Slashdot Mirror
Is SAIR Certification Worthwhile?
cheezus asks: "My company is sending me and the other two members of our tech department (we're all university students) to the upcoming LinuxWorld Expo in New York, and we are planning on taking the Sair Linux and GNU Certification Level I tests that are being offered for free while we're there. We ordered the study materials (very cool, even came with 9 distros on CD) and have started reading up. Two of us are intermediate Linux users and have successfully set up Linux boxes that run our Web, Mail and DNS, the other is a relative Linux newbie. I'm wondering how hard the tests are going to be, and what the real benefits of having LCP or LCA certification are." Are CTOs and managers in Linux shops actually looking for such certifications right now? And has anyone taken these certification tests before and can comment on how well they match-up to real world expectations of a Linux Administrator?
Firstly, I'll say that I've been the CTO of 2 public dot.coms (and they're both still around...though barely solvent) so I think I can make a general comment...
;-)
Firstly, based on my experience with the MCSE bonanza, it's apparent that most testing organisations are mostly interested in stuffing their classes with warm bodies and extracting their training fee, NOT with producing useful "graduates." It's a sad, but unfortunately true phenomenon.
Secondly, in order to fulfill the above criteria, the testing methods and depth of testing are kept rather mediocre in order to produce the most "graduates."
Am I saying all testing centers do this? No. Is it a common practice? You betcha.
After interviewing literally hundreds of SA's, coders, and QA personnel, I can say that a cert might open the door, but hiring based on those certs alone is foolhardy. I've routinely rejected about 50% of the applicants for tech positions who couldn't answer even basic questions about their area of expertise. That's why it is so vitally important to avoid the trap of "letting HR handle these things" and have a competent tech person conduct the interviews and screen applicants.
To be honest, some of my best people were folks who had little formal computer training. Many just picked up books and dove in. Some of them later threw virtual rocks at me when I forced them to take MCSE tests to stay in M$'s good favour, but I considered it an unfortunate cost of doing business. Even though were were an M$ "solutions provider" I specified either Linux or solaris solutions 90% of the time. 8-)
Hope this was helpful.
Regards,
Just another anonymous coward who hopes his options will be worth something someday.
I hesitate to recommend a book which I haven't actually read. There have been plenty of books which looked good, but when push came to shove, the detailed info was simply incorrect.
This is one of those Exam Prep ones. Big tacky and red. "General Linux 1", Dee-Ann LeBlanc from Coriolis. I haven't given it a read cover-to-cover so I can only recommend pulling it off a bookshelf and skimming it for now... but it looks quite solid. ISBN 1-57610-567-9.
In fairness, I think Tobin et al. are aware of the problems; the main issue is that it is tough to find people with Linux expertise in Oxford, Mississippi, and once you find them it's hard to keep them on at $10/hr doing tech reviews. Another problem: writing readable technical books is hard. Probably 30 people, including me, read Running Linux (3rd ed) before it was published, and I'm sure some stuff still slipped through the cracks. Sair maybe had 3 people qualified to do that when I was there, hence the issues identified here...
My Blog. Sela Ward can sell me long distanc
you've done just about everything on a linux box at least once before... and committed it to memory.
That's the thing...I've done a whole lot, but what is the point of committing all the options of 'ls' to memory (for example)? I took a 'quiz' they offered, and it didn't impress me. Someone who really knows what they're doing, IMHO, doesn't memorize crap that they ask, they use the wonderful man pages, info pages, and documentation to figure it out, and for reference. A quick --help or man will refresh your memory, and is much better than trying to memorize everything.
That said, I also noticed that one of the questions on the 'quiz' was about Version 6 UNIX. This is a Linux and GNU test; what the fuck does Version 6 UNIX have to do with Linux or GNU?!? That was another thing that didn't impress me about these tests.
And finally, I read their 'Agreement'. Not exactly in the spirit of Free Software. You can't say anything bad about them, ever, or you lose your 'certification'. They can basically make you do anything, or else you lose your cert. Whatever.
One benefit in having LCP and LCA certification is that you look cool. And in this day in age, looking cool is important.
I'm totally serious.
I don't think Linux people really need certification in a corporate setting. Linux is still a "finge" OS, so any company using it is likely to just hire someone who claims to know what he's doing. I'm not saying that certification is bad, per se, (it would look good on a resume, and would probably get you better pay) but it only seems to be necessary for Windows admins, where everybody and his duck knows how to click a button and use an applet. I think the best thing to do would be to try to find a job with a company and negotiate into your hiring contract a clause where they pay for your training/testing. That way, you can get a job, and, if you don't like it, you can get another one by flaunting your certification. And it won't cost you a dime.
