Re: RES: CISSP Test

[R Mondesir <rmondesir () gmail com>]

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
inevitable.

-Rafiyq  


On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 01:26:36 -0500, SecurityLSI <security () lan-slam com> wrote:
> 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
> 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.
>
> The added bonus of having an industry benchmark that bars entry into the
> field tracks to something a mentor once told me: people that belong to
> unions drive Chevys and Fords. Those that belong to associations drive BMWs
> and Mercedes.
>
> --Joe
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vladamir" <wireless.insecurity () gmail com>
> To: "Jose Ribeiro Junior" <ribeiro () microcity com br>
> Cc: <>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: RES: [Full-disclosure] CISSP Test
>
> > CCIE is where it's at.
> >
> > I love writing practice tests, but I'm only 20, so what do I know
> >
> > Jose Ribeiro Junior wrote:
> > > Hi Friends,
> > >
> > > What you think about CCIE certification model, practice and write tests
> ?
> > > I think that is a good model to Security Certifications.
> > >
> > > But, can you create a practice tests not using especific vendors ?
> > >
> > > -----Mensagem original-----
> > > De: full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk
> > > [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces () lists grok org uk]Em nome de Vladamir
> > > Enviada em: quarta-feira, 23 de março de 2005 14:23
> > > Para: DAN MORRILL
> > > Cc: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > > Assunto: Re: [Full-disclosure] CISSP Test
> > >
> > >
> > > Very good points, so.. who wants to start writing to the mentioned
> > > organizations about this?
> > >
> > > DAN MORRILL wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think in reading the multiple threads on this issue, there there are a
> > > > number of perspectives on the value of the CISSP.
> > > >
> > > > What was most interesting was the CEO's perspective. Since the CISSP is
> > > > a boot camp, and the SANS is bootcampable in the longer run with the
> > > > removal of the practicle. The real question is working towards a
> > > > certificate that demonstrates ability to work in the security arena, one
> > > > that is really hard to get, and one that really tests the ability to do
> > > > the work.
> > > >
> > > > While CISSP and SANS are great to have as a resume filter, it does not
> > > > imply that anyone with either certificate to their name can actually do
> > > > the work. What I am seeing is that many people are going for these, and
> > > > have them, but had them a result from an IDS system, or ask them to do a
> > > > security design for either a network or a chunk of code, the ability to
> > > > actually perform the task is not there, even though they have the
> > > > certificate.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I believe the community needs something, certificate,
> > > > degree, internship, what ever, that actually means you can perform
> > > > competently in the security arena. That there is a skill set there that
> > > > the entire community agree's upon is the minimum recommended skill set
> > > > to work in this field. If we had something like that, then any school
> > > > that is pumping out Bachelors of Information Security folks would have a
> > > > standard. Anyone building a bootcamp or certificate program would have
> > > > an agreed upon community standard to work with.
> > > >
> > > > ISC2, ISSA, WSA, SANS, et al. Could build a board in conjunction with
> > > > the community, develop the minimum qualifications to work in the field,
> > > > and actually accomplish something once they have been certified or
> > > > degreed. NSA has been hugely successful in developing security schools
> > > > through James Madison, Boise, et al. But they have to agree to and teach
> > > > to the minimum standard that NSA has put together to meet the needs that
> > > > NSA has identified.
> > > >
> > > > I think until we as a community agree upon a minimum standard, apply it
> > > > consistantly across the board much like doctors, lawyers, social
> > > > workers, and other degreed or licensed professionals, we will continue
> > > > to have this debate until the house burns down. As security
> > > > professionals, as security folks, we have the same ability to either do
> > > > good, or do harm as any other profession does. We need to understand
> > > > this, and begin working towards skill sets either certificate or degree
> > > > that actually mean something useful at the end of the day.
> > > >
> > > > My thoughts, flames invited.
> > > > r/
> > > > Dan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sometimes MSN E-mail will indicate that the mesasge failed to be
> > > > delivered. Please resend when you get those, it does not mean that the
> > > > mail box is bad, merely that MSN mail is over worked at the time.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > From: "Clement Dupuis" <cdupuis () cccure org>
> > > > > To: <robert () dyadsecurity com>,"'Vladamir'"
> > > > > <wireless.insecurity () gmail com>
> > > > > CC: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk
> > > > > Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] CISSP Test
> > > > > Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:45:47 -0500
> > > > >
> > > > > Robert E. Lee wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "SANS programs have little to do with security.  I'm glad they changed
> > > > > their
> > > > > policy.  They seem more honest now."
> > > > >
> > > > > Good day Robert,
> > > > >
> > > > > Honesty is a very neat goal to achieve, however it has many facets.
> > > > >
> > > > > I lately learned (under all reserve, please correct me if you know
> > > > > otherwise) that SANS no longer has any NON PROFIT portion left.  They
> > > > > used
> > > > > to be registered as a non-profit entity in the state of Maryland but it
> > > > > seems that it was dissolved.  Technically we could say there is no SANS
> > > > > Institute left anymore as we knew it on the non profit side.  After
> they
> > > > > dissolve SANS they created a FOR PROFIT corporation called ESCAL which
> > > > > registered the names used in the non-profit as trademarks for their
> > > > > new for
> > > > > profit organization.  Even thou you see the name GIAC and SANS being
> used
> > > > > everywhere, they are all trademark (not organizations) of the new
> > > > > privately
> > > > > owned company.
> > > > >
> > > > > Principals at SANS have NEVER claimed to be non-profit, it is a myth
> > > > > that we
> > > > > the people that have been dealing with SANS for a long time (since the
> > > > > time
> > > > > they were non profit) have been propagating.  We have been keeping
> > > > > this myth
> > > > > alive simply because we did not know any better and we did not know
> > > > > that the
> > > > > non-profit was dissolved.  It was done without any noise or public
> > > > > announcement to the people that were already certified.
> > > > >
> > > > > So they NEVER lied but they never went to any length to inform people
> > > > > of the
> > > > > real and current status of their corporation activity.  Most people
> think
> > > > > that GIAC is non profit which is not the case anymore and this better
> > > > > explains the decision of dropping the practical requirement: it does
> not
> > > > > generate money and it is not a good business decision to keep something
> > > > > alive that will become a drain on the bottom line.  Which is a bit
> > > > > contrary
> > > > > to the reason given of improving the overall state of the security
> > > > > community
> > > > > :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Take care
> > > > >
> > > > > Clement
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
> > > > FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > Esta mensagem pode conter informacao confidencial e /ou privilegiada. Se
> voce nao for o destinatario ou a pessoa autorizada a receber a mensagem, nao
> pode usar, copiar ou divulgar as informacoes nela contidas ou tomar qualquer
> acao baseada nessas informacoes. Se voce recebeu esta mensagem por engano
> favor avise imediatamente ao remetente respondendo o e-mail e em seguida
> apague-o. Agradecemos sua cooperacao
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/