Talk:Security through obscurity
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
Intense Editorial Bias in this Article
[edit]1. The article does not say a single positive thing about security through obscurity in its entire text, only a litany of criticisms. Humorously, they felt the need to add a criticism section in an article consisting of nothing but criticism. 2. The article is focused entirely on information technology security, or, by way of analogy, locks in the history section. Security through Obscurity is a perfectly valid way to, say, position a nuclear launch site/vehicle. There is no mention whatsoever of myriad other security contexts. 3. The criticism amounts to a strawman that security through obscurity is the only method of security being used, rather than in concert with other forms of security. --166.182.84.28 (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- I will be correcting this. Thanks for pointing it out. skarz (talk) 04:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- In addition to everything you mentioned, there's also no actual difference between STO and the alternative. Adding more hex characters to a hash just increases its obscurity. 207.91.187.66 (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Technology
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Technology
- C-Class vital articles in Technology
- C-Class Computer Security articles
- Mid-importance Computer Security articles
- C-Class Computer Security articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class Computing articles
- Mid-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Computer Security articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles