Penetration Testing mailing list archives
RE: CEH training
From: "Drage, Nick" <nick.drage () eds com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 09:05:42 +0100
For the list: I believe it to be a poor (but expensive) course. The material is in places questionable, and at best dated.
I just wanted to second this comment, the course certainly needs work, and a fair percentage of it does need updating. And I feel from an ethical hacking / penetration testing point of view quite a lot of it should be cut out as well. Which is a shame really as the intent of the course and its overall aim are excellent, but unfortunately I can only suggest that you look elsewhere for an introduction into pentesting. -- Nick Drage, CEH EDS UK Penetration Testing Team
Current thread:
- RE: CEH training, (continued)
- RE: CEH training Steve A (Jun 21)
- Re: CEH training Ralph Echemendia (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Tim Singletary (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Prashant Meswani (Jun 24)
- Re: CEH training NativePenSec (Jun 24)
- RE: CEH training Tim Singletary (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Michael Mooney (Jun 21)
- Re: CEH training xyberpix (Jun 23)
- CEH training Lim Kah Wee (Jun 21)
- RE: CEH training Chuck McWhirter (Jun 21)
- Re: CEH training ilaiy (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training Drage, Nick (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training Tim Singletary (Jun 22)
- Re: CEH training Michael Hammer (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training Tony Mesenbrink (Jun 22)
- Re: CEH training Gareth Davies (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Tim Singletary (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training Zuromski, Brian (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training glemmon (Jun 22)
- RE: CEH training Richard Zaluski (Jun 22)
- Re: CEH training D K (Jun 22)
- Re: CEH training Pete Herzog (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Richard Zaluski (Jun 23)
- RE: CEH training Richard Zaluski (Jun 22)