Like the title says, I used to be against cert programs. My attitude was that they are just a way of the companies involved making money. A common response to "How does Sun make money of of Java if they give it away free?" is "The certification programs."
However, I've recently been studying for my weblogic certification, which has Sun Java Programmer as a prereq, and I've found the experience to be quite satisfying. Like most tests, it actually has me learning in depth stuff that I normally wouldn't look into while on a project. Even things I sort of knew, I know really well now, because I have to know them for the test (I will be taking it next Friday).
Of course, I don't think I would do it if I had to pay for the test. But when an employer is paying, it can be really worth it.
So, from a less practical standpoint, so you feel that you have to learn stuff you don't know for this test? Do you have to cement stuff you kind of knew. If so, then I'd say it's worth it.
-no broken link
I see the hiring process as follows: the candidate and the company try to find a good match (a place that fits with the candidate's current skills, and also provides an opportunity for her to advance into whatever role she wishes.) Most candidates will NOT be hired, and thus it is important not to humiliate, grill-and-dump, or otherwise trash the interviewees. These people may be your future clients, vendors, or even co-workers. Specifically, no one should ever feel that they were "tripped up" by a single question or unknown fact.
Thus, I start easy: if the candidate aces the machine examination question, we move onto topics like compute-farm management, spreadsheet design, and global networked databases. If the candidate starts thrashing, but says her strengths lie more in Perl, we'll talk about algorithmic complexity, and data structures. The next interviewer will be a Perl expert, and will judge Perl skills.
I want candidates to show their best, so I try to makes questions easy, but each question provides a chance for an expert to strut their stuff. If you come in for a sysadmin job, and find, after a few hours, that you are filling a whiteboard with code for L2-cache optimal matrix multiplication, you are probably going to get offered a job, and one that's quite a bit better than the one the headhunter said you were interviewing for!
About 15% of the questions were poorly worded (nasty double negatives, insufficent information) or just plain wrong. About 50% were trivial, leaving 35% that could be quickly answered if you had a command prompt or a browser running.
If I were interviewing a candidate, I'd prefer to just telnet to a machine, sit him down at my keyboard, and ask:
- What type of machine is this, and what OS is it running?
- How much local disk space does it have?
- What's its primary role?
I'll trust her answers more than any certification.- We are always looking for "Certified" Linux guys... In a sea of Kernal hackers, some sort of "Cert" will definitely put your resume at the top of the pile.
As a unix professional myself, the biggest fear I have when taking a new job is whether or not I'm jumping into a job with a clueless administration that likes to hop from buzzword to buzzword. You describe a "sea of Kernal [sic] hackers" and can't even spell 'kernel' correctly!Right now I can't help to notice that little man on my shoulder waving a red flag and screaming to stay out of the pit of hell that your place of employment probably is. This probably sounds like a troll, but I might suggest you consider looking more deeply at experience rather than certifications.
I/O Error G-17: Aborting Installation
Is it ever ethical for a Network Administrator to read other users' E-mail on a server that he is administrating without approval.
Explanation: The Electronic Communications Privacy Act specifically grants this right to authorized personnel. Courts have generally ruled that there is no reasonable expectation to privacy and, further, states that employers have the right to read e-mail to protect their interests. While I see that it is legal, I still don't consider it "ethical"
2 :Of the following examples, which would be the most representative of physical security?
1. Computer Locks
2. BIOS Security
3. Boot Loader Security (example - LILO)
4. xlock and vlock
Explanation : Physical security of a machine is the protection of unauthorized persons from logging into the physical terminal. All four examples help in preventing unauthorized persons from logging into the machine.
I think the first one is "most" representative answer as the others are all implemented in software.
9 :Which of the following is the most secure method for a System Administrator to login as root into a host. (This host may be accessed
through the local area network if necessary)
A.rlogin
B.ssh
C.telnet
D.Login as root at the physical terminal
E.All of the above are equally suitable options
Explanation : Answer D is correct. Using rlogin, ssh, and telnet place the root password on the network, subjecting it to potential snooping. Further rlogin relies on the "trust" of another host and can be easily fooled. Telnet and Secure shell are probably the next best choices because they are capable of using encryption to protect the data but is still unsafe because it is always feasible that someone is capable of decrypting the message. Physically logging onto the terminal prevents network snooping of the root password.I chose SSH. I realize that logging on to the physical console is the most secure but why does the question say you can log in over the network if necessary? And unless I'm graveley mistaken ssh does not put the root password in plaintext on the network. I'm sure it doesn't when using public key authentication...
