Subject: Real-Time Inventory Updates

From: Vehicles Below MSRP <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:11:55 -0700

Dealerships have commitments to the manufacturers to take certain quantities of inventory in.

The 2015 model year is right around the corner, and they need to make room in their lots.

** We know which Dealer's need to move their inventory**

- The Search takes only 60 seconds-

Search Model Here -> http://www.luckycupoe.com/realtime/inventory/update.index

| Ford | Acura | Nissan | Cadillac | Dodge | Tesla | BMW | And More...
View all makes and models available -> http://www.luckycupoe.com/realtime/inventory/update.index

to stop further auto updates -write  Member Update Systems at 9167 ROAD 177 Oakwood, OH 45873
or visit http://www.luckycupoe.com/4i9tu.jfj4i

I have no problem with more people using SecureString. I disagree with your reading of the discussion as "don't use char[]" - yes, you've got to use it properly, but that's feasible. Note that SecureString isn't available in Portable Class Libraries, just as one example why you may not be able to use it.   Jon Skeet Dec 6 '13 at 20:23
  	  	
nice remark on reflection as a way to clear up string content.   Nhan Feb 22 at 17:14
  	  	
@JonSkeet You wrote "That means once you've created the string, if another process can dump memory, there's no way (aside from reflection) you can get rid of the data before GC kicks in." I am not getting why you choose to write another process? Shouldn't it be the same process in which you have created the String? What am I missing?   Geek Mar 7 at 13:28
  	  	
@Geek: Only that using a separate process would (I believe) be a more common attack vector than within the same process.   Jon Skeet Mar 7 at 13:29
  	  	
ell I can imagine situations where an arbitrary object would be transformed to a string using toString() say if you're logging arbitrary exceptions. Now I'm sure nobody here is saying this SHOULD ever happen, but exception logging is probably one of those things that's only an after thought while testing (it certainly wouldn't rank especially high on my list)   Voo Jan 18 '12 at 6:35 
  	  	
I do not understand why those random characters are printed when it's a char[]. Could someone explain what is happening?   Alexander Bird Jan 19 '12 at 19:37
 	
@Thr4wn Default implementation of toString is  [C represents char[], the rest is hexadecimal hash code.   Konrad Garus Jan 20 '12 at 12:39
  	  	
What if the char array is accidentally printed by a for loop or a helper function? Why are your developers printing critical sensitive information to a log that they claim is "insecure"?   Dog May 20 '13 at 13:37 	
@Dog Life is a game of probability. Sometimes some arguments may get written to a log or some other readable medium. char[] is somewhat less likely to be printed in a readable form than String. Overall, the chances of leakage are a little bit lower in this case. That is all, I'm not saying that's the only (or even the main) reason why it's char[], nor that it's totally bullet proof. If you have 100% control over "your developers" and everything, congratulations.   Konrad Garus May 21 '13 at 5:46 
  	  	
@KonradGarus: If I had some sensitive information, I wouldn't be posting it to public places. How can you not tell whether the password is leaked to public or not by looking at your code for 2 seconds? Are you using /dev/urandom to generate your code?   Dog May 21 '13 at 8:40
2	  	
@Dog Can you grasp all the possible layers, wrappers, loggers, monitors, error handlers 3rd party and whatnot, including those driven by AOP or pure reflection, and all of their combinations, in 2 seconds? Like Voo said: Nobody says you should rely on it, but things can slip through.   Konrad Garus May 21 '13 at 11:37
  	  	
@KonradGarus: so you're saying having all that stuff you describe makes trivial code complex to reason about? How can you actually write code that works in such a case?   Dog May 21 '13 at 13:07
  	  	
Just to clarify for someone who thinks that this is the right way of doing it, we must note that doing it like that:pw = "Password".toCharArray(); will not offer any good. If the string is instantiated it is in memory so, even if you translate it afterwards to c