Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Re: RES: [Full-disclosure] CISSP Test
From: J. Oquendo (rootnullrouted.us)
Date: Tue Mar 29 2005 - 15:49:43 CST
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, R Mondesir wrote:
> The C.P.A exam for accountants is a better comparison to the CISSP
> than the Bar exam is for lawyers if we are going to compare industry
> benchmarks. Eitherway, an internationally accepted stantard seems
Funny thing is, outside of the USA, I barely see people abroad toss in
fifty different little signatures when they send out mail.
SCSA, CISSP, CCIE, CCDA, MCSE, FOOL, PWND, OVRKL
55 Main Street
With the exception of the Cisco certs, I can't recall seeing someone "tag"
their CISSP status coming from somewhere outside of the United States. Not
to say it is not important, but sigs (and this is all they mean to me...
signatures) are becoming overrated and bloated. Its like "Yea well I just
obtained my Symantec Uber Certified Klassification! Now I can add a SUCK
to my sig!" Give me a break.
I should for kicks dig through some of the mailing lists I'm on and point
fingers at CCDA's, MCSE's, CISSP's, and other little signature devils who
ask questions a 16 year old can answer. There are those who take tests,
and there are those who don't.
I'm sure many on this list know someone who is supposed to know but is
actually a clueless gimp.
> > I wholeheartedly agree that there needs to be an industry benchmark,
> > something that says you cannot operate in this field unless you have passed
> > x. I'm thinking along the lines of something similar to the Bar exam that
Industry benchmark? Sure there should be some overall knowledge of just
about everything but how do you define the unknown which is what most
computer security is at its core. Well I guess I'm looking at it from a
Greyhat perspective. How do you expect someone to learn vulnerabilities
that pop up. It takes a little more than reading and memorizing some book.
Bottom line in my opinion.
> > lawyers have to take, or perhaps a license like what doctors are required to
> > obtain before being able to practice. I fear its going to take something of
> > that level to truly separate the chaff from the wheat. Anything less and you
> > only end up with braindumps and bootcampers throwing resume after resume at
> > you.
It will not separate any chaff from the wheat. How many people just dive
into books and pass exams? With the CISSP, one is supposed to have an
alloted amount of time in the field. Sure lets debunk this moronic notion
of them validating this... Joe Blow worked for Foo Financial for 10 years.
9 of those years where in the mailroom. His brother in law works in the
compsec department and convinced his boss to `give him a chance`. Joe Blow
with one year experience studies for that one year. Applies to take the
test with (get this) 10 years (oh my he has some experience (do he not!)
under his wing. Joe Blow gets his sig and becomes a sig nazi. Whoopdeedoo.
So much for standards.
GPG Key ID 0x0D99C05C
sil infiltrated . net http://www.infiltrated.net
"How a man plays the game shows something of his
character - how he loses shows all" - Mr. Luckey
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/