Feeling bitter about the IT certification racket; People who dumped the test, and...

rcsoar4fun

Moldygr33nb3an wrote: »

What? 2 years ago they purged 30+ year civilians with huge retirement bonuses. DOD Civilians retire all the time after 30 years of service. We had a sys admin retire after 30+ years and then come back as a contractor.

Not sure what you mean.

Folks with 30 years are under the old FERS system and have "retirement" benefits. People hired in the last 15 years basically just have a 401K.

ande0255

Amen to the OP of this, I know someone who is exactly the same, and I mean EXACTLY. I hate that smug piece of ****.

lucky0977

ande0255 wrote: »

Amen to the OP of this, I know someone who is exactly the same, and I mean EXACTLY. I hate that smug piece of ****.

Yes we all have that fellow co-worker. The good thing is they can only go so far. They can't **** an ISACA or ISC2 exam (at least I don't think so). I am also reading up on some blogs that Microsoft and Cisco have started suing websites that host their test material online. It's not a total solution, but at least it's a start.

These vendors that sell **** online are getting their material from one of the testing sites. I wonder how hard it would be for Pearson Vue or Prometric to secretly perform audits on their own employees?

thomas_

lucky0977 wrote: »

These vendors that sell **** online are getting their material from one of the testing sites. I wonder how hard it would be for Pearson Vue or Prometric to secretly perform audits on their own employees?

I don't think the testing sites are employees of Pearson Vue. I think the testing sites get paid by Pearson Vue to proctor the exams which is included in the price of your voucher.

It seems like it would be pretty easy to catch the testing centers by having control questions in the exam that only appear in a test proctored by that test center. If that question later shows up word for word on a **** site then you know it most likely the test center that compromised the test or someone with a photographic memory just happened to test at that test center.

devilbones

rcsoar4fun wrote: »

Folks with 30 years are under the old FERS system and have "retirement" benefits. People hired in the last 15 years basically just have a 401K.

Federal employees get TSP (401k), BB and SS. Not sure what they retirement benefits they are missing.
https://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/fers-information/

ande0255

I've seen posted several times in different forums from techexams and here that brain **** are actually used in countries as legitimate study materials in schools, and I believe these countries also host test centers for Cisco curriculum and I am sure many more.

I wonder if testing centers have access to the answers database though for the pool of questions, or if a secure connection is made to a Cisco DB to score the exams, and such for other vendors.

And here is a feel good story to my fellow cert dumper haters here:

The person I had mentioned was able to pull it off because he had Cisco TAC (support) engineers on chat, and he worked remotely doing VOIP job duties, so he would be able to regurgitate high level technical answers on tickets that he was given by a Cisco support person over Jabber and claimed that it was all him.

He took a promotion which will have him going on site to doing deployments in front of the customer instead of remote, and he is sweating bullets because he is about to get found out for the fraud he is when he can't perform these skills he claims he has during a deployment which is really going to anger some customers a LOT.

So a hopefully a sad ending to a cert dumpers career with my company, good riddance

EagerDinosaur

thomas_ wrote: »

I don't think the testing sites are employees of Pearson Vue. I think the testing sites get paid by Pearson Vue to proctor the exams which is included in the price of your voucher.

It seems like it would be pretty easy to catch the testing centers by having control questions in the exam that only appear in a test proctored by that test center. If that question later shows up word for word on a **** site then you know it most likely the test center that compromised the test or someone with a photographic memory just happened to test at that test center.

So far, the test centres I've used which are actually run by Pearson (ie. are owned and operated by Pearson) have all seemed well-run, and rigorous about verifiying candidate identity, checking people's pockets for notes, etc.

On the other hand, some of the non-Pearson college-above-a-chip-shop test centres I've used have made me feel distinctly uneasy. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were complicit in the creation of brain-**** and other forms of cheating.

ande0255

I've actually had the proctors whisper under their breath a website name that used to have actual CCNA tests / answers when I failed, I had no idea there was a thing called brain dumping before that.

Companies will send CCIE's to get their certificates together as well, have the highest level / most likely to pass engineer take it first, then if he passes great, and he passes everything he was tested on (including his answers and score) onto another engineer to memorize / study all night.

