The author fails to mention that changing SSH to a non-privileged SSH port also has other security implications that can be exploited. The other example they g

The author fails to mention that changing SSH to a non-privileged SSH port also has other security implications that can be exploited. The other example they gave that it's "more costly" to scan your host to find the non-standard port also barely holds water. It would be trivial to script such a scan and the relative time/compute that it occupies is minimal when you're conducting a dragnet of a pool of hosts, especially when parallelized across your own pool of hosts (which are potentially compromised, and thus coming from various host networks). I think generally when you hear people mock changing your SSH port it's because it's often done as a sort of high pass filter and then nothing else is done on top of that. That or it's done in lieu of real prevention techniques like establishing bastions with temporary credentials or OTPs. Now, I'd end with this with the usual guidance I give people in political or social realms: mocking people rarely teaches anything, it just dissuades action in the short-term. If you want people to stop being reckless with SSH then you need powerful visualizations and demonstrations of just how easy it is to find the skeletons in your closet from outside the fortress. Thank you for attending my TED talk.