Sorry, those just caught me as unfair questions...
There seem to be a lot of new certifications out there now. Personally I think most of these to be ploys to make some money off the certification craze. People hear the word certification and they associate it with one thing... money. Eventually these "deadly certifications" will degrade the value of the more esteemed cert's, such as the Cisco line and the M$ line. Bad news for the people who have these already.
----------
do { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); } while (alive)
----------
while (alive) { Work(); PayTaxes(); Eat(); Sleep(); }
Bool
you can pay "big" bucks for a cert that the vast majority of employers won't grok, or, you can go get the online freebie at brainbench. i took the unix admin one and there were actually points where it was tough!
2 1337 4 u!
The answer they were looking for was the first one (due to the GPL's viral nature). However, as most people who follow Slashdot regularly know, there have been a number of exceptions, to allow GPL'd code to be combined with other source that's of a similar open sourced nature but not under the GPL itself.
I can give the inside scoop on operations at SAIR. Their material is prepared by college students; many of them never using a Linux box before their initial employment. Their deadlines are rushed and the quality of output is poor. If I had to speculate, 65% - 75% of the employees could NOT pass the Level I test. A Linux certification should be based on the same principles as the system itself: open development. SAIR is plagued by poor management, poor quality material, and a lack of the true vision of Linux. If I were an IT manager, knowing what I know about the Sair, Inc. company, the certification would be a piece of paper. LPI should be recognized as the "standard" Linux certification.
...see you auntie
My dad was the first Certified Quality Manager in the state of Mississippi, as cert'd by the American Society for Quality. Certified Quality Engineers had already proven the standard [my dad had his CQE and was teaching CQE review courses], and CQM got some acceptance on that.
I guess the benefit will be the initial graduates and any subsequent certifications that follow. You'd want to make sure that one level of cert is respected before adding more, but the additions have a value added by those that they're built on.
--
-- Geof F. Morris
... are that in theory, the cert will test the individual on basic requirements to be a sysadmin. This doesn't mean that the individual will be a good Sysadmin, I've known several MCSEs that have $10.00/hr US jobs as field techs because they were incompetent as an Admin, but at least indicates that they took the time to go through the test.
Hopefully, the test will cover important stuff like TCP/UDP/ICMP services, security, permissions, file locations, libraries, user management, cron, etc... Otherwise, the test may be worthless...
"Titanic was 3hr and 17min long. They could have lost 3hr and 17min from that."
IBM had PL/1, with syntax worse than JOSS,
And everywhere the language went, it was a total loss...
I like certs. They have a cool minty core and only one calorie. I think the most sought-after cert would be the spearmint, but I could be wrong.
Have you flamed SpanishInquisition t
is esentially to give a prospective employer your knowledge base at a glance. The certification does not do anything else really. I am an A+ certified tech but my experience with *nix (FreeBSD) at home has taught me a lot more than any exam or course ever could. My experience with my own computer systems prepared me for my A+ exam better than any book could have as well. I also think that some certification systems are simply a joke, for example, I am also Lexmark certified. I can do warranty work on Lexmark printers. The exam was 20 MC questions, on my own puter, with the service manual open in front of me!! Kleed
Sure we wang, can.
As you could see on the news, RMS got arrested instead of me.
The moral of the story is that Linuxgruven takes a bunch of knuckleheads (my buddy was at the top of his training class) and gives them a month long introduction to Linux. Some of these guys truly are knuckleheads and have NO chance of passing, but my buddy with a bit of hard work is going to pass all the SAIR tests just two months after he first logged in to a Linux box.
You have to know some details, and they have questions about netstat, arp, route, ifconfig, ipchains, kernel modules, samba, apache, anon ftp, sendmail, etc... but if you've been working with Linux for 3 years and you review the material covered by the tests, you shouldn't have a problem.
moe
Of course everybody has a different experience of things... but... I tried it out at the San Jose LinuxWorld in August and to be quite honest it's not worth missing all the keynotes and cool talks. The training is not *before* and not *after* the conference, it's during! I was really pissed off about afterwards and when I go next August to SF I'll just stick to the conference.
