[Owasp-cert] Good bye.
McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT)
James.McGovern at thehartford.com
Tue Aug 12 09:31:11 EDT 2008
Certification needs to be based on a body of knowledge and right now,
much of this is tribal knowledge. You can find lots of presentations by
folks frustrated with waterfall, but nothing that folks can actually
read in depth (only summary articles at best) and therefore doesn't make
this a good candidate for certification.
This isn't to say that it isn't important nor that it can't be
considered at a later date.
From: owasp-cert-bounces at lists.owasp.org
[mailto:owasp-cert-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Kamal
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 7:33 AM
To: james at architectbook.com
Subject: Re: [Owasp-cert] Good bye.
I am sorry, I came up with the previous mail without thinking about the
specific context and assuming that you were referring to the general
Given that I haven't read or explored into the specific domain (agile
+security), I cannot provide references. However, I am doubtful if they
can be considered orthogonal. For example, upon receiving your mail, I
googled to see around and came across this:
But I agree with your concerns. Agile+Security seems to be not within
the comfort zones of many - not within my comfort zone for sure. No
sufficient literature is seen around. No unique places like Agile
Manifesto or XP web sites can be identified. The domain is yet to
evolve. Yes, as of now we seem to have presentations and tribal
Sorry if I deviated too much.
On Tue, 2008-08-12 at 03:44 -0700, james at architectbook.com wrote:
> OWASP is all about web application security. Could you point us to an
> article that connect Agile approaches to security? I believe they are
> orthogonal concerns....
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Owasp-cert] Good bye.
> From: Kamal Wickramanayake <kwickramanayake at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, August 12, 2008 12:55 am
> To: "McGovern, James F (HTSC, IT)"
> <James.McGovern at thehartford.com>
> Cc: owasp-cert <owasp-cert at lists.owasp.org>
> Food for thought here. I am collecting some resources that I
> 1) Agile Manifesto
> Sets the orientation for all the agile processes
> 2) Agile Principles
> Describes the foundation stones of agile processes
> 3) Declaration of Interdependence for Modern Management
> Provides a management side perspective
> Once the above are read, you understand that it's impossible
> to write
> something and call it "THE Agile Book". Hence, you acknowledge
> the value
> of a multitude of processes that have sprung. Within the
> perimeters of
> the above, you can choose to follow one specific agile process
> or use a
> mixture of techniques coming from a number of known agile
> processes. You
> select based on the value the specific process/technique
> brings to your
> project according to the context. Your process is adaptive,
> principle driven.
> Some notable processes (not all!):
> 1. Scrum
> The life cycle described in Scrum is fixed and explains a
> working model. I don't mind about the certification.
> 2. OpenUP
> In case you like to read in detail, this is the one. Download
> the OpenUP
> published web site and unzip.
> 3. Extreme Programming
> Site has full details. A zip download is also available.
> 5. Agile Model Driven Development
> Yum, yum! Full details are available. This page links to other
> within the site.
> As said, followers of agile principles don't have to stick
> with any
> specific process above.
> But agile processes don't mean loose or undisciplined. Agile
> demand more discipline than heavy weight alternatives like
> Agile processes are not documented with bells and whistles.
> agile principles, they have been documented to the just
> degree. Hence, there's little chance to find a comprehensive
> rigid body
> of knowledge coming from one source - not required, not valued
> by agile
> practitioners. OpenUP has been documented more than other
> which has derived its flavors from both agile principles and
> Process. Furthermore, OpenUP documentation comes with bells
> and whistles
> due to the process editor used (Eclipse Process Composer).
> Agile processes are being practiced by small and big companies
> For example, IBM is known to have agile projects with team
> size even
> reaching the order of 500-600 people. (Source:
> Many folks still do not know about this specific meaning of
> They think it describes a sloppy process (or no precess at
> all), can do
> whatever they want and call what they have done falls under an
> process - which is wrong. Such folks should at least visit the
> three URLs provided in this mail and start understanding what
> flavor of "Agile" is (other than the plain dictionary
> On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 14:04 -0400, McGovern, James F (HTSC,
> IT) wrote:
> > My thought says that there are most certainly better ways to
> > software and that agile approaches need to be encouraged
> throughout. The
> > key challenge for an exam is to make sure that there is a
> body of
> > knowledge that exam takers can read and I don't believe that
> one exists
> > for the subject areas mentioned.
> > I could be wrong, but would certainly like to know. We can't
> really base
> > an exam on presentations and tribal knowledge...
> Kamal Wickramanayake
> IT/Software Architect & Trainer
> Software View - http://www.swview.org/
> World Quality Trainings!
> Owasp-cert mailing list
> Owasp-cert at lists.owasp.org
> Owasp-cert mailing list
> Owasp-cert at lists.owasp.org
IT/Software Architect & Trainer
Software View - http://www.swview.org/
World Quality Trainings!
Owasp-cert mailing list
Owasp-cert at lists.owasp.org
This communication, including attachments, is
for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary,
confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify
the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and
destroy all copies.
More information about the Owasp-cert