4 ms·
Yeah but why is it a saying and "security by anything-else is not good" isn't a saying. What layer of security is sufficient on its own? None. Why is "obscurit
by illiac786 3y ago
Yeah but why is it a saying and "security by anything-else is not good" isn't a saying.
What layer of security is sufficient on its own? None. Why is "obscurity" being singled out?
It always feels a little condescendant, like "oh I got a cool saying that applies to most noobs in security, let's use it", implying one is assuming the other party in the conversation knows less.
- bradknowles 3y agoHow would you apply this "anything else"? What "anything else" did you have in mind? If you can come up with some good examples, maybe we can make that a thing. Until then, we know that "Security by obscurity" is really bad, if that's the only thing you're relying on for security. Otherwise, that would be "Security by something else plus obscurity", which might or might not be a bad thing, depending on what the "something else" happens to be.
- illiac786 3y agoAccess lists alone are not sufficient Authentication alone is not sufficient IDS alone is not sufficient Encryption in transit alone is not sufficient Etc.