These are the type of people who put "CCIE (Written)" on their email signature, so everyone knows they can memorize answers.

dlvega0030

I had a similar experience with ****. I honestly studied for the CCNA and, a few months before taking it, a friend got me a **** with lots of questions. I tried to answer most of them, but I knew I would have failed that test if I had took it right there.
I asked to some of my coworkers, and most said they would read the material, take some notes, and then go to the brain ****, to the point of knowing the answer without looking at the questions. And almost everyone agreed that, in the end, MOST local companies check your certifications, or take them into consideration for a possible rise in payment.
Now, I am beginning to gather material for the CCNP R&S, and after reading lots of people who got their certification through the honest route, it gives me the motivation to study all the material.
It's true that getting the certification is important, but having the knowledge is way better. I know because I got the CCNA after almost 1 year on a Network Analyst job. I was asked to teach new guys (some with CCNA certs) to do the troubleshooting. And OMG... I think that was the time I thought getting the CCNA would be a piece of cake.

As many people have said before, the best way to filter the brain dumpers is to set an appropriate lab in the job interview. And maybe expand our people network so, when a position needs to be filled, we can recommend a person with a good set of skills (both tech and inter-personal skills) to get the job.

chappys4life

I can see how braindumps could be a good study aid say to help the legitimate people who studied get that reassurance of passing. It sucks when you study and go oh wow that was harder than expected. Like anything else something that could be a good resource gets used improperly and the good people suffer. I have always been too nervous of briandumps as the sites all seem majorily shady. Why not just study a little extra and pass is how I look at it.

spiderjericho

xxxkaliboyxxx wrote: »

If you want to talk about brain dumping and paper tigers, you should look no further than DoD. Now I can only speak for the Army, since I worked on the uniform and currently on the civilian side. Not only is brain dumping allowed behind closed doors, it's actually encourage. I mean seriously, these guys are getting hired purely on certifications in order to meet DoD requirement (you can tell within 5 minutes who the guys/gals are). Not only that, even when they bring in professional companies to conduct a bootcamp on an Army installations, the instructors are passing out **** at the end of class. Now would they have the balls to do that without prior approval? I have no idea, but on the Army side you can actually get hired without any actual credentials and they will give you 30 days to pass the exam. If that isn't a undertone to brain ****...

With that said, any company of worth is going to see right through it. Take for example when I interviewed with your search engine. I made it all the way to the final face to face interview and there is no way anyone that brain **** would ever make it that far. They bombarded me with scenario questions for hours. I felt good leaving the interview so I could only imagine that only someone that really knew his stuff would of outshined me for the engineer role.

Case in point, any job and company of any worth can tell who the fakers are.

I, respectfully, disagree. I've taken certification boot camps personally and on the job. A lot of boot camps are geared toward ensuring the student passes. It's good for business and their reputation. Plus, there's no way they can accurately and effectively teach all of the material in the time provided. I took a CEHv9 boot camp in December. The teacher didn't provide tests. But he didn't cover all of the chapters in the official EC Council books or perform all the labs. There were a lot of students who didn't have a cyber security or strong IT background. So, more than a week later, I'm not sure what the pass rate is for the class. It has nothing to do with the DoD. It just so happens that the DoD is a customer that procures and fills the seats in these boot camps in order to be compliant with DoD 8570/8140.

Also, government personnel "have" 6 months to get their IAT/IAM level certification. Contractors are "supposed" to be hired with the required certification. But they can also be granted a waiver. Though it does look bad for the contracting company. Again, it is more for compliance.

Moldygr33nb3an

spiderjericho wrote: »

Also, government personnel "have" 6 months to get their IAT/IAM level certification. Contractors are "supposed" to be hired with the required certification. But they can also be granted a waiver. Though it does look bad for the contracting company. Again, it is more for compliance.

Interesting. I was talking to a contracting company about this recently for a friend and I was flabbergasted when they said my friend had to have his MSCA first before hiring. I always thought there was a grace period. Thanks for clearing this up.

si20

One of the above quotes was very interesting. **** IN the workplace. I need to be a bit careful about how I word this because it will be obvious if said dumper ever reads it. But I personally witnessed a very clever way of dumping an exam being done in the workplace - it was absolutely encouraged by the team/managers. That's all I can say.

I personally am against dumping and wasn't taking the aforementioned exam. If I dumped an entire exam i'd feel bad enough, but if I got a job off the back of it - i'd feel like a complete and utter **** at that point.

I don't feel like a **** should ever be needed. If the practice questions are close to the real questions without being exactly the same, then you should be in good shape to take the exam in my eyes.

TechGromit

dave330i wrote: »

I don't care how you got your cert. If you can't answer my questions, you're not getting hired by me.

