|
|
|
|
|
by Kalium
989 days ago
|
|
This reads like your standard issue security-team-in-a-box JD. You might find the T-shaped candidate of your dreams, but anyone capable of delivering the combination of cloud admin/netadmin/IT/SOC II/HIPAA/software arch/devops is going to know they're a substitute for a team. They'll expect to be paid significantly above what you're offering because they're going to be doing the job of a director and a team of six on an engineer's authority. This doesn't even touch on policy or IR, but they'll inevitably wind up in there too. Speaking as a security professional who is the T-shaped person you want, this JD is bad news. It reads less as the expression of a hopeful young company and more of a giant red flag warning that this company does not understand security or take it seriously enough. You may want to rethink it if you wish your company to have a reputation as taking the security of your customers' data seriously. The advice to consider a consultancy is sound and well worth careful consideration. |
|
This is an early stage startup, and they are very clear in describing that. I also like the clarity in their business model. And the conciseness. In 2 sentences they've told me everything I need to know. The founding team is also exceptionally on point. What I read into all this is that they are good to great at execution, at communication, and very well versed in the problem space. There aren't all that many medical doctor, strong compsci, startup founders.
The money on offer is very much on par with this kind of position at this size of company. I have to believe that the equity will also be respectable. Surely, they will find out soon enough.
I also think it's admirable that a company of this size isn't just winging it with security. I don't work in the space, but having been adjacent I can tell you that even in the healthcare startup space, few are treating security properly. (Hence the HIPAA in a box startups! Some occasionally advertised here on HN. I see far more ads for such startups than actual medical data processors hiring for security internally.)
I very much understand where the cynical take is coming from, but I think it's unfair. Security should be a core competency of such a company and they are trying to make it so. That's to be applauded not scorned.