[adventured]

They're fake / fraudulent requirements, it's questionable which side is being more unethical.

Entry level with min 3-5 years of experience in cyber security, yeah, that's bullshit. Either they're outright lying, dramatically exaggerating about what they need, or dangerously incompetent.

When someone sets up fraudulent requirements for a job listing, they're priming the ground for dishonesty all around (they're being dishonest with the job listing to begin with), and they become partially responsible for the context.

If I put out a job listing for $250,000 / year and demand people have 3-5 years of experience at telepathy, I'm going to get a lot of candidates willing to lie on their application. The same principle comes into effect when you put out any manner of fraudulent requirements for jobs; to the extent your listing is fraudulent, is the extent to which it's going to cause problems one way or another.

[jart]

If I copied and pasted some boilerplate requirements to save time, I would look for the candidate whose attitude is, "I'm so strong in other areas you haven't considered that you're going to overlook your requirements and make an exception for me" rather than the candidate who thinks, "I take bullet points so seriously that I'm going to focus on deceiving you into thinking I meet them when I actually don't". You will eventually find an employer who doesn't bother fact checking but is that the kind of employer you want?

[lovich]

How many HR resume filters do you get past before you even get a chance to make that argument?

You could be referred personally to some hiring manager but you have to admit that situation is a minor occurrence compared to most job postings