What are your questions? How much does the job pay? What are the hours? How long do I get for lunch? Can I get a advance on next weeks paycheck? I know I'm new, but can I have 3 weeks paid vacation for go to Europe? My dog developed a skin condition, I'm afraid I'm going to need to take family leave. You know I don't think this is going to work out, I decided not to take the job after all.

xxxkaliboyxxx

spiderjericho wrote: »

I, respectfully, disagree. I've taken certification boot camps personally and on the job. A lot of boot camps are geared toward ensuring the student passes. It's good for business and their reputation. Plus, there's no way they can accurately and effectively teach all of the material in the time provided. I took a CEHv9 boot camp in December. The teacher didn't provide tests. But he didn't cover all of the chapters in the official EC Council books or perform all the labs. There were a lot of students who didn't have a cyber security or strong IT background. So, more than a week later, I'm not sure what the pass rate is for the class. It has nothing to do with the DoD. It just so happens that the DoD is a customer that procures and fills the seats in these boot camps in order to be compliant with DoD 8570/8140.

Also, government personnel "have" 6 months to get their IAT/IAM level certification. Contractors are "supposed" to be hired with the required certification. But they can also be granted a waiver. Though it does look bad for the contracting company. Again, it is more for compliance.

I can only speak from my last 8 years in the Army. All these boot camps I have attended have been on military bases. I been in classes where they all been military and in class where I was the only active member. Whatever the case, **** were being passed out or hinted at, plain and simple. I'm talking about boot camps across the world at different military bases. Also, the 30 day cert might of been an internal policy. Now that I'm on the civilian side working for the military, they require new guys to come in having their baseline certification, but a grace period for a CE cert.

DatabaseHead

Kali - former co worker went to a very presitgous camp in Atlanta for the MCSE. Every single course had a **** passed out at the end of the class. Everyone got their MCSE.

Fast forward to last year and my boss recently got her PMP and she received a **** to help with the exam. This one might of been similar, not the actual exam but it helped her pass.

I think more people **** that don't. While I was working as a team lead I remember seeing CCNA **** on a few of the techs desktop. I just chuckled, I honestly don't care I am not the moral police.....

xxxkaliboyxxx

DatabaseHead wrote: »

Kali - former co worker went to a very presitgous camp in Atlanta for the MCSE. Every single course had a **** passed out at the end of the class. Everyone got their MCSE.

Fast forward to last year and my boss recently got her PMP and she received a **** to help with the exam. This one might of been similar, not the actual exam but it helped her pass.

I think more people **** that don't. While I was working as a team lead I remember seeing CCNA **** on a few of the techs desktop. I just chuckled, I honestly don't care I am not the moral police.....

I wouldn't say I care, but I would be lying if I say it doesn't bother me when it comes to the DoD specially. It bothers me because I loved my time in the military and I hate the incompetence on the IT side of things, I would see it day in and day out first hand, the compliancy and self-entitlement.

518

Moldygr33nb3an wrote: »

Because it's cheaper to pay a contracting company for minimally qualified personnel, than pay DOD employees pay + full benefits and retirement for life.

minimally-qualified paper-tiger defense contractor here. most GS that I worked with won't even pass the interview I give on candidates for defense contracting jobs. they think my questions are CCIE level, no seriously. If you know the CCNA material, it's basically off of that.

518

lucky0977 wrote: »

I'm not going to paint a broad brush and state that it occurs everywhere in the DOD. My experience came from when I was on vacation and they decided to have a week long bootcamp for the CASP. I wasn't able to attend so they paid for my books and online CBT classes that I spent 6 months studying for. When I actually came around to taking the test, I thought I failed and did poorly only to find out that I passed but didn't know my actual score. I went back to work and asked my boss how so many people were able to pass the test with only a 5 day class. He showed me the study guide the instructor had them take home at the end of the day and to my amazement, they were the exact same questions on my exam. This is the AF-DOD and I complained to my boss but he just told me "Hey, people gotta feed their families".

In the end as the others have said, the ones who actually studied will eventually move up the totem pole or these mindless f%cks will learn how to tap dance around when questioned. Till then, just realize you're gonna have to do your job and embarrass these clowns when an actual issue arises.

Yup, seen that on Sec+ bootcamps conducted on AF base, too. A company needs to maintain their 97% pass rate afterall. Worst, the testing center in Bagram Airfield was shutdown in 2010. The proctor was taking money from test takers, $2k for CCNA. And just like what lucky0977 mentioned, one day their network went down and nobody could figure it out...we're talking about two days of outage. Each Network Admin had to re-interview to keep their job. As well, if you have a buddy inside, the interview questions/answers are leaked.

spiderjericho

xxxkaliboyxxx wrote: »

I wouldn't say I care, but I would be lying if I say it doesn't bother me when it comes to the DoD specially. It bothers me because I loved my time in the military and I hate the incompetence on the IT side of things, I would see it day in and day out first hand, the compliancy and self-entitlement.

Most organizations in the DoD are doing it for compliancy i.e. check in the box.

