Comment Re:Secrecy or Transparency? (Score 1) 145
the security of systems relies at some point on the obscurity of certain pieces of data
No it doesn't. Obscurity is neither a necessary or desirable element of security.
Whether it be a user password or a map of a network topology
The first of these isn't obscurity, and the second should not result in the ability to compromise a system, so keeping it obscure won't help security (in fact, the belief that keeping it obscure is beneficial actually *reduces* your security.)
Obscurity is information that is obscured - ie hidden with the belief that an attacker won't find it. In some cases, this belief is justified (strong encryption) in others, this isn't (network topology, listening ports, etc.)
In any properly designed system (Such as Unix, or even Windows login) passwords are not obscured, they are one-way hashes, with both the location and hash algorithm known. If the passwords were kept in plaintext, and their location was kept secret, then that would be obscurity.
Even considering that the system may have been used inappropriately, is the crime worth the possible destruction of the entire network at the hands of hackers?
You're making the (extremely) flawed assumption that the *names* of people who used computers will lead to the destruction of the network, which is absurd.