Should you start a blog??
Had a few discussions with people about whether they should start a blog/website/home of their own that I decided I needed to put my thoughts down so I can just refer people there instead.
Happy to chat with people here or offline about getting started, but I do encourage people to do so.
Thanks for posting this – there's been a lot of posts about blogs recently and they've each given me the encouragement to think about starting mine up again. I had hosting but let it expire.
Your point about Imposter Syndrome is spot on. When you're a student you get the feeling like there's nothing you can post that hasn't already been done much better than you could do by someone who knows much more than you do. It's hard getting over that and getting with the idea that even re-verifying something already known or trying something in a different way is valid.
P.S - Thanks for thisweekin4n6, I look forward to the post every week - maybe someday with this blog I'll be able to contribute something! wink
Or even doing something known in a much better way.
Agree about thisweekin4n6. It's a very good summary and it saves people time.
If anyone wants help just reach out )
Your point about Imposter Syndrome is spot on. When you're a student you get the feeling like there's nothing you can post that hasn't already been done much better…
The thing is, this expectation you have that you have to find something new is entirely incorrect.
For some who is a student, just demonstrating that you can pick up the material and then share it back in a coherent, thoughtful manner is enough.
And now is the time to get over that…I've worked with experienced analysts who've used the same rationale for not sharing findings. Who wants to work with a team member who's ( a ) not able to pick up new information that they're given, and ( b ) not willing to share things that they've seen or learned?
For a new person, a student such as yourself, a blog is a great way to demonstrate a grasp of information as well as the ability to communicate, and as such, a means for getting a job.
What keydet89 said.
Also, know that we're all students. Requirement to continually learn follows the curve of rapid changes in technology. One of the best ways to master something is to explain it to someone else (Feynman). There's a catch to it, however. While you're "explaining to master", you run the risk of being wrong. It's this fear of being wrong , I think, that prevents many of us from sharing with the community at large.
The argument can be made that there's too much disinformation out there as it is. I agree with this, but I also see the practitioner's act of publishing something to the greater digital forensic community as being akin to a research scientist publishing to a scientific journal. One overarching benefit to doing this is peer review. It's true that we often read blogs, articles, posts, books, etc. to learn a supportable way to do something or to learn a solid definition. I think this is best achieved when some form of accessible feedback accompanies the original material. For example, a blog post is made better when accompanied by a healthy amount of reader comments. Trolls aside, the comments and questions posted by readers, especially if the author responds, can significantly illuminate not just fallacies in context, but also may teach the author something about effective written communication. I have a very knowledgeable friend with impeccable integrity who is currently providing tech review on something I've written. Not only am I learning my forensic craft better, I'm also learning my writing craft better. Not everything I explain makes sense to others. Also, not everything I've written is correct. I'd love to have more reader input to my own blog for these very reasons. Maybe I don't post enough. Maybe my writing is so confusing no one knows what I'm talking about. Maybe I have wrong assumptions. Maybe I'm spot on. Whatever the case, I have no way to know without feedback a.k.a. peer review.
You've likely heard of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Usually it's discussed in the context of a less capable person thinking more highly of their knowledge and capabilities than is deserved. The opposite is also true in that more knowledgeable people sometimes don't see the value in what they have to offer because they assume if they know it, everyone knows it. No matter who you are, you know something someone else doesn't. You're good at something others aren't. Therefore you have value. It's ok to have a goal of becoming as good as those giants in our field like keydet89 who are not only master practitioners, but master developers and researchers. It's unfair to yourself, however, to think you have nothing to offer if you're not on that same level yet.
Start a blog? Heck yes. Comment on the blogs of others? Absolutely. Will you be wrong sometimes? Yep. Should being wrong or a fear of criticism stop you? Absolutely not. Remember that it's peer review. When you're the peer reviewer, treat others with dignity and respect even if you disagree or can flat out prove them wrong. Be forgiving when your peers don't extend to you the same courtesy. Mostly, don't be afraid to experiment and share what you learn. This makes us all better. No one in our field was born knowing what they know and everyone of us can learn something from any of the others.