Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use CharSequence not String as input type for Zxcvbn.measure #64

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Oct 19, 2019

Conversation

SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor

Issue 31 - change parameter type for Zxcvbn.measure() from String to CharSequence.

This gives a lot more flexibility in what format the password can be in.
The Strength object that is returned also now has a wipe() method to clear sensitive content.
This patch also attempts to avoid using Strings for any sensitive intermediate objects.

…harSequence.

This gives a lot more flexibility in what format the password can be in.
The Strength object that is returned also now has a wipe() method to clear sensitive content.
This patch also attempts to avoid using Strings for any sensitive intermediate objects.
…harSequence.

Adding WipeableString class that was missed from previous commit.
@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

This patch resolves issue #31.

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd be interested to know whether the changes to DictionaryGuess.uppercaseVariations are safe. I've switched from regular expression matching strings to comparing characters, as I believe that the code was just counting upper & lower case characters. However, I'm not 100% convinced that the new code has exactly the same results as the old code in all possible cases. Does it matter?

@vvatanabe
Copy link
Member

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Sorry for the late reply, and thank you for the great pull request.

I think there is no problem switching from regular expression matching strings to character comparisons.

Please take a moment to review. Thanks.

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

SteveLeach-Keytree commented Aug 13, 2019

Please take a moment to review. Thanks.

Sorry, I'm not that familiar with the Github PR workflow. What exactly would you like me to review?

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @vvatanabe - could you clarify what I need to review, and if there is anything else I need to do to get this PR merged?

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

While waiting for this PR to be merged I thought I might as well investigate and fix issue #49, so that is now also covered by this PR.

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

Are there any other maintainers who can merge this?

@SteveLeach-Keytree
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is this project dead now?

@vvatanabe
Copy link
Member

@SteveLeach-Keytree
I'm sorry it took me a while to get back to you. I will merge and release a new version.

@vvatanabe vvatanabe merged commit 8dabfef into nulab:master Oct 19, 2019
@overheadhunter
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the PR. I was very happy to see this has been implemented in 1.3.0. I was just about to make a PR myself, when I stumbled upon the new release 😄

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants