hottest cert ?

walid97

Is it true that Security+ is one of the hottest certs in the market today ??

garv221

I would have to say a Hot cert would be one that defines your position. CCIE, CISSP, MCT. SEC+ is definitely popular among security but does not have pull like those.

freak

Let's put it this way: it is starting to be recognized. "hottest" is a bit of a stretch at this stage

Zraxniah

Sounds like someone hear one of those ads "no college degree, COMPUTER TRAINING FOR THE ILLITERATE, MAKE LOTS OF MONEY $$$$$$".... I took security+, and didn't think it was that great. I don't think anyone really cares about COMPTIA certs. I went to a job interview, and they were talking about my expired (3.5 yr old) CCNA...

freak

to be fair, I don't think you should compare a CCNA to a CompTIA cert. It's simply not the same level. Not trying to be rude about CompTIA certs, because they have their place. But what you are saying is kinda like comparing a CCIE to a CCNP and saying that the CCNP is not worth much...

RussS

According to many publications Sec+ is hot - unfortunately that is pretty much hype as out in the real world most employers have not heard of it.
At the end of the day NO certification is worth much at all if is gained solely by 'book learning' or studying **** and is not backed up by solid practical skills and knowledge.

freak

I agree - to a point. I am a bit tired of the cert vs. experience battle. It is as futile as genetics vs. environment. The bottom line is that it is BOTH certs AND experience.

I was a network engineer for a while - several years - before I studied for my first MCSE in NT 4. That sounds like a lifetime away Anyway, I was clearly a better engineer after I studied for those 7 original tests. I knew most of the content, but I didn't always know/understand how it all worked together.

I see a lot of value in learning from books, as long as you back it up with hands on training, and later on real world experience on live networks. I think the combo books/certs/experience makes you a more complete engineer/tech than just hands-on can.

nightstrm_ut

Plus, I think the Security+ exam lends itself to more book learning than practical. Most of it is theory and just learning the different concepts and definitions. It's not like a Cisco or server exam where you actually have a piece of hardware you can sit down and use.

linuxguy

I completely agree with freak. I was also an admin for a while beforesitting sown and studing the 'book' ansers. My technical skill was greatly increased off just the 'big picture' understanding I gained from my studies.

Might I also add that if your interviewer has not heard of a cert. that is not necassaraly a bad thing. I f you go to the HR folks they nay not know some well know certs. They will research it and it will get you the credit it commands, that you understand the concepts of basic security.

It is mostly physical security and methodology... but so is craking

Every cert has a worth if it has to be studied for... and it applies to your career.

IMHO

skully93

linuxguy wrote:

I completely agree with freak. I was also an admin for a while beforesitting sown and studing the 'book' ansers. My technical skill was greatly increased off just the 'big picture' understanding I gained from my studies.

I agree! I was a Jr. Admin for several months, and while I didn't get a horde of experience, it's enough to understand a lot of the material.

The problem I'm running into on some things is real world vs. exam on a few things. Some of the ?'s are simply invalid because, if someone did what was in they hypothetical question, you'd probably just kill them or buy them a new machine in the case of a VP .

freak

ha ha, remember, if it's a MS question, then you need to give them an MS answer

That's why I always tell my students that taking tests is first and foremost a reading exercise. Look for the keywords, analyze the question, and from there decide what skill/knowledge they want you to display...

RashedS

I think Security+ and CCNA are at the same level but the first one is in the security field and the other one is in the field of networking !!

freak

Have you taken the CCNA? Because I took both of those tests, and I can tell you that while are considered entry-level in their own tracks, the level of difficulty of the CCNA test and the sec+ test is pretty different.

Case in point: it took me 30 minutes to pass the CCNA. It took me 11 minutes for 100 questions to pass the Sec+ test. 'Nufff said

Cherper

I will back Freak on this one. The CCNA is a more demanding cert to get than Sec+. If you have never touched a router, and have no idea how to configure one and just read a book, you won't likely pass the CCNA. If you read a book, you can pass Security+.

linuxguy

I will also stand as one that has both and understand both. Having used both in my daily job functions the CCNA is far more "proof" of skill than Sec+. If you were going to compare a networking cert. to sec+ then it would have to be Net+. Even at that if it were not for poor wording in the Sec+ I think I would say that net+ was more technical.

IMHO

RussS

Good comment Linuxguy. I relate Sec+ more to knowledge of things like the day RSA was developed, or maybe the middle name of Diffie-Hellman rather than proof of skill

Mikey Palmice

I am a CCNA, and I wanted to take the security+ cert. Twice I signed up for it at my local college, and twice it was cancelled due to lack of interest. They each had like one person enrolled.

freak

well, at a college I am not surprised... it's not really the right audience.