Do you agree that MCSE 2003:Security is the best?

[NetZaid]

Hello ev body,
Right now i have MCSA 2000, and I was kind of not a big fan of windows till recently(actually till my work environment forced me to!)
My point here is that I see MCSE 2003 Security as the best of the list of Microsoft Networking certs, and I really appreciate it if somebody agrees on that with me, coz I'm planning to go for it, and I realized that I need 6 exams to make it, so your opinions will really encourage me with that...

The funny thing is: I found out that I have to take the 6 exams to get MCSE2003:Sec only, and also with the same number (but differnet titles) of exams, I can get MCSE 2000 along with MCSE 2003:Sec...
BTW: the certificate planner sucks!!
_________________
Zaid CE, CCNA, MCSA, JNCIA-FWV, JNCIA-IDP, ITIL-SM

[Ozzy_98]

Well, if I had a choice of any free certification from MS, and they somehow pumped me full of that knowlage I would pick MCDBA, but it just doesn't work like that

Yea, of the pure microsoft networking exams, mcse2003:Security would be a top-level, so would Messaging, but the second one is pointless if your work doesn't use exchange servers.

[Headhunter]

Depends on how you look at the "security" aspect... It does not cover any network security what so ever, just M$ and not even hardening a Windows box so even though it's a nice one to have like messaging it does not really cover network security
_________________
Koen
CCSI #30501 CCNP CCIP CCVP CCSP CCDP Cisco Advanced Wireless LAN Field Specialist Cisco Unity Design Specialist Cisco IP Telephony Design Specialist JNCIS-ES JNCIA-ER JNCIA-EX MCSE MCSA:Messaging

[skoga1]

Do employers actually care if someone is MCSE:security or messaging or just plain MCSE?
_________________
I guess I just love her

[kidvelvet]

I would think it would depend on the employer and the position that was being offered. Like with any othe cert, if you don't have the experience, it doesn't really matter, which makes them both the same in that respect.
_________________
kidvelvet
www.kidvelvet.net

Yes, your problem is the most important. Just like everybody else's.

[skoga1]

[techno-jordan]

My employer cared that I had my MCSA:Security and MCSE:Security because I was applying for a security admin position, however I also have my Security+ and 6 years experience with network security on DoD networks. I honeslty think the experience was more relevant in me getting the position then the certs.

As for the first question, my friend it really depends on you. If you want to start working in IT security that may be a place for you to start I would recommend working on and maybe taking a course for your Security+. You will learn more there, MCSE: Security is more or less implementing and using ISA and how to analyze a network with MBSA and how to deploy updates with SUS. If that sounds like something you wanna learn then go for it. As far as MCDBA, well personally I'm no SQL expert so I will let someone who is answer that for you.
_________________
Jordan, MCSE:Security, MCSA:Security, Security + (Working on CCNA)
"Red Team Go!...Red Team Go!..."

[Skull]

[kidvelvet]

I think you missed the point of his post. Basically, HH was saying that you are going to see security from a Windows communications and hardening point of view, but you are not going to get security considerations from a pure networking/architecture point of view.

For example, the CCSP for Cisco will cover best practices for firewalls, IDS, perimeter hardening, and SAFE, which is Cisco's best practices policy. While this cert will cover security from a Cisco point of view (pure network) it will not cover how to setup audit policies for your MS machines, and it will not cover how to make Apache or BIND more secure on a Solaris box.

If you are looking a a total security point of view of things, you may be looking more at a GIAC or CISSP certification. The MS security cert will only go so far when it comes to a secure environment, and like HH says, it will not cover the network architecture or inter OS communications at all.

So from that standpoint, the messaging cert may be a bit more useful. You are more likely to get hands on experience with Exchange, whereas security will probably fall within another group in the company (as it does in mine.)
_________________
kidvelvet
www.kidvelvet.net

Yes, your problem is the most important. Just like everybody else's.

[Skull]

Well Kidvelvet,
I do agree with your arguments, but one more thing: All certifcations come from knowledge, not necessarily from experience. Regarding the CISSP certification for instance, that's among the most wanted certs in the industry, but it also gives best practices on securing a wide range of environments without taking you into the details (That's why it's a standard). So how can one be a good security professional? My guess will be: Choose your environment, Stick to it, and Know it thouroughly. The general knowledge one can get from certifications is a good start to almost any kind of environments.
Let's take for instance, the CBK domain "Access Control Systems & Methodology"; You are tested on your capabilities to understand the functionning of Access techniques, but this doesn't mean you had ever dealt with it....
_________________
Phil
MCP

Machines should work. People should think!

