You can go for all the schooling and internships you want, but good jobs are still gotten the hard way -- with people skills. You need to be able to communicate well and convey a very positive self image. Your degree should at least get your foot in the door for an entry level interview. From there, it is all up to you. As far as giving a good interview goes, there is a plethora of decent advice to be found, though my most commonly given advice is this: Nothing sells like honesty.
To sum up, ignore what the want ads say. Just go in and make them give you the job. You must have many bad interviews before you begin to have good ones. Many of the senior and even higher level engineers I have worked with never even had college degrees. What they did have is a lot of ability and good people skills.
There is an assumption that appears to be raison d'etre for this article, and I think that it is a flawed one. Patching security holes in software is not done for the welfare of its users -- it merely keeps the software alive so that we can continue to use it (and it is a losing battle). Most security problems are remedied with quick patches rather than the rearchitecture necessary to make certain kinds of flaws impossible instead of improbable. This statement should not be interpreted as an attack on the maintainers of software, rather, I would prefer that it be viewed as a lament over the software creator-user dynamic that exists today. Users are riding leaky boats at sea -- they can't very well leap into the water while we make proper repairs, so we merely patch the holes. The sad fact is that, eventually, the boat sinks into the waves. Until user expectations change, software creators will use the practices that encourage these sorts of defects. Assurance of quality begins with the management of expectations.
Who is going to risk incriminating him or herself for a mere 200 bucks? I wouldn't even walk across the street for that. That notwithstanding, who would want to tell their story to a hacker that's been compromised already? Were I one who "hacks", I would not even give the time of day to a hacker who has gotten pinched by the feds.
Slashdot Mirror
You can go for all the schooling and internships you want, but good jobs are still gotten the hard way -- with people skills. You need to be able to communicate well and convey a very positive self image. Your degree should at least get your foot in the door for an entry level interview. From there, it is all up to you. As far as giving a good interview goes, there is a plethora of decent advice to be found, though my most commonly given advice is this: Nothing sells like honesty.
To sum up, ignore what the want ads say. Just go in and make them give you the job. You must have many bad interviews before you begin to have good ones. Many of the senior and even higher level engineers I have worked with never even had college degrees. What they did have is a lot of ability and good people skills.
There is an assumption that appears to be raison d'etre for this article, and I think that it is a flawed one. Patching security holes in software is not done for the welfare of its users -- it merely keeps the software alive so that we can continue to use it (and it is a losing battle). Most security problems are remedied with quick patches rather than the rearchitecture necessary to make certain kinds of flaws impossible instead of improbable. This statement should not be interpreted as an attack on the maintainers of software, rather, I would prefer that it be viewed as a lament over the software creator-user dynamic that exists today. Users are riding leaky boats at sea -- they can't very well leap into the water while we make proper repairs, so we merely patch the holes. The sad fact is that, eventually, the boat sinks into the waves. Until user expectations change, software creators will use the practices that encourage these sorts of defects. Assurance of quality begins with the management of expectations.
Who is going to risk incriminating him or herself for a mere 200 bucks? I wouldn't even walk across the street for that. That notwithstanding, who would want to tell their story to a hacker that's been compromised already? Were I one who "hacks", I would not even give the time of day to a hacker who has gotten pinched by the feds.
"The only way to beat the terrorists, is to show that were will not change as people despite their best efforts."
:P
Yes, that strategy has worked pretty well for the Israeli people, too. No, wait; I guess not.
Justice can come from unexpected places.