Re: [funsec] You have just violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

2012-11-29 Thread Kyle Creyts
I puzzled at Jeffery's message for a while before I realized _this_ thread wasn't about the same thing as this other thread I was following about the guy who recently had all of his gear taken because he operated a Tor exit. http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.org.operators.nanog/108040 On Thu, Nov 2

Re: [funsec] You have just violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

2012-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:36 PM, phester wrote: >> >> http://cfaadefensefund.com/ >> > I have my doubts about Weev, but the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act > (CFAA) is Gestapo Legislation that is subjectively enforced and should > go away. Oth

Re: [funsec] You have just violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

2012-11-29 Thread Rob Thompson
On 11/29/2012 04:36 PM, phester wrote: > > > http://cfaadefensefund.com/ +1 > > ___ > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. > -- Rob

Re: [funsec] You have just violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

2012-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:36 PM, phester wrote: > > http://cfaadefensefund.com/ > I have my doubts about Weev, but the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) is Gestapo Legislation that is subjectively enforced and should go away. Other victims of the CFAA include Wiseguys Tickets, who gamed TicketMa

[funsec] You have just violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

2012-11-29 Thread phester
http://cfaadefensefund.com/ ___ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread John Bambenek
But isn't security whatever the auditors tell us to do? *ducks* On 11/29/12 1:24 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:10 PM, John Bambenek wrote: I'm convinced that certifications have given us an army of IT workers that have letters but are utterly unqualified. And they get e

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Walton
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:10 PM, John Bambenek wrote: > I'm convinced that certifications have given us an army of IT workers that > have letters but are utterly unqualified. And they get employed by the > thousands. > > Exhibit A: Web developers. > > On the upside, unlimited job security for tho

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread John Bambenek
I'm convinced that certifications have given us an army of IT workers that have letters but are utterly unqualified. And they get employed by the thousands. Exhibit A: Web developers. On the upside, unlimited job security for those of us who have to respond to incidents involving their lousy

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread John Bambenek
FWIW, I was trolling my employer Ernst & Young about a decade ago about certifications so I took the CCNA one day after cramming a book. Prior to the exam, I had never laid eyes on a cisco device, much less interacted with one. Passed the test. Anyone need a network engineer? :) On 11/29/12

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Paul Ferguson
I agree with you, to certain point. :-) But I've also witnessed way too many instances of people with "Cisco certifications" who had no idea how to build networks. Sure, they could configure a router but... - ferg On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29,

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Paul Ferguson
Yes, I actually built real networks. :-) - ferg On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Blanchard, Michael (InfoSec) wrote: > Don't Cisco certs require you to perform a function on real equipment? Or > did they remove that piece :-( > > The tester would "break" a network in such a complex manner

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Blanchard, Michael (InfoSec)
Don't Cisco certs require you to perform a function on real equipment? Or did they remove that piece :-( The tester would "break" a network in such a complex manner that the testee would have to dig deep into their practical knowledge to make it work again... within the allotted time period.

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Paul Ferguson
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Rich Kulawiec wrote: > Certifications are, in practice, crap. > Amen. Short story: As an early Cisco engineer, I (and may other very talented people) helped develop the original CCIE program. I wince now when I hear people reference Cisco "certifications" becaus

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread John Bambenek
Oh, I agree, it's only useful to get past the bean counters. I haven't had a job that paid travel to take classes, so I haven't had the benefit of part 2 on that point (I would like a job some day that did offer that benefit though, but I'm more resigned to doing my own business just to get ou

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Blanchard, Michael (InfoSec)
The only think certs are good for is getting you into the door... they're essential for getting your resume looked at, and I think we all agree on that part, so they're needed just for that piece... Yah, I have a fewI also have over 20 year experience to back them up... But, I was basical

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread John Bambenek
Oh, some people try to write a good test and we can have a nice discussion about psychometrics and the lot, but at the end, we haven't even figured out K-12 testing. It's a hard problem with no solution. In our field, we need to be able to DO things, not be able to recite knowledge. And testi

Re: [funsec] "Skills gap"?

2012-11-29 Thread Rich Kulawiec
On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 09:24:29PM -0600, John Bambenek wrote: > That said, I've been helping write/audit SANS certifications for > awhile. I'm simply ineligible to take them (for what should be > obvious reasons). I got real tired of submitting resumes and being > told I need a GSEC/GCIH/et al.