full-disclosure - [inbox] Re: Training & Certifications

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <NMEAJDJMDLJLOIOCIKJJMEOMFBAA.exibar@thelair.com>
From: exibar at thelair.com (Exibar)
Subject: [inbox] Re: Training & Certifications 

When that cert will get me the contract over someone that doesn't have that
cert, I could care less if that phone operator could spell CISSP....  Now
I'm not saying that it's good public relations for their operators not to
know ISC2's own policies, but for a lot of security professionals, those 5
letters might as well be spelled $$$$$....  just like MSCE was way back
when.... and who knows what will be 5 years from now....

  Please no replies with "well *I* don't have the CISSP and I'm getting
contracts left and right... for those FEW that can win a contract without
those letters, more power to them keep up the good work!  Just hope that you
don't bid for a contract and go up against someone that HAS those 5
letters.... you'll probably not win that contract... in the real world, thye
DO mean something to potential employers, thats why people get the certs.
If they're a paper only type certified, well they won't be able to finish
the contract and either get fired or worse.

Exibar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu]
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 7:15 PM
> To: Bojan.Zdrnja@....hr
> Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
> Subject: [inbox] Re: [Full-Disclosure] Training & Certifications
>
>
> On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 10:18:10 +1200, Bojan Zdrnja
> <Bojan.Zdrnja@....hr>  said:
>
> > If that was the reason for not hiring the person, good for him then!
>
> On the other hand...
>
> > If you went to ISC2's site and go to Directory of CISSPs and
> SSCPs and read:
> >
> > "... ISC2 will continue to respond to any employer requests for (ISC)2
> > credential holder verifications. Such requests must be in writing on the
> > employer's company letterhead and a release signature from the
> CISSP/SSCP
> > must be included in the request. "
>
> Do you want to give much weight to a cert from an organization, when the
> organization's *own* staff can't get that one right?  (I mean, we'd not be
> having this interchange if the original poster had been told that
> by ISC2, would
> we?)
>