Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(February 1998)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re[2]: Use the CISSP, Luke (was Re: Certifiying Security Aud
From: dennis_keller @ smtp . ddc . dla . mil
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 98 13:24:36 -0800
To: <anton @ the-wire . com>, <proberts @ clark . net>
Cc: <bet @ rahul . net>, <firewalls @ GreatCircle . COM>

     I've been following this argument for the past two weeks and I agree 
     with what Paul iterates.  Certification is for those who are clueless. 
     Anybody can pass a test, multiple-guess exams from my college days 
     prove this.  The question is, can those who are *certified* apply the 
     knowledge?  Myself, I don't give brass farthing on being *certified*, 
     rather my, and other esteemed readers of this list, actions speak 
     louder than any certificate or diploma.
     
     Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth, flame away!(or is that FLAME ON!)
     
     Denny
     Defense Distribution Center
     New Cumberland, PA
     email: dkeller @
 ddc .
 dla .
 mil


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Use the CISSP, Luke (was Re: Certifiying Security Audito
Author:  "Paul D. Robertson" <proberts @
 clark .
 net>  at internet01
Date:    2/19/98 7:18 PM


On Wed, 18 Feb 1998, Anton J Aylward wrote:
     
> But what gets me is that you're crying out for something 
> positive, and when other people do offer something positive, 
> not perfect, because this isn't a perfect world, but a start, 
> and something better than what went before, rather than 
> investigate, you condemn.  Not only that, but you cast
     
I'm not sure that I buy this predicate.  It would seem to me that 
there is a strong vector of argument that says that certification *isn't* 
"better than what went before".  In _some_ cases it may be better, in 
others it may be *worse*.  I think we can all drudge up examples of 
people with certifications and a complete lack of clue.  If certification 
programs perpetuate that state of events, then perhaps we actually are 
better off without them, or as Bennett suggests, using them as negative 
metrics.  
     
Let's examine this from another angle, and see why we're at where we 
are.  What exactly would drive someone like myself or Bennett to take 
such a course?  If you have Information Security Professionals who have 
no interest in the certification process, then I think you're missing 
more than you're gaining.
     
I've made the transition from a mainframe environment to a multi-platform 
     
one.  The only people I've seen actively looking to take the CISSP are 
folks who were unable to transition effectively and needed paper proof 
that they could.  I have no doubt that there are folks with a CISSP who 
know what they're doing, but there are enough of the other kind, and the 
parroting sort to make it less than useful as a metric.  
     
> And I thought this wasn't USENET.  It seems I was mistaken.
     
muc.lists.firewalls if the gateway ever got fixed ;)
     
Paul
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal opinions 
proberts @
 clark .
 net      which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
                                                                     PSB#9280
     
     
     



Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Crunchy and Chewy
From: swlodin @ iquest . net
Next: Re: Use the CISSP, Luke (was Re: Certifiying Security Auditors)
From: Anton J Aylward <anton @ the-wire . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Routing questions
From: trall @ almaden . ibm . com
Next: RE: Re[2]: Use the CISSP, Luke (was Re: Certifiying Security Aud
From: "Stackpole, Bill" <BSTACKPO @ sla . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com