So we could start with a function: volatile_clear(void *ptr, int size), that does volatile writes of 0 into the memory.
We can specify this today, using volatile.
We can name it without using "secure".

Is this a worthwhile step?



On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:47 AM Miguel Ojeda via SG12 <sg12@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:10 AM Arthur O'Dwyer
<arthur.j.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think it's very important to point out that what "secure_clear" is trying to do is an opposite, much harder problem: it's asking for a mechanism to ensure that some operations are never performed.

No, the proposal is not trying to do that. Please do not read more
into the placeholder name "secure_clear" than what is actually being
proposed.

There are many possible names we can take (see the paper for some
examples). The current one is just close to SecureZeroMemory from
Microsoft.

Cheers,
Miguel
_______________________________________________
SG12 mailing list
SG12@lists.isocpp.org
Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg12
Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/sg12/2020/04/0885.php


--
Be seeing you,
Tony