Github user greenman18523 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/commons-lang/pull/335
> Just to clarify: maskedStart from this PR corresponds to minMasked from
#332 but the discussion is about adding a maxUnmasked, right?
I don't see a ``maskedStart`` parameters, these are the parameters I see in
this PR: ``final String str, int unmaskedStart, int unmaskedEnd, final char
mask``
If you are referring to ``unmaskedStart``, then this is a parameter with a
dual, non-obvious role, which is not good. There should be different parameters
for different roles. If I a missing something from this PR, please elaborate.
> > some messages are short and contain one time passwords
> it doesn't need for a masking at all. Short term generated values, OTPs
and tokens like OAuth access_token (but not refresh_token) are safe to write to
logs. If hacker stole logs we will have nothing to do with the data.
No, you must not write any sensitive data, even if they are valid for half
a nanosecond. Every tiny info a 3rd party gains gives them more leverage on how
to further proceed. Hackers don't always steal old logs, they can live monitor
your logs also! For OTPs, there should be different endpoints where logging of
messages is disabled. But, just in case something like that goes through the
main channels. 30 is a best-effort estimation, based on the currently seen
patterns for OTPs.
> a new parameter maxUnmasked may be not so useful in real life but
confusing.
I am referring to a ``minMasked`` parameter, which by it's name states it's
purpose. Which is the absolute minimum number of characters that must be masked.
---
