Police Seize Assets of TestKiller.com
7/10/2002 -- On June 6 San Antonio police seized assets of TestKiller Ltd., the company that runs the practice exam Web site TestKiller.com.
According to a police report filed with the Bexar County, Texas District Court on June 20, the raid was prompted by Microsoft, who alleged that the site was selling Microsoft certification exam questions.
In his affidavit, seizing police officer Daniel Flaharty, a detective in the Special Crimes Unit of the San Antonio Police Department, wrote that he was contacted by a representative from the anti-piracy office of Microsoft. The unnamed representative alleged to Flaharty that TestKiller Ltd. was selling Microsoft "trade secrets" in the form of questions and answers to Microsoft exams.
According to the report, Flaharty began an investigation based on Microsoft's complaint, which led to the June 6 seizure of $408,566.84 in cash as well as several phones, printers, computer equipment, software and other items from at least one location.
No charges have been filed in this investigation. Calls made to the Bexar County district attorney's office to determine whether the investigation was ongoing were not returned as of press time.
Garry L. Neale, one of Testkiller Ltd.'s owners, politely declined CertCities.com's request for an interview, referring all questions to his attorney, who is out of the country this week.
A spokesperson for Microsoft confirmed that the company was aware of the investigation but said he could not comment on it due to the legal nature of the story.
The Testkiller.com Web site has been offline since early June.
Neale is the former owner of Troy Technologies (TroyTec.com), which in December settled a civil copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit brought by certification vendor CompTIA (see "CompTIA v. TroyTec Settled; Company Pulls CompTIA-Related Products from Site, Denies Wrongdoing").
CertCities.com will continue to follow this story and bring you further updates as they develop.  -B.N.
|
There are 254  user Comments for “Police Seize Assets of TestKiller.com”
|
|
Page 14 of 26
|
| 7/17/02: Anonymous says: |
There should be changes to both sides of this problem. I've taken several MS tests, so I'll address those. First, Microsoft could get rid of their nebulous guidelines for test prep and lay everything out in the open. Make it clear as to what a test candidate is going to be tested on. I remember preparing for my first MS tests toward MCSE for NT4. I read and studied with books from 3 or 4 different publishers, with none of the books being anything close to an all-in-one source of information. I also set up several PC's and made a small network with workstations and a server to practice with. I remember the shock of missing questions on transcender test simulation that had been glossed over in the test prep books. [One glaring example was "SLIDING WINDOWS" , which was in the TCP/IP test. An MS press book, referenced as a source by transcender, dedicated something like a whole whopping 1 or 2 sentences to explaining and using "sliding windows". I spent almost a week trying to hunt down definitive info on the topic, in order to determine what these were, how they worked, how they affected data flow, etc] If micosoft thought something like this to be important enough to be made a test question, then they should have included a decent explanation of such in their own publications MS PRESS. Second, as far as brain dumps and cheet sheets go, they may get you "some" right answers on the test, but a lot of the questions involve logical reasoning and knowledge of the underlying rules. Example: cheet sheets might get you through questions on minimum equipment requirements to run a certain OS. Those are relatively fixed answers. RAM needed, HD space needed, etc. But they can't do much for you when variables are involved and you don't know the underlying formulas used to compile the variables. Example: a cheet sheet could tell you that you'll see a question asking the sum of 3 + 3 + 3 = ?, while never explaining the concept of simple mathmatic addition to you. Then your test might have a question like, what is the sum of 4 + 4 + 4 = ?. If you do not understand the underlying concept of the question, in this case mathmatical addition, there's no way you can adapt and successfully answer the question. What sucks is when you see something in a brain dump or cheet sheet and you think,"no way they can ask that. there's no way it fits within the guidelines of what the test is supposed to test you on" and wham....... there it is on the actual exam! I've taken tests in the military, various civilian exams, DOD exams, in college and for other non IT certifications. I have never seen anyone else play as many "games" with their exams as MS does. It's as though MS purposefully set out to create at least 3 different streams of cash flow from their exams: 1. from the basic books/courses you take to learn the information necessary to operate and administer the software. Usually 3 or 4 books from different publishers, per exam. 2. from the testing center fees involved in becoming certified. $100 a pop. 3. from those individuals/companies/bootcamps whose sole purpose is to "fill in the missing gaps", between what the books/courses/hands-on usage teaches you and what you'll actually be asked by the test questions. Robert Allen, who spoke about "multiple streams of income" as a way to get rich would be proud................ :0 |
