My point is that the cost for the attacker is higher than the cost for the defender, if the attacker has to spend tokens probing for vulnerabilities against a system which has little know about it, while the defender spends tokens on a system they have the full source to.
That is not at all relevant to "security via obscurity" or similar arguments: having the source in the open may (eventually) be more secure, but it lowers the token-spend for the attacker.
That is not at all relevant to "security via obscurity" or similar arguments: having the source in the open may (eventually) be more secure, but it lowers the token-spend for the attacker.