[jpgvm]

My point is thus. You can't legitimately argue that you can reasonably understand modern security without understanding modern exploitation techniques. Furthermore you also can't say that a certification that doesn't test for any of this knowledge would then be useful for filtering candidates that have said knowledge.

That is not an argument from ignorance, that is simple fact.

If you are hiring for "security" at an enterprise company where the role generally consists of vendor management then sure, CISSP is probably exactly what you need/want.

If the certification was worth something it would feature more prominently in requirements for companies with excelent security orgs. Notice it's completely absent from https://www.tesla.com/careers/search/job/security-engineer-f... and https://boards.greenhouse.io/cloudflare/jobs/1727694?gh_jid=... and https://jobs.apple.com/en-au/details/200293563/product-secur...

Instead note the prominence of proven vulns, low level language experience, etc.

Lesson is simple. If you want to be good (and paid a shit ton) disregard certs, acquire CVEs.

[austincheney]

This thread isn’t about kernel developers or experienced senior security scientists. It’s about a developer wanting to move into a security job. You have completely left reality to qualify some unrelated personal bias.

[jpgvm]

No, it's not.

It's about a clearly technical person looking to get into security that already makes a high salary and wants to retain that.

I gave (IMO) very solid advice on what to do and what to avoid if you want to remain technical and meet his desired salary. i.e learn the technical side first, do OSCP, land job somewhere that values security highly.

You haven't added anything of substance other than trying to argue from authority that somehow these certificates are useful without anything that would actually help him on that path. If you instead offered anecdotal evidence for how your certifications actually helped you in the real world I would be much more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt but as it stands I think you are just offended that I don't consider such certifications to be worth the paper they are printed on.

[austincheney]

The problem is why you would give that advise at all if you do not have any related experience? I do find that offensive.

[jpgvm]

I gave that advise based on what everyone technical around me that works in security also advises, additionally it's the path most of the successful ones have taken or wish they had taken.

My related experience is two-fold, yes I know many practicing professionals but additionally I am generally on the hiring committee for security so my opinion matters on whether or not a security professional gets an offer from companies I work at.

So I would say that is pretty relevant.

[lexdiamonds]

Hmmm....there are many many different aspects to security. Security Architects for example, dont necessarily need to understand the details of CVEs, but the general principles of defence in depth when architecting solutions. Similar to medicine or any other fields, there are sub areas that require specific experience. CISSP gives a good foundation for the security assurance type of roles. Those are security as well. I wouldnt focus only on CISSP if i was after a security engineer, a role that requires specific skills.