| 7/17/02: SB from Arizona says: |
I think if Microsoft was more fair with their tests there would be no need for braindumps. I took their IIS 4.0 test, and I used their book to study. There were 3-4 questions on the exam that had to do with error messages, but they were NOT covered in Microsofts book, nor the majority of the others on the market. The only coverage of these was from Troy and New Riders. Not only that, but the questions were not directly related to IIS, they had to do with SQL, and unless you had the error you never would have known the answer. Unfortunately I did not use the Troy or New Rider for my studying, and I missed 1 too many questions to pass the test, and the test expired. I wrote Microsoft, but it went into the peverbial bottom drawer. So until Microsoft starts playing fair, these are an added extra. And if used correctly they are just like an additional study guide that you can purchase for some college courses. Also the fact that they put all the pressure on people to get their cert before the end of the year, and then changed their mind, alot of people that had classes in the end of 2000 needed the extra help. |
| 7/17/02: Anonymous says: |
Wow. Until reading all these posts I never knew about the existence of most of these websites, which sell cheet sheets. All I ever heard of was www.chinaITcertify.com .........................................Looks like the only solution is to: 1. make Microsoft offer all tests for FREE. 2. All braindump sites close down.........That way test takers aren't monetarily penalized for failing. |
| 7/18/02: Anonymous says: |
I think Microsoft has acted very late. We do not need paper MCSE's. They suck... |
| 7/18/02: Dave W from Omaha says: |
Do any of you out there realize that training,testing and certifications are a profit center for Microsoft,Cisco,Novell, etc... ?? The tests are designed so that the average person will take at least 2 retests out of a series of cert tests. These companies do not report profits from education venues purely out of curiosity. It's a big business. Profits go down when people pass on the first shot. For all of you people that run to Microsoft or Novell or Cisco, what have they done for you ?? they have made you a paper whatever and a net god in your own mind. The real world awaits and experience and common sense are what will take you places. |
| 7/18/02: MCSE from Minnesota says: |
Do any of you remember the days in college when you would attend a study group? These groups were neither immoral or against any laws or rules - in fact they were encouraged. Almost all of them had sample exam questions from previous exams. Now I do not condone obtaining questions and answers from these certification exams for the sole purpose of getting some initials next to your name. But if sample questions are used as a learning aid, then what harm can come from them? I agree with the group of people that feel these exams should reflect real world scenarios. Therefore, if sample questions lead you to researching the product more in order to find the solution, then the certification is not only demonstrating that a person meets a "minimum" requirement, but rather the process to obtaining the certification is training in of itself. Myself, I had about two years experience working with Windows 2000 and about 1.5 of those years designing Enterprise Active Directory Networks before obtaining my MCSE. I did see a couple of the Troy Techs, but found many of the answers to the questions to be wrong, and the study section before the questions to be a joke. Should my certification be revoked because I looked at a couple of these TroyTech study guides - but did not rely on them to pass the exam? Personally, I do not think so. My experience and studying with collegues is what got me through the exams....not relying on these study guides. Anyone who obtains these certifications by means of only studying questions and answers is doing themselves a disservice. Until Microsoft decides to make their exams interactive instead of mostly multiple choice, there are always going to be problems with people obtaining certifications by means of shortcuts. I don't believe the solution is to go after these brain dump sites - but rather change the tests so simply memorizing multiple choice questions and answers is futile. Case in point - is there a brain dump site that is going to help you pass the CCIE lab test by memorizing questions? Experience, knowledge and troubleshooting skills are tested - not memorization of questions and answers. In closing, why not make it so the exams actually test ability through interaction, not memorization of facts, then no one has to question if the person knows their stuff or if they went to a boot camp to pass the exams. Resolve this at the source of the problem! |
