There are 13  user Comments for “CISSP To Require Endorsement”
|
|
Page 1 of 2
|
| 5/15/02: Anonymous says: |
Wonderful. Yet one more obstacle for those of us wishing to enter the IT field with as much education as possible. No experience? No CISSP. No CISSP? No job to gain experience. This is just one more cert that will have no meaning at all since so very few will pursue it. |
| 5/15/02: Anonymous says: |
WOW - while this move will remove a lot of the so called paper certified. As mentioned in the above post ... it really becomes a "Which comes first scenario ... the chicken or the egg?". I guess the answer is, if you are new to security and you are trying to get in to this field suggest you look to other certifications as your experiance is building ... CIW Security Analyst is one and SANS offering another. With time it really seems that the CISSP will be the one to have! While it will make it hard to achieve there is the other side of the 'meaningless' coin - people who hold this cert will really know what security is about not just a papper qualification; this has got to be a good thing! |
| 5/16/02: EsJay says: |
CISSP is a new cert to the Caribbean Islands and is going to be the Cert to have, no Maybe's!! Personally the exam does not test your knowledge on Security, it test your knowledge on the Definition of terms. The exam is geared for a person who knows almost everything there is to know about Security terms and definitions. |
| 5/21/02: Anonymous says: |
Security is an Art, and needs real working time, not book definition time. People who pass the test but have no work experience in other fields are journeymen (journeyperson?) We need a designate for people who have passed but don't have the experience yet. People who pass without experience can get jobs in security and the security field gets better people. They'll charge to upgrade your title once the 2 years is up. ($$) |
| 5/22/02: Anonymous says: |
If you look at the requirements for this certification, you'll see that you need years of related experience just to apply to take the test. This is not an entry level certification. You're not supposed to be a CISSP and then go get a security job. You're supposed to become a CISSP as proof of your job/skills. By positioning itself as this type of certification, it will not appeal (or apply) to folks with no experience. Good. If ISC2 can keep this cert's elite status (and not just the appearance), I will be happy. Not to sound mean, but I do not want entry-level workers being responsible for security. It is avoidable error that many security problems can be traced back to. |
| 5/23/02: Joseph Osako from Berkeley, CA says: |
On the one hand, this is probably a good move over all; too many certs mean nothing because they represent only the ability to pass a test, not any real skill or experience in the field. On the other hand, ther must be a way for assistant-level security professionals to show that they are ready to take on the responsibilties of their work. Perhaps ISC2 should use a tiered system, with the level I equating to a trained but inexperienced operator, someone suitable for an assistant position; followed by a 'journeymen' level II, who is qualified to manage a small-to-medium site on their own; and culminating in a level III, representing those approaching or at the level of corporate security chiefs. Certainly, requiring a Level II or III candidate to provide an endorsement or even a notarized affidavit would not be unreasonable - at that stage, anyone who could not gain such probably isn't able to pass the test anyway. |
| 5/26/02: Joe Ng from Hong Kong says: |
This exam is a tough one already and combine with this new requirement may be an extra barrier for guys who are participating in the related field but only get 1~2 yrs experience. For the rapid change of I.T. field, how can this exam be a indicator for the people who have enough knowledge with adequate experience? Invest an extra year to proof the skills I have on security issues? 1 year later who knows what the world is? Your company may now need the guys who have this knowledge and skills about I.S. security officer to deal with nowadays condition, who cares about 1 year later what u can be? This just benefit the old dogs with license but no new coming dog guards! Goodbye CISSP! |
| 6/2/02: Anonymous says: |
This is a great move. This requirement has always existed for this certification. It's now being enforced a little more effectively. If you don't have the experience, you shouldn't have this certification. If you need a cert to get a job (usually that's not the case if you interview well), go study and take one of the GIAC certs. Work for a few years, then take the SSCP or CISSP. |
| 6/5/02: David from Wilson says: |
Experience is required in the security arena and the CISSP certification will help establish a candidate's credentials. Requiring a candidate to document their experience and expertise should not be viewed as a obstacle, but as an opportunity to solidify and reaffirm a CISSP candidate's value. The same information that would make a security position candidate attractive to a potential employer is essentially the same information that would be expected for a security professional pursuing the CISSP certification. I feel the recent CISSP requirement is a positive shift in the right direction, but I'd like for the ISC2 take it further and require longer responses on the exam that allow the candidate to demonstrate expertise in the areas. Short essay type questions and list answers describing procedures to armor systems or security approaches. Another positive development could be for the candidate to bring an application packet with them to the exam to be interviewed by the test proctor to ensure that the candidate indeed meets a minimum expect experience level and to review the candidate's experience portfolio. Like many others, I have worked in system administration and network management for years, where security was not a separate field, but a integrated approach to protecting information and the systems that process that information. We as security professionals should welcome the opportunity to prove our credentials whether for the CISSP credential or to an employer. Everyone's information is affected for how well systems are protected and we should want the very best protecting that information. |
| 9/7/02: bob from atlanta says: |
I agreee another obstacle Im sorry i didnt ride the damn cert wave back in the day and go in knowing nothing making big bucks,,, This is just another obstacle, I cant get a job unless I know something I cant get a foot in the door unless I have the cert now I cant geta cert unless I have a job( mind you Im also In a BS degree program for computer science )but damn where the hell am I gonan catch a freakin break and get in!!! |
First Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
- B.N.