Studying for the CompTIA SecOT+ Exam

Studying for the CompTIA SecOT+ Exam

🎙 Mike Holcomb 👥 27K 📅 July 8, 2026 ⏱ 65 min 👁 448 📄 expert opinion 🧭 2026-08-16
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

SecOT+CompTIAOT securitystudy tipsGICSP

Summary

In this live session, Mike Holcomb discusses strategies for studying for the CompTIA SecOT+ exam, which is currently in beta. He shares his personal preparation routine, including taking the exam on Mondays after weekend study sessions. He highlights the exam’s six domains, emphasizing the importance of architecture, design, and engineering, which he estimates could constitute 50% of the exam. He recommends the book ‘Practical Industrial Cyber Security’ as a study resource and his own YouTube course ‘Getting Started in OT/ICS Cyber Security’. He also introduces a free OT threat feed aggregator he created, and suggests using AI tools like Claude to generate study guides by comparing the exam objectives with existing course content. He discusses the mix of IT and OT professionals interested in the exam, and notes that the exam is currently easier for experienced professionals. He also mentions his involvement in writing the official CompTIA online course for SecOT+.

151 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The video provides valuable, practical advice for individuals preparing for the SecOT+ exam, drawing on the author’s extensive experience in OT cybersecurity. The argumentation is based on personal experience and industry knowledge, which adds credibility. However, the advice is largely anecdotal and not backed by empirical data or formal research. The author does not provide a structured study plan but offers useful resources and tips, such as using AI to fill knowledge gaps.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The author demonstrates a good understanding of the subject matter and references relevant standards (NIST 882, IEC 62443) and resources. He mentions his involvement in creating the official course, which adds authority. However, he does not cite specific scientific studies or peer-reviewed sources. The title accurately reflects the content, which is focused on study strategies. The video is not a formal educational resource but rather an informal discussion, which is appropriate for the topic.

162 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content, which focuses on study strategies for the CompTIA SecOT+ exam.

Quality & Reliability

7/10

The author is an experienced OT cybersecurity professional, actively involved in developing the CompTIA SecOT+ course, and provides practical study advice. However, the content is largely anecdotal and lacks rigorous scientific backing or verifiable data.

Key Moments

Cited Sources

  • CompTIA SecOT+ Exam Objectives — Mentioned as the official exam requirements.
  • Practical Industrial Cyber Security — Recommended as a study guide for the exam.
  • Getting Started in OT/ICS Cyber Security (YouTube course) — Recommended as a foundational course.
  • OT Threat Feed — Free aggregator created by the author for OT threat intelligence.

Concurring Sources

  • CompTIA SecOT+ Exam Objectives — The exam domains discussed align with the official objectives.
  • Practical Industrial Cyber Security — The book is widely used for GICSP preparation and covers similar topics.

Contribution & Novelties

The video offers a unique perspective from an insider involved in creating the official CompTIA SecOT+ course, providing practical study tips and resources. It introduces a free OT threat feed aggregator and suggests using AI to generate personalized study guides, which is a novel approach.

Pour aller plus loin :

  • IEC 62443 — International standard for industrial automation and control systems security.
  • NIST SP 800-82 — Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security.
  • Purdue Model — Reference model for industrial control system architecture.

83 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows a balanced performance across all dimensions, with slightly higher scores in quality and reliability, reflecting the author's expertise and practical advice, while the quantity of information is moderate due to the informal nature of the session.

Reliability 7/10

💬 Sur les 0 commentaires analysés, aucune tendance n'a pu être dégagée.