3 ms·
Then for sensitive strings you wouldn't use the built-in string and have to build your own? I'm not sure I see the issue, you just implement a memory-safe stri
by sieabahlpark 4y ago
Then for sensitive strings you wouldn't use the built-in string and have to build your own?
I'm not sure I see the issue, you just implement a memory-safe string class that manages arbitrary bytes, it's slower but that wasn't the goal.
- somehnguy 4y agoI can’t remember off the top of my head which major Java library I was using a few years ago but that’s exactly how it took sensitive string params - via a char array instead of a String object. I was scratching my head why they would do that for a bit until I learned.