Re: [boost] A secure string library?

On 7/9/24 15:57, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

In my opinion a secure erase function which works most of the time but not all of the time is worse than not having it at all, as it may imply false claims about security.

As far as secure erase functions go, there's no variance about whether it works or not. It either works as specified in the contract or it has a bug. And it's fairly easy to make it work as intended anyway. The question is rather is the secure erase enough to consider your data safe from leaks. It definitely is not. But not allowing it to leak into heap and remain there for extended periods of time is a necessary step towards better security. Even having just that protection alone is better than not having anything at all.