What are you looking for in that case? I mean, in the absence of previous experience doing the same thing.
The way I look at it, people come into technical security either from operations or development backgrounds, but it's hard to distinguish someone who has the required skills from their years in dev or ops from those who have managed to do their core work so without going into the relevant details; their CVs are going to look pretty much the same.
A hobbyist might have practiced on some CTFs or vulnerable machine challenges, but unless they haven't e.g. won some bug bounties or gotten some CVE disclosures, then that won't be really visible on a job application. If certifications aren't considered relevant by security hiring managers, what is?
Why would those things count more or less than other things? It seems more like a list of things you think are neat but trying to guess what a resume-reader might think is neat seems like a game with very poor returns.
Ah that makes sense but then those things would be useful when applying for your specific job rather than things that would be useful when looking to make a specialization switch and are wondering whether certifications are useful.
The way I look at it, people come into technical security either from operations or development backgrounds, but it's hard to distinguish someone who has the required skills from their years in dev or ops from those who have managed to do their core work so without going into the relevant details; their CVs are going to look pretty much the same.
A hobbyist might have practiced on some CTFs or vulnerable machine challenges, but unless they haven't e.g. won some bug bounties or gotten some CVE disclosures, then that won't be really visible on a job application. If certifications aren't considered relevant by security hiring managers, what is?