Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

2/28/2018
09:00 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Nearly Half of Cybersecurity Pros Solicited Weekly by Recruiters

More than 80% say they are 'open' to new job offers, while 15% are actively on the search, a new (ISC)2 survey shows.

It's still a seller's market in cybersecurity, where recruiters are aggressively contacting prospects and the majority of workers are keeping their options open for a better job offer.

A new global survey of security professionals by (ISC)2 shows that while just 14% are actively on the job hunt, 84% say they would consider a new position this year. Some 46% say recruiters contact them weekly, and around 18% get daily calls even though they are not actively seeking new employment. Nearly 40% of those who are on the hunt get multiple pings from recruiters daily.

"It's a great place to be if you're an experienced cybersecurity pro. You can write your own ticket these days," says Wes Simpson, COO at (ISC)2. The talent gap in the industry remains unfilled, and that makes security professionals even more valuable and in hot demand – especially those with five or more years' worth of experience, he says.

There will be some 1.8 million unfilled security positions worldwide by 2020, according to Frost & Sullivan.

Overall, one in five pros get a minimum of one recruiting call or email each day, the (ISC)2 survey found, and most of these workers have three- to 10 years' experience. C-level executives make up nearly one-fourth of those who get multiple recruiter contacts per day.

Meanwhile, salary was not the top-ranked requirement for taking a job. Some 68% say they want a position at an organization where their opinion is valued; 54% say their current jobs fit that bill. Some 62% say they want a job where they can protect people and their data; 58% say their current jobs provide that. Next in the rankings is working at a place with a "code of ethics" (59%), with 54% saying their organization satisfies that requirement.

Nearly 50% say they want the "best salary," and 39% say they are satisfied with their current pay. That doesn't mean salary is not a factor, the report says, since 55% of security pros with no job-hunting plans are happy with their salaries.

"Job seekers in cybersecurity are just so mission-oriented. They care about really fighting back, being the professional, and being able to help and protect an organization and their data. They just want to have a sense of ownership and belonging … and that they are being listened to and consulted," Simpson says.

Security pros also are discerning about job descriptions: some 52% say a vague and unclear job description indicates to them that the organization does not understand the industry. "Vague language and descriptions that don’t seem to accurately reflect the job are definite turnoffs," the report says. 

Job position descriptions typically are written by the HR department, which often employs a template for the wording. "These job descriptions are written by the HR folks and not the hiring manager," says (ISC)2's Simpson. "The problem is a lot of great candidates probably never even get a chance because the job description is written so poorly."

There's also a lack of consistency among different companies' descriptions and names of various job titles in security, too, he says. "As a profession we can be more standardized around job descriptions or lexicon," he says.

A recent study by the Jane Bond Project report, commissioned by security talent recruiting firm CyberSN, found that organizations know their HR generalists are not equipped to recruit and hire cybersecurity talent, and that flawed salary data complicates their ability to issue the best job offers. Half of the organizations in the study had to up the compensation offers from the job description in order to finalize an offer to a candidate because the original salary offer used by HR was inadequate.

(ISC)2's report, which polled 250 cybersecurity professionals within the US and Canada, also asked security pros what they value in an employer. They say it's "very important" for them to work for companies that: invest in training and certification (88%); train their employees in security (75%); use clear and concise job descriptions (63%); and invest in the latest security technologies (50%). It's very or somewhat important that the company have clearly defined responsibilities among cybersecurity staff (100%); a large dedicated staff (88%), and a CISO on board (88%).

Related Content:

 

Black Hat Asia returns to Singapore with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/28/2018 | 10:43:02 PM
Problem of multiple-choice surveys
The problem with these surveys is that options like "code of ethics" are spoonfed to the respondents. How many would identify things like this on their own freely if it was not given as a multiple-choice option?
Overcoming the Challenge of Shorter Certificate Lifespans
Mike Cooper, Founder & CEO of Revocent,  10/15/2020
7 Tips for Choosing Security Metrics That Matter
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer,  10/19/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-27605
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton through 2.2.8 uses Ghostscript for processing of uploaded EPS documents, and consequently may be subject to attacks related to a "schwache Sandbox."
CVE-2020-27606
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier) does not set the secure flag for the session cookie in an https session, which makes it easier for remote attackers to capture this cookie by intercepting its transmission within an http session.
CVE-2020-27607
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
In BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier), the client-side Mute button only signifies that the server should stop accepting audio data from the client. It does not directly configure the client to stop sending audio data to the server, and thus a modified server could store the audio data and/or tr...
CVE-2020-27608
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
In BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier), uploaded presentations are sent to clients without a Content-Type header, which allows XSS, as demonstrated by a .png file extension for an HTML document.
CVE-2020-27609
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton through 2.2.8 records a video meeting despite the deactivation of video recording in the user interface. This may result in data storage beyond what is authorized for a specific meeting topic or participant.