> A religious approach is not appropriate for technical issues. What you call "security through obscurity" is not the Devil, to be shunned at every step. Of co

> A religious approach is not appropriate for technical issues. What you call "security through obscurity" is not the Devil, to be shunned at every step. Of course not, and frankly that's a gross mischaracterization of the parent's point. The problem is not that security through obscurity is the devil; the problem is that security through obscurity is not security, and is not useful when you need security. > The encryption key exists somewhere in the parameter space This misses the point of cryptography, which is that you (roughly) have to try each possible key separately. So, for example, the combination of a 64-bit security layer (or set of layers) with another 64-bit security layer is a 64-bit security layer, not a 128-bit security layer, which you should know if you know what "parameter space" means.