[Orion IV]

Hi all, nice discussion!

I want to add to the discussion that there is different points of views on what security really is. Techno-jordan and Kidvelvet (if I understand correctly) are more the technical kind of guys and see security as setting up firewalls, routers, defining password policies, patch management and managing access control. I was very much this kind myself but has after ending MCSE Security and getting GIAC certified (GSEC), I'm now of a little different opinion. This technical talk is really talking about getting best security or most security in all products - but that may not be the need of the individual business and not possible to get funded.

These things are "just" tools and techniques to implement and audit your security policies, but I agree with Microsoft in that it has to start with Risk Management as this is where you determine the needs and threats to your business - all other initiatives and security implementations are based on that (or should be). Designing defense in depth with physical, perimiter, network, client, server, application and data security must be ballanced to the risks and priorities of the business. You will not implement a PIX or ISA firewall if the cost is more than the expected losses - you will stick with simple filtering in the router you already have.

When I started out in my security cert path, it was both of interest, but also because I felt something was missing - why did the company I worked for not secure the clients proper, why was so many security holes left open all the times? Now after working with security and system administration (and the managment group) for a few years I see why - lack of funding, lack of seeing the big pictures (getting priorities straight with the risk management process) and lack of understanding all areas of security practise. They are mostly guided by people talking their departments interests, e.g. the network group wants to build firewalls and DMZ's and the server guys wants servers to be hardened for better uptime and for virus resiliance. The initiatives of the management group are not based on a clearly definded defense in depth plan, but are based on who has the best arguments and "worst" threats to protect against. So I agree more and more that security IS Risk Management, the rest is following best practice and business relevant needs in the technical implementation of security.

I urge everyone to look at the highly entertaining but also very relevant presentations by Steve Riley and Jesper Johansson (both from microsoft), they have made many but I recommend this 5 part presentation from IT Forum 2004:
http://www.microsoft.com/uk/technet/itsshowtime/result_search.aspx?speaker=9&x=13&y=2
(can be seen streaming or be downloaded in high quality)

So with this in mind, I find Microsoft MCSE security as very relevant since it learns the student how to implement the policies of risk management with defence in depth from host to network to LAN to WAN to RRAS to DMZ and partner-nets (see 70-220 curriculum), including DNS, WINS and DHCP infrastructure services. The 70-214 or its 2003 counterpart focuses on patch management, hardening by using server and client security templates (whick is ensuring all systems are configured accordingly to the corporate policies), RRAS, Ipsec and certificates for network and application security, auditing for verification that the security policy are actually being implemented and followed, including scanning with MBSA to check patch management. The ISA exam (70-227) is as technical as Microsoft gets, placing most focus on the product and perimiter defence. But microsoft MCSE is not going to be a network expert exam like Cisco's and therefore is something of a more broad holistic type of securtiy certification.

I feel Microsoft covers "security" very well, making MCSE Security a very valuable exam IF you want to have a role in securtiy (but management will most likely still let the network guys maintain the routers and firewalls). Just dont expect to be an expert in any particulary field - you will more have a general understanding with acceptable depth in your knowledge, e.g. perfect for project management or architectural roles. Add to that specific knowledge from other certs, e.g. GIAC or cisco, then one might be an expert (experience still required!).

Cheers,
OIV
_________________
MCSA 2000:Security, MCSE 2000:Security, PCSE, GSEC, DRUNK+
I can handle pain until it hurts!

[gorebrush]

Just to add my two pennies...

Me and a co-worker are both on the MCSE 2003 tracks, and he made me think...

I asked him the other day "Are you going to follow Messaging or Security"

He replies - "I'm doing both"

Interesting... I've had a similar thought... are there any reasons why one can't do it?
_________________
David Jones BSc (Hons)
MS Certs: MCSA: Messaging 2003, MCSE: 2003, MCTS: Vista, MCTS: Exchange 2007
Cisco Certs: CCNP
Studying: CCIE: R&S Written, Feb 28, 2011

[Skull]

Are you having any business with Messaging Systems (Exchange) ?
As for security, you always find it in your way, but not necessarily a messaging environment.
So the answer will depend of course on what you're doing, or what you're dealing wiht....
_________________
Phil
MCP

Machines should work. People should think!