| 7/18/02: Flixx from Dallas, TX says: |
I already have my NT MCSE. Studied like crazy for the Accelerated Exam, including the TroyTech for it, which I had never heard of until that test. I don't know how close I was to passing, but I did not pass, even though I knew most of the TroyTech answers. The questions I had on the exam were not "word-for-word" the same as those TroyTech included. Maybe what Microsoft is fighting is not the fact of the braindumps and so-called cheater sites, but the fact that Microsoft is not getting any revenue from those sites. Maybe if they gave a percentage of revenues to MS, they'd be okay? But I don't understand what the gripe is with sample test questions. I mean, would you want an instructor or mentor helping you learn how to do things who had never used the software? Would you want a teacher who had never taken a certification test teaching you what you need to know to pass it? If Microsoft tested on real-world every-day things, no one would need to pay the $$$ we have to shell out for classes, books, test-prep materials and so on. It would just be another troubleshooting or another setup or another configuration, and we'd either know it or not. But so long as Microsoft continues testing on obscure points that either aren't covered or are covered briefly with no detail in their own materials, and so long as I have to keep paying for the privilege of taking their tests whether I pass or fail, I'm going to use every available means at my disposal to study and prepare for those tests. I already know how to do my job. I just need to know how to pass Microsoft's tests. And for the record, I got my NT MCSE with the help of very good college instructors, lots of self-paced study, and hands-on experience in the real-world of a global corporation's IT department. Even by the strictest standards it is not a paper-certification. |
| 7/18/02: Teacher from Michigan says: |
I think its funny how Transcender seems to fall below the radar these days. When I took my 70-210 exam. At least one of the questions I had was word for word on the transcender...hmmmm Does anyone remeber when transceder supposedly had all the questions word for word? Then they got a hand slap or something, changed their ways and still exist. |
| 7/18/02: Flixx from Dallas, TX says: |
After I took the NT Workstation exam I ran across someone who had the Transcenders for it... and I found almost every question from my exam in those questions. But NT Server was far less similar, and when it came to the TCPIP test the Transcenders were worthless as far as the test went. However, I like the Transcenders, not for the questions themselves, but because they tell you not only what the answer should be and why, but also why the other answers are wrong, and even when the other answers would be right, in some cases. They're valuable learning tools. The TroyTech questions were worthless, in my opinion, because they were often garbled, sometimes so much so that the questions didn't make sense, they occasionally had an incorrect answer, and most importantly, they don't explain why the answer they give is correct, let alone what alternatives might have been given to mislead you. |
| 7/18/02: Anonymous from Utah says: |
When I see one of you cheaters proudly proclaim on your resume how you passed the MCSE exams by using braindumps I might believe your BS about how you don't think it's wrong. But since you're clearly interested in hiding that little detail from Microsoft and the employers you're trying so hard so scam, I think we can see that for the crap that it is. But hey, you can prove me wrong. Just send me your MCP # and e-mail address. I'll report your cheating ass to Microsoft and we'll see how proud you are. OTOH - I do have to agree that this is primarily Microsoft's fault. If they had a shred of ethical concern themselves they'd take a real stand against all forms of cheating and publicly decert those that post with a "get caught, find a new industry" approach. That's what you agreed to before you took each exam. I agree with several other posts that suggest the real solution is for Microsoft to move to a practical exam similar to the CCIE. They won't though. There just isn't a way to allow the losers to pass while giving the impression that it means something. |
First Page Previous Page Next Page Last Page
|
|
|
|
