Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by pvg on Sunday June 11, 2017 @04:11PM
(#14533528)
This doesn't have anything to do with 'security through obscurity'.
Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by ignoramous on Sunday June 11, 2017 @05:37PM
(#14533917)
It might not be. When someone raises concerns around disclosing weak passwords or weakness in crypto, or security holes in general [0], I kind of like to think they are trying to think abt the problem in the wrong way. STO is a good framework, I think, to help people steer in the right direction, and hence the 'also see' label.
[0] Google's notorious Project Zero, for instance.
Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by pvg on Sunday June 11, 2017 @08:11PM
(#14534517)
STO is a good framework
It's a fairly specific term so trotting it out for everything makes it pointless and obscures its actual meaning. Every time someone misunderstands something about information security (or someone thinks they do), someone else comes along and says 'Security through obscurity!' or 'Trusting trust!' or something about source code. It turns these things from terminology and concepts into magical-sounding incantations that really just mean 'I disagree/don't like this'.
This is analogous to the more familiar overuse of 'ad hominem' and 'straw man' and so on. It's not a good thing.
Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by ignoramous on Monday June 12, 2017 @10:42AM
(#14537715)
I get your gripe with the overuse. I now agree with the point you are trying to make. Thx.
Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by BenjiWiebe on Sunday June 11, 2017 @11:44PM
(#14535101)
Of course it has to do with security through obscurity... Passwords themselves are only security through obscurity.
Re:Show HN: 5+ Billion Passwords in Order of Most Popular
by pvg on Monday June 12, 2017 @01:48AM
(#14535381)
No, they aren't. Not knowing something is not 'security through obscurity'. If it was, any encryption at all is 'security through obscurity' because, hey, you don't know the plaintext. That isn't what the term means at all.
Also see: Security through Obscurity.