Security+ isn’t overrated, but it is often misunderstood. The certification provides a solid foundation in cybersecurity concepts, but it doesn’t prove hands-on skills. Because so many candidates now have it, Security+ has become a baseline requirement rather than a differentiator, which leads some people to see it as ineffective. That said, Security+ still has value. It helps with ATS filters, is required for many government and SOC roles, and gives beginners a common security language. The real issue is expectation Security+ alone won’t make someone job-ready without labs, tools, and real-world practice. In my view, Security+ is useful as a starting point, not a guarantee. - Should employers keep requiring Security+, or shift more toward hands-on skill assessments?