Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
From: I. Brugman (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Dec 11 2001 - 16:40:05 CST
1) You really do not need the true understanding as you call it. In depth
of NT and 2000 OS (like "inside windows 2000" by russinovich) architecture
is more than enough to understand things you simple
do not need Unix for that (and when you do, there are ample ways of finding
out what you need to know). In general it is the best of both worlds.
Superficial knowledge (ed the GUI as you call it) is around, in depth
knowledge is hard to find. Windows 2000 has good scripting capabilities,
although I do not understand what scripting has to do with making the
win2k/Linux choice. Why be so proud over a script, this is something which
is inherited from the past and not necessarely such a good thing, although
very handy. Again, scripting can very easily be done in 2000, takes skill,
but that goes for unix too.
IN general Unix admins are not Windows minded and vise versa. In general the
reason is that knowledge is either unix or windows,
very few people have in depth knowledge of both, the main reason why one is
less than the other.
still, the figures show that the future will certainly be not linux for the
front end (maybe we will have thin clients, becoming very popular...windows
2000 with citrix metaframe 1.8 or XPx...I see you thinking...we go unix
again). For the back end, there will be a battle I think. Certain
types of requirements will need an infrastucture which windows can not
provide and again vice versa. Unix is losing ground in big parts, so
why choose unix (do we see nt/novell to unix migrations..no)..You choose it
when you need it..coming to the second point...
I think I will agree on that, good unix people are also hard to find (and
more expensive), just as good 2000 people. Still when choosing between red
hat certification and MCSE, I think I know what it should be, that was what
we were talking about. I see a lot of demand for unix admins and unix
security admins in the netherlands...so even in this small place...they
desperatly seeking unix knowledge
In general I think a security architect should know both very well. Having
one favorite most of the time.....
----- Original Message -----
To: "I. Brugman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:49 PM
Subject: Re: Fit for CISSP?
> I would disagree to go with Win2K instead of Linux.
> 1) Learning any *nix you will have a better understanding of how O/Ses
> truly work, not just a pretty GUI or administering by point and click.
> Scripting, unheard of by"most" in the windows world and used by "all" in
> the *nix world, makes for a more intuitive mind.
> 2) Generally, Unix Admins are better paid than their Windows counterparts.
> What does this matter? Well in times when one can't find a security job,
> there is the "better" paying Unix administration job.
> Oh, I could go on and on, but in general it is fair easier to learn
> security after honing ones skills as a Unix Admin then the other way
> David Barnett CISSP #25867
> Cap Gemini Enrst & Young Global Operate - America
> Security / UNIX Architect
> O 312-356-2895
> M 312-282-2088
> F 312-356-2895
> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others
> authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally
> information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in
> on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
> us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your
> system. Cap Gemini Ernst & Young is neither liable for the proper and
> complete transmission of the information contained in this communication
> nor for any delay in its receipt.
> "I. Brugman"
> <ivobrugman@ho To:
> tmail.com> cc:
> Subject: Re: Fit for CISSP?
> 09:17 AM
> i guess if you want to be serious in security, you should know the most
> operating systems.
> -Novell netware
> -Microsoft 2000/nt
> specially the second .....it would not be smart to ignore this. You better
> have MCSE 2000 than
> red hat, give me one reason for taking red hat. the only and most
> interesting thing for companies
> is apache webserver, as a client it is no serious competitor for the
> years, compared to microsoft.
> Maybe it is more secure..does this matter? NO, important is what is used,
> that counts. The usability of linux
> suchs majorly. Also..it is difficult to get people administering linux and
> many people still stick to linux....for no reason whatsoever. Often
> of Microsoft as a company,
> it is stupid to base your carreer on that i think
> besides os's go for products like
> - checkpoint firewall (CCSA and CCSE)
> - unicert baltimore
> - ISS products (scanning and intrusion detection)
> -do some cisco
> - valicert
> - RSA
> - combination microsoft windows 2000 and baltimore (believe you me.....)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <email@example.com>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:51 PM
> Subject: RE: Fit for CISSP?
> > Thanks everyone for your response. I was just wondering how I would get
> > the sec-sys admin field. Street knowledge is not enough. I need some
> > of degree to get in. Fisrt, I thought it'd be CISSP that'd give me a
> > access to the sec-sys-admin field. But now it isn't. I don't wanna do
> > which worth less than a penny (solely in my opinion). I need the group's
> > opinion in this - should I go for a MS in Networking? or what? I want to
> > for RedHat Certified Sys Admin exam. Does anyone have any info or
> > in this which you want to share?
> > Any kind of information will be highly appreciated.
> > Thanks.
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com