Elaborate further please. A negative critique can be just as valuable as positive ones.

The manual is far and away my biggest complaint. There are errors in it which detract from the overall polish of the course. Not anywhere near as bad as CEH's but still. Some of the errors were small, like *this* code not matching *that* output. But there were some that were enough to throw me off for an hour or so. I could see how it would be difficult to regularly update the videos, but a PDF? Also, I don't expect them to have the latest BT R# syntax/path/etc in the manual, that'd be ridiculous, but couldn't there at least be some form of errata? My suggestion would be to create a web page where students could submit errata which the offsec folks could then confirm. OSCP students are the best people to review the material.

And while the videos are great, I'm disappointed that they serve to supplement the manual rather than complement it. If I'm trying to look something up, a printed manual is much easier than scanning through multiple video segments.

Instructionally, some modules were great, others, not so much. The BoF module was excellent. Muts stepped through each item in the process methodically. That was followed by an exercise where you could practice this on your XP Client. Conversely, the port forwarding module - critical to the back labs - amounted to "here's some cool things...try out whatever you can on whatever lab machine you think it might work on."

I've learned enough in this class to make my head explode but I can't understand why I see not even a slightly negative review. Maybe it's just me having a low tolerance for errors in manuals. I don't want to come across as completely knocking this class. I'm not. But like I said, there is room for improvement.

Hey hey hey !! You need to read my post more 9 days ago in my OSCP journey thread when I lost a complete DAY figuring stuff out, that made me really pissed :-)))

:-)

Thing is, I noticed that with OSCP you need to add at least 6 books that you should read before or wile doing this course.

I think we must not forget that OSCP is all about the labs, not so much about the pdf and the videos...

@DragonGorge I can certainly understand your frustration. The reality is though, that in a pen test, lots of things don't work perfectly. An exploit you find might be broken, a PoC might display the wrong output, this stuff happens all the time.

Now, whether or not this was done on purpose by Offsec is up for debate. I think it makes you learn to be very resourceful. This is a key skill to develop because a lot of the time during a pen test you're going to have figure out of new stuff you've never seen before....just like in the OSCP labs. Compare it to boot camp, if they made it all very easy, you'd never be ready for the real deal.

I also think the reason you don't find many negative reviews is that most people review the course when they are done and have passed the exam challenge. Usually they're riding a big time high and they've already forgot about all the minutia that drove them crazy during the journey. Hang in there, I'm sure you'll be one of these people writing a glowing review

It's in my thread about the OSCP

JMP http://www.ethicalhacker.net/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,54/topic,9115.0/

:-)

They also run an IRC channel, and there's almost always someone that'll respond to legitimate questions / concerns. If you come across an error that you can't correct easily, just go ask a question. There's no need to waste an extended amount of time struggling with it. I don't think erroneous materials are intended to be part of the experience.

I am sure if you TRY HARDER you will get there