INTRODUCTION

Application Security practitioners, software engineers, and researchers from all over the world gather at OWASP’s BASC conferences to discover, present and discuss the latest developments in software security, collaborate with their peers, and share the newest innovations in the field.

The conference will take place on April 11, 2026 in Boston, MA The event will also offer hands-on training with vetted and leading trainers on the same day.

CALL FOR PRESENTATIONS (CFP) & CALL FOR WORKSHOPS SUBMISSION 

The OWASP BASC Team is formally issuing a call for presentations, opening Nov 1st, 2025, and closing Jan 11th, 2026, at 11:59 EST. 

What topics should you submit about?

This year’s tracks are based on different target audiences we would like to cater to . Speakers should focus on the following guidelines for each of the tracks below. Sessions will be scheduled for 45 minutes or 20 mins, with an additional expected 5-10 minute Q&A period. 

LEADERSHIP - Show the community how to create an effective AppSec culture, communicating AppSec value to leadership, or case studies about risk tradeoffs. We are looking out for talks with the following themes here

State of Security 

AppSec Strategy & Trends

Compliance, Regulation & Policy

RESEARCH - If you are a project leader and want to share updates on your OWASP project with the community, this would be the track for you! If you are working on something new or improving an existing area we would love to hear from you. We are looking for talks with the following themes here.

OSS Security Threats

State of AI

DEVELOPER - Show the community how to build more secure apps, how to securely use technology in our code, and how to secure our systems at scale. We are looking for talks with the following themes here.

OWASP Projects Usage

Is DevSecOps Dead or has it changed?

REVIEW TIMELINES

 CfP CfW IMPORTANT DATES: 

 Opens:  November 1, 2025

 Closes: January 11th, 2026

 Notification of submitters: Week of Jan 26, 2026

 Program announced: Week of Feb 9, 2026

Keep in mind: the better your description is, the better our review will be. Please review your proposal thoroughly, as your accepted abstract and bio will be published publicly as submitted on our site. 

***************************************************

REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS

The Program Team will review your submission and give it a rating which will be used to compare it to the other submissions in your chosen track. 

Your submission *will be disqualified* if: 

Your submission was submitted by someone who is not one of the speakers such as the marketing team or a marketing agency.

Your submission has self-identifying elements in its abstract, outline, slides, past presentations, etc. - these elements can be, but are not limited to, affiliation with well-known podcasts, headshots, company references, apart from directly identifying information like names, etc. - OWASP strives to have a completely blind review process

Your submission is identified as having been generated by an AI

Your submission will *NOT* be disqualified, BUT:

If you have recently presented the same material in another conference or venue, kindly indicate so. OWASP strives to have new and novel content in its events, and we expect that any material previously presented elsewhere will have enough distinction during our events so as to separate it from previous presentations. Please be sure to indicate how this edition will be different from previous ones

If distinct submitters from the same company submit on the same or closely related subject, we ask that you kindly coordinate before submitting, so we can guarantee the highest quality of presentation

If you are submitting to more than one track, please indicate in your submissions so the reviewers are aware of it.

The top scored submissions:

-Have a clear abstract that describes an interesting and relevant talk which we would choose to attend. This is primarily to market to attendees but obviously it needs to impress the reviewers as well.

-Have an outline that leaves no doubts about the structure of the talk and the timings 

-Tell the reviewer exactly what you will be covering. Don’t just say “we will provide our top 5 techniques for avoiding this issue. Instead, clearly set out for the reviewer what those 5 techniques will be. Don’t keep secrets from the reviewer or try to keep the reviewer in suspense, that is what the conference abstract is for!

-Discuss a new or novel topic that attendees couldn’t see in the recordings of previous conferences or in existing resources.

-Describe a real-life story of how you solved a problem in a real-world environment.

-Are clearly aligned with the audience in the track to which the talk is being submitted and clearly demonstrates why the submission it is relevant for the stated skill level. 

-Demonstrate clear takeaways that attendees can immediately implement at their workplaces.

Top reasons submissions get marked down or rejected:

-No clear link to the topics listed above.

-Poorly formatted or structured submission or significant spelling and grammatical mistakes. Get someone else to review your submission or use an online tool to proofread it.

-Your submission sounds like it was created by an AI.

-Your submission makes it sounds like the answer to the challenge you raise in the talk is to buy your product. Alternatively, the submission sounds like a direct sales pitch. If you work for a vendor, we will be looking for a clear explanation of what value the submission brings, separate to your product or service.

-Your submission is full of buzzwords without clarity on what tangible value the talk brings to the attendee.

-The shorter the submission, the less time the reviewer will spend on your submission before they mark it down, due to a lack of details..

-Your submission has self-identifying details

You can see some sample, high-quality submissions here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m_IroyqjYwGL-8arwAxY-aDxWCH_3xda0BjNytkvaQ0/edit