I'm not sure if the CISSP is the way to go but I want to feel as if I am moving forward on a career search so I don't get stuck in a rut.
I'm not sure if the CISSP is the way to go but I want to feel as if I am moving forward on a career search so I don't get stuck in a rut.
Maybe the perfect cert would be a useful tool for some purposes (corporate hiring, huge projects with consultants doing low-level IT, etc.), but those are crappy jobs (and not really "expert" in any way).
More importantly, the extant certifications are all crap. CISSP in particular. Get it if an employer requires it, but it's independent of your actual knowledge and learning process.
I personally got it just so that no one else in my company would ever need to do so; there are stupid companies which won't buy a product without integration, and where they have artificial requirements for integrators being certified. Given that it is only 1% of useless pain to enable 99% useful rewarding stuff, I found the sacrifice worthwhile.
But to be clear: I believe pretty firmly that for technical / software security, the CISSP is useless.
I'm not sure how I feel about SANS/GIAC. Absurdly expensive IMO, but potentially actually has some value for sysadmins doing system security. I can't think of what CISSP is actually good for, except maybe trivial pursuit - crappy consultant edition.
I'm under no illusions about the certification's marketplace value and I doubt I would have ever paid for the course/cert on my own, but it felt like one of the better formal trainings I've been through in my professional career (which, granted, isn't saying a whole lot by itself).
Also, the certificate comes mounted on a comically oversized plaque, which provides some entertainment value.
Once upon a time I was a contractor at an insurance company, and I saw that most of the people in their IT department had various certifications hanging on their cubicle walls. I thought, "I want one of those."
So I selected the Security+ certificate, inhaled about two-thirds of a book covering the material, passed the test, framed the certificate and put it on my office wall.
That's about it. It was fun.
Security+ seems a bit more focused, and obviously vastly less comprehensive (Part of CISSP is some fairly esoteric and never-used theoretical models). In practice I'd say it's on par with CISSP.
https://www.isc2.org/dodmandate/default.aspx DoD considers Security+ to be level I or level II, CISSP to be ok up to level III, although prefers CISM or CISA for certain roles over CISSP.
That said, there are a few certifications that are very hard to fake your way through. --I wouldn't put much stock in a CCNA or CCNP, for example, but someone who has CCIE most likely does know quite a bit about the area covered by the CCIE exam. Likewise, the Microsoft Certified Master program, which not only requires exams, but a certain number of years of experience (varies by product) in the product you want MCM status for, shows that you've been working with the product long enough that you probably actually know something about it (whether or not it really makes you an expert...) But these certifications don't really say much about your software development skills, which is what the Hacker News audience is probably more interested in.
Focus your efforts on actual learning, instead of proving through a worthless piece of paper.
edit: Just to drive the point home: 9 years later I still don't know shit about security.
I'd trust a RHSE to know redhat security for redhat deployments more than I'd trust a CISSP, mainly because I put close to negative value on the CISSP, and a lot of infrastructure security is actually following best practices, not anything too specific to security.
For networking, Cisco (assuming a Cisco shop).
For virtualization, I've heard the VMware stuff is good if you're enterprise doing VMware. I wonder if there's value in the Amazon AWS courses for AWS deployments; I'd almost take one just to see what they're like.