Moldygr33nb3an

518 wrote: »

minimally-qualified paper-tiger defense contractor here. most GS that I worked with won't even pass the interview I give on candidates for defense contracting jobs. they think my questions are CCIE level, no seriously. If you know the CCNA material, it's basically off of that.

Not trying to get in a GS vs Contractor debacle here. I use to be a contractor and I will agree, contractors work several times harder than GS employees - generally because they are looking for that next GS opening. However, in most cases (I've been through multiple contracts during my time) once the contract expires, it goes to the next lowest bidder, then the company that wins the award, sub-contracts out for an even lower bidder. These companies require certifications and minimal qualifications because they are just trying to fill a spot with a warm body so they can get paid.

As for qualifications between the two. Contracting companies hire from the out-side and have free-will for the interview. A lot of GS positions hire internally and the interview process is constrained to certain questions and must be applied to all interviews.

So a ****-bag GS can easily slip through the interview process if he was provided the questions ahead of time from one of his buddies.

518

Moldygr33nb3an wrote: »

Not trying to get in a GS vs Contractor debacle here. I use to be a contractor and I will agree, contractors work several times harder than GS employees - generally because they are looking for that next GS opening. However, in most cases (I've been through multiple contracts during my time) once the contract expires, it goes to the next lowest bidder, then the company that wins the award, sub-contracts out for an even lower bidder. These companies require certifications and minimal qualifications because they are just trying to fill a spot with a warm body so they can get paid.

As for qualifications between the two. Contracting companies hire from the out-side and have free-will for the interview. A lot of GS positions hire internally and the interview process is constrained to certain questions and must be applied to all interviews.

So a ****-bag GS can easily slip through the interview process if he was provided the questions ahead of time from one of his buddies.

no worries, sir. I know exactly where you coming from. sadly, thats what a lot of contractors do..a warm body. "Oh, you have an SCI? cool, you can have this billet so I wouldnt have to pay 20% penalty." Normally, a contractor pays a penalty of 15-20% of the base salary for each month the "seat" is empty.

I just want to point out that when a prime contract wins, they are obligated to award part of their work to a sub. and based on my experience, subs actually pays A LOT more than the prime.

Moldygr33nb3an

518 wrote: »

they are obligated to award part of their work to a sub. and based on my experience, subs actually pays A LOT more than the prime.

I did not know this. The last contract that came through where I'm at was SAIC, then they subcontracted out to some smaller company which paid less - a lot of good people left. I guess it depends on the contracts. Too much bureaucracy to keep up. I can't even request contract service and support from a sole service provider without jumping through hoops.

"Are they a small business?"

"Are they owned by a woman?"

"Native American owned?"

"Veteran owned?"



Me: "I just need their products...thx"

518

Moldygr33nb3an wrote: »

I did not know this. The last contract that came through where I'm at was SAIC, then they subcontracted out to some smaller company which paid less - a lot of good people left. I guess it depends on the contracts. Too much bureaucracy to keep up. I can't even request contract service and support from a sole service provider without jumping through hoops.

"Are they a small business?"

"Are they owned by a woman?"

"Native American owned?"

"Veteran owned?"



Me: "I just need their products...thx"

back when Five Rivers and Vista Ops were small business (2008-2013-ish), an IMO/WGA gets paid $240k in Afghanistan vs ITT/Vectrus' Help Desk/ADPE Techs $135k.

Reason why smaller business pays a lot more is they have less stakeholders to answer to. Thats not the case for bigger companies obviously.

daviddws

I would say this .. get over it. It's good that you have put in the time and really understand the concepts, but having a big head about your abilities will not help you make friends in IT. Yes there are plenty of arrogant, self congratulating morons in the field, but they will pass away like leaves in the fall. Just keep a level head and perform.

spiderjericho

NetworkNewb wrote: »

Right ^ I just wish our military would have people in these positions that actually are able to pass these tests on their own. Especially if they feel it is supposed to be a requirement. Little disappointing to hear about all the **** being passed around there.

Well...that is a loaded comment and is pointed toward a systematic root issue in how the DoD recruits, initial training, provides on-the-job-training, opportunities to obtain job experience, intermediate training opportunities (that are mandated), etc cyber/information technology/communications personnel. Most of the time, folks learn either through self-study or being placed into austere situations lol.

I took a CISSP boot camp. It was about 10-days and it was back when the test was paper-based. We never got any **** just testing methodology, key focus areas, etc.

I have attended events where what you say does take place but again, it's endemic of IT training companies. The company has to have a positive success rate or no one is going to attend.

Dr. Fluxx

Certs like the OSCP/OSCE and the CCIE seem to separate the men from the boys.
Neither of these certs are multiple choice. They are practical.