> It is not always known where those massive pipes are through the land

These pipelines are quite easily identified on-shore by surface markers in the UK[0]. Also, like I did, folks would have noticed the fairly substantial earthworks that went on when they were being installed....and bided their time if they were to interfere with them. I remember the excavations in Scotland for these pipelines back in the late 70's and 80's. There's no big secret about them.

As to offshore, well your "terrorists" are going to need a fairly huge amount of resources to attack them...deep sea divers, vessels large enough to withstand North Sea storms etc.

[0]: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-oil-pipeline-marker-with-f...

I have read an account of the SBS storming a North Sea rig as part of an exercise and it wasn't exactly easy for them with all the very best training and gear and supported by Royal Navy ships - and that was in reasonable weather conditions.

Security through obscurity should be long dead by now. If the only thing stopping people from damaging these assets is their 'secret' location, we have a big problem.

Security through obscurity has different merits depending on the context.

In software, it is a really bad idea to hope that your code is so obscure that no attacker will find a security flaw.

IRL, on the other hand, unknown positions of assets are often critical (the uncertainty whether you know about all the adversary's nuclear silos being a huge part of the nuclear deterrence policy). There is just so much resources you can throw at discovering underground pipelines.

Silos are hard to move; secret nuclear launch locations are provided by SSBNs.

This is completely incorrect. Things can be made so difficult that they become impractical by forcing the bad actor to do a lot of grunt work.

Not finding significant pipelines. That's pretty easy if you want to do it.

In some sense, that's what cryptography is.

People like vandals and thieves and vagrants can be deterred by obscurity. There are lots of things which enjoy a modicum of peace and non disturbance because of obscurity. Maintenance sheds, utility rooms, etc.

Security through obscurity is a useful and valid part of a security process, but only if it's one of many parts of the process.

Do they put Fylingdales on maps yet? Though of course it's been well known for decades :)

I did a quick check and RAF Fylingdales is easy to find on Apple and Google maps. However, my OS Maps app won't find it even though I can find other 'normal' RAF bases (e.g. RAF Lossiemouth).

I should be surprised that OS still don't list it, but I think it's almost quaint these days. :)

Well, for doing anything outdoors I'd take OS 1:25000 maps over Google or Apple maps any day (both the app and backup paper versions).

Me too. I meant the continued absence of a huge base and radomes from the OS maps was the quaint relic, expressed poorly. :)

It's more likely that some negligent construction workers accidentally puncture a pipeline than terrorists blowing it up.

Negligence can be factored into insurance costs. Act of war, not so much.

I'm sure plenty of insurance companies would underwrite terrorist events, considering how rare they are compared to other risks.

They're not exactly secret either. Has any terrorist group tried this in a Western country?

And let's be honest with ourselves, if they were trying to destroy things (and not... well... terrorize...) then there are A LOT of sectors that are EXTREMELY vulnerable [0]. It doesn't take much knowledge or money to perform acts that would have extreme economic impacts. But wannacry (or something far worse) is less scary than a person shooting up a night club. Terrorists are trying to strike fear, not economical damage. State actors would be the ones trying to do economic damage, but we're not really at war with people that would do that (on a meaningful scale).

[0] a quick google search will lead you down a huge rabbit hole. Here's a good start: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL9q2lOZ1Fw but there's huge flaws in all these sectors and even in cellular communication. Just watch some Black Hat and Def Con conference talks.

Fair point, not yet.

But I assume that a pipe that is placed 5m underground on an unmarked path crossing a valley, was done so for a security as well as convenience. I will not apply to see that data, but if I was a "Red Team", it would be 'useful' information to have.

They used to have quite the secrets policy in place to cover critical fuel infrastructure, yes.

I'm pretty sure the only reason they're opening this up now, is that it's now become so easy to get ground-penetrating radar satellites into space, that every state actor now knows where all everyone else's pipes are. They can't hide it, so they may as well give up trying.

Does accidental damage count?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/americas/mexico-gasoline-expl...

Edit: only the ignition was accidental, the puncturing was intentional