Comment by freetime2

I think two things can be true here: the article's assertion that "IPv6 is not insecure because it lacks NAT" is correct, and other peoples' assertions that NAT provides an extra layer of security are also correct.

A correctly configured IPv6 firewall provides equivalent protection to a correctly configured IPv4 firewall and NAT. Either way, connections that do not originate from within the local network are going to be rejected.

But if the firewall is misconfigured, then NAT will make it more difficult for an attacker on the internet to discover and exploit vulnerabilities on the local network.

"Defense in depth" is a valid security principle. But NAT also creates real-world problems that IPv6 solves. As with all things, there are tradeoffs, and whether or not you should enable IPv6 on your local network depends on your use case.