> You can use whatever technology to accomplish that complexity, be it passwords, SSH keys, or SSH certs. Anything else is just technology architecture noise. Passwords absolutely can clear the O(2^N) > 80 bit threshold. It's just about bytes, and how you store them.

I always try to assume breach in my thought processes, but I recognize that this lead to overengineered solutions because sometimes the mitigation is not worth the cost.

> Just look at the title of this post: "If you're not using SSH certificates you're doing SSH wrong". It's just completely devoid of environment issues, user issues, datacenter issues, and reeks of elitism.

I think this is an excellent point you make. There are a few different ways to use SSH securely and I probably lean a little towards the x509 and other alternatives, given the established base of x509 within my industry.

I don't use SSH certificates at work because they really don't make sense for me when I am using a strong credential already (HSMs)

> There is no "one true way" despite people's insistence that they are the arbiters of truth. I keep reading here about "you should just use serial over network instead of SSH!" but fail to read about how those serial over network connections are usually less secure than SSH itself. Best practices guides have gone off the rails. They are generally good guidelines, but you have to make sure you are taking into account your own environment and user needs and take them with a grain of salt. Learn for yourself, and read raw facts from real cryptographers and people in the field. Don't take best practices guides as absolute truth, but learn from them.

These are some other seasoned points you make.

I like to think about "Security Objectives". In most cases I am concerned about is something secure from a confidentiality, or integrity perspective. But, since I also deal with an ICS/SCADA community, their context is completely driven by "Availability as Paramount", defined performance within an acceptable range being next, and only after that, does the other objectives come into play.

However, given the varying use-cases of machine, mobile, app, connectivity basis or lack thereof (internet, transient, air-gap, etc) and the limitations of each, sometimes a smorgasboard of solutions are needed to satisfy within constraints.

> How does one become a security professional? Maybe not with one of those "become a security professional in 30 minutes" packages then start a blog about how everyone isn't conforming to their tiny worldview. No matter what it'll take >10 years with actual experience, just like any profession. One has to start from the bottom and make their way up. Most environments are too complicated for any "one size fits all" solution:

Appreciate the words of wisdom.

I view security as having much in common with other rapidly evolving fields of expertise. The generalists becoming specialists, are now becoming sub-specialties, adding fellowships, etc. When I was a young force-sensitive had the good fortune to fall in with the right community in which to collaborate.

My opinion is that many of the security communities are among the most welcome, diverse, and inviting folks around.