full-disclosure - [ok] 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: <41A2272F.80904@psilanthropy.org>
From: hades at psilanthropy.org (Anders Langworthy)
Subject: [ok] Certifications

Scott Renna wrote:
> I would agree with these statements as well.  I'm carrying 2 GIACs(GCIA 
> and GCIH) as well as CISSP.  I feel that the CISSP is a very broad 
> general overview of the concepts of security; however, there are far too 
> many unqualified people attending boot camps and passing the 
> examination.

I'm not questioning your knowledge, but since I've been looking into 
certifications to help me find a job, I did some research on this recently.

I understand the concept of a boot camp with regard to something like 
the Security+, where the only requirement is passing the examination. 
I'll be taking this exam soon, and from what I've looked at so far, an 
intelligent person with little security experience could probably pass 
this exam with only a few weeks of memorization.

The CISSP, otoh, supposedly requires 4 years of professional full-time 
security work (3 years with a college degree, or 2 years with a BS & 
Masters in Info Security).  Going to a boot camp wouldn't take care of 
this requirement.  Shouldn't those with 4 years of professional 
experience doing security be able to pass the exam without the need for 
a boot camp anyway (or is that just foolish optimism)?  Are the exp. 
requirements so open to interpretation or embellishment?  What gives?

\\Anders