pen-test
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Mile2 Training (Certifications)

To: Pete Herzog <lists@isecom.org>, Ken Kousky <kkousky@ip3inc.com>
Subject: Re: Mile2 Training (Certifications)
From: Andrew Blyth <ajcblyth@glam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 09:08:07 +0100
Cc: 'Clement Dupuis' <cdupuis@cccure.org>, <ppsih@hol.gr>, 'Serge Vondandamo' <serge.vondandamo@wanadoo.fr>, <pen-test@securityfocus.com>
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: pentest-list2@consult.net
Delivered-to: mailing list pen-test@securityfocus.com
Delivered-to: moderator for pen-test@securityfocus.com
In-reply-to: <469BBCF7.2050100@isecom.org>
List-help: <mailto:pen-test-help@securityfocus.com>
List-id: <pen-test.list-id.securityfocus.com>
List-post: <mailto:pen-test@securityfocus.com>
List-subscribe: <mailto:pen-test-subscribe@securityfocus.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:pen-test-unsubscribe@securityfocus.com>
Mailing-list: contact pen-test-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm
Resent-date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:58:04 -0600 (MDT)
Resent-from: pen-test-return-1078484611@securityfocus.com
Resent-message-id: <20070718045804.8C6E3144995@outgoing2.securityfocus.com>
Resent-sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
Sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
Thread-index: AcfISZt62j0m7zQ8EdyXfQAX8tS7qQ==
Thread-topic: Mile2 Training (Certifications)
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214
Greetings,

There is an initiative in the UK that has lead to the creation of the Tiger
Scheme.

The TIGER Scheme provides a means of independently certifying the skills of
vulnerability test ('penetration test') engineers.

The Scheme is managed independently by a Management Committee comprised of
industry stakeholders with a vested interest in maintaining standards and in
meeting market requirements.

The three main strengths of the TIGER Scheme are: independence; a
University-based examination; and strong end-customer involvement on the
Management Committee.

http://www.tigerscheme.org.uk/


Andrew


On 16/7/07 19:46, "Pete Herzog" <lists@isecom.org> wrote:

> Hi Ken,
> 
> Unfortunately, skills-based certification is the closest thing that exists
> to what is really required, decent apprenticeships.  While "virtual"
> apprenticeships happen through hacker groups and to some regards in certain
> on-line training venues, that doesn't come close to giving the well-rounded
> skills a professional security tester needs in the modern workplace.
> 
> I was lucky enough to have a great mentor during my time at IBM and what
> Peter Klee didn't teach me about just knowing how to be a "smart security
> consultant" as he called it could fit in a thimble.  For a year that guy
> dragged me to analyst meetings and customer meetings and presentations and
> internal department meetings where I just sat there with my mouth shut and
> learned how security professionals handle themselves.  That doesn't happen
> these days.  Kids leave college with a few infosec courses under their belt
> and they become security professionals already assessing other people's
> business.  There's no substitute for proper apprenticeship.  But since that
> won't happen much anymore we need to find other ways to prove ourselves.
> We do that by showing it to an independent 3rd party to rate our ability to
> apply knowledge and skills to realistic problems in a timely manner. And
> that's what ISECOM is doing. It's the closest thing you can get to proving
> experience and ability like in an apprenticeship.
> 
> This whole thing about work experience voucher and all that is a sham that
> more and more people get around.  That doesn't mean anything!  We all work
> with people who share the same job title but not the same work ethic or
> skills.  Yet after 2 years they are the same level as you according to
> these business experience certification requirements.  It's so hokey that I
> even have to use the word "hokey" and that alone is upsetting! ;)
> 
> Sincerely,
> -pete.
> 
> 
> 
> Ken Kousky wrote:
>> When exploring certification programs it's also important to note that
>> ANSI/OSI have a standard for the certification of professional licensing and
>> certification programs. The ANSI/OSI framework does not allow for this kind
>> of approach, where you have to buy a specific training product or program.
>> 
>> A professional licensing process should be an independent test of
>> competencies and not a measure of the training program an individual
>> purchases. 
>> 
>> The DoD 8570 directive endorses ANSI/OSI certified certification programs -
>> I think for this reason. It's not buying training but establishing
>> competencies that matters.
>> 
>> It's what you know, not what you buy. I think mostgood professional
>> certifications are moving in this direction.
>> 
>> We still have a long way to go before the processional standards for
>> competency are clearly codified. Right now, the targeted skills continue to
>> evolve with the exploits but we're starting to better understand the need
>> for foundation skills and then specific applications of these skills.
>> 
>> KWK 
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This List Sponsored by: Cenzic
> 
> Swap Out your SPI or Watchfire app sec solution for
> Cenzic's robust, accurate risk assessment and management
> solution FREE - limited Time Offer
> 
> http://www.cenzic.com/c/wf-spi
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
This List Sponsored by: Cenzic

Swap Out your SPI or Watchfire app sec solution for
Cenzic's robust, accurate risk assessment and management
solution FREE - limited Time Offer

http://www.cenzic.com/c/wf-spi
------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>