It *is* a great way get your boss to send you to a cool conference, but I'd actually go for the standard paid-for course and come up with a different reason for your company to send you (cos there are plenty)...
I've been geeking with Linux since about mid '97 ish and am totally self taught. It was quite hard to get into the SAIR style and every training comapany definitely has their very own style of questions. Occasionally they trick you into thinking you don't know the answer by phrasing it in a completely nonsensical way, when if they'd asked you straight you'd've got it no problem.
In short... my advice is go to LinuxWorld and enjoy it but do the training seperately.
My two rubels.
IF WE REALLY WANT to become "professionals" in the sense of lawyers and doctors, (not neccessarily a good idea imo) then there needs to be some kind of centralized authority with fixed types of knowlege tests. That kind of certification might mean something. But all of these certifications promelgated by manufactures are simply another source of income and advertising.
We are always looking for "Certified" Linux guys... In a sea of Kernal hackers, some sort of "Cert" will definitely put your resume at the top of the pile. A lot of hops (here in Calgary) are reluctant to deploy Linux, simply because they feel that it is easier to find M$ Network Disintegrator. If there were more certified Linux Admins, Deployments would go up, and that would make Cmdr. Taco a very happy guy.
um.. I done, you can stop reading...
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
Search dice, monster, net-temps, etc for the different cert acronyms and it will quickly become apparent which are valuable and which are not.... IMO Solaris is the sought after *NIX cert... may vary by location..
First off, my wife and I are currently working on a study guide for the LPI level 1 exams, which should be out soon. I wouldn't say I'm biased by it, though.
We took the Sair tests and "training" at Linux World in San Jose. Skip the "training". It's a waste. You miss a lot of the conference, and you get no real information. The "instructors" were not that good. We were really disappointed. If you want to pass the Sair exams just go buy the Sair books. The answers are spelled out word for word in them. The questions on the exams were not that good. They really didn't test your knowledge.
I much prefer the LPI exams, which is why we're doing an LPI book. The questions are MUCH better, and do require knowledge of how to work with Linux. The LPI exams don't get as much press, though...which is a shame. They have backing by major players in the Linux world. The level 1 exams are out of beta now, so check them out at http://www.lpi.org.
But, since the exams are free at Linux World, go for it. Just don't waste time in the "classes". Whoever came up with the line saying "$5500 worth of training!" is on crack.
One final note...for the security exam go learn the different informatino laws and how they apply to work. They ask a lot about that and proper chain of command....or what they consider proper. Go take the practice exams they have.
Of course, once hired, if that employee proves to be uttlerly clueless, that will reflect back on the SAIR coursework and likely not be as meaningful for the next candidate. The abilities of the early graduates will ultimately determine the value of the program.
I passed the first two exams (Installation & System Administration) last week, just before Christmas (here in Europe). My score was really close to the required minimum (74% = 37/50 questions) though. I suggest you to solve the test exams here: http://www.linuxcertification.com/resources/quizze s/
and read the exam objectives here carefully:
http://www.linuxcertification.com/exams
I am fairly Linux newbieish, but I have set up various distros, including Debian with various configs, and I also studied the book and knew it cold. However I failed the test. I am an MCSE plus a few othter certs, been in the IT field for 15 years and never failed a test before this one. They had a lot of questions that you would never know from reading the books, but would only know from really playing with the OS for quite some time. I figure I just got used to the M$ tests where you can generally read the book one day and take the test the next without booting a PC. I guess it better this way as it will keep people from becoming "paper LCP/LCA's".
At the companies I've worked or consulted for, certification is something the companies will consider if you don't have a well-established track record. The applicability of certs is generally limited to entry- and mid-level positions. You will almost never get a senior position on the strength of a few certs.
If you don't have the experience, and a good work history to prove it, a certfication may get you in the door. But, for higher-level positions, like the senior designer for a large system's middleware or the engineer in charge of scalability/performance tuning on a large-scale distributed sytem (which a lot of e-commerce back ends are), certifications aren't given much credibility.
In general, a known track record (good or bad) trumps certifications: If you're a known lamer, a cert won't save you. And if you're a known project-saver, nobody is even going to ask for your certs (or a resume in many cases) -- they want you on the team.
So, if you have a good track record, make sure that you can demonstrate it to potential employers. Otherwise, a certification may be your best bet.
Easy, automatic testing for Perl.