The rest of the news sounds great, but I don't particularly like the idea of deprecating SecureString just because some people see the word "Secure" and think it is magic and that they don't have to do anything else to protect the secret. If you handle the secret appropriately, the class does exactly what it is supposed to. I could get behind a shift to a new generic type as replacement, but from reading the discussion it seems ShroundedBuffer<T> (or whatever they end up calling it) is nothing more than a glorified write only array.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
The rest of the news sounds great, but I don't particularly like the idea of deprecating
SecureStringjust because some people see the word "Secure" and think it is magic and that they don't have to do anything else to protect the secret. If you handle the secret appropriately, the class does exactly what it is supposed to. I could get behind a shift to a new generic type as replacement, but from reading the discussion it seemsShroundedBuffer<T>(or whatever they end up calling it) is nothing more than a glorified write only array.