Cleaned up SmsDetector.java implementation, related issues #615, #537

[smarek]

So, what was done:

• Removed unused class-global fields
• Removed, WTF, code new Thread().sleep(500);
• Rewritten implementation of reading String lines out of buffer, including one more local temporary variable
• Fixed author javadoc tag
• Replaced first level of for-loop in checkForSilentSms with foreach
• Removed pointless calls toString() in context like this DETECTION_PHONENUM_SMS_DATA[2].toString() (where DETECTION_PHONENUM_SMS_DATA is array of Strings)
  Some encoding sincerely occured on-the-fly, hope you don't mind.
  SmsDetector doesnt check how many bytes where read from input #615 discussion points are imho fixed by this PR
  Detection of Silent SMS (part 2) #537 pointed out that the problem with performance is in string retrieval/parsing/checking, I agree and we should imho migrate the code over to regexp declarations, and I'm worried we do not now correctly handle situations on border of string stream (where detection would fail because the data are incorrectly splitted by newline character)

[ghost]

@smarek Thanks for modifying code and improving something similar to what my last PR was going to do. Nice to see someone helping out on detection because this is what the app is about.

[ghost]

Also so from tests I done regexp seems very slow a bit like string format.

[SecUpwN]

I feel blessed to see you repsoning here, @banjaxbanjo. Since you've closed your important pull requests, do you think you could add your changes back again after I've merged this on sunday?

[ghost]

@SecUpwN I will have a look at my offline dev sometime this week with original PR to see what can be merged. No promises😉

[SecUpwN]

No promises

No need to promise anything, I hate promises but love honesty. ;-) Shall I merge the proposed changes?

[ghost]

The offline class I have for sms detection is copy & paste the full class and uses a different method for reading buffer, Just needs minor formatting and its 10 times better than current class, be no problem to merge this PR by smarek but if I was to add the previous PR I would be overwriting this pr for it to work the way I intended. Can work behind scenes on class with smarek so we can finish this class for good.

[SecUpwN]

Can work behind scenes on class with smarek so we can finish this class for good.

Would you really do that? This would be absolutely lovely! I guess @smarek can add the necessary changes to this PR so that it gets polished and does not have to be closed. Thanks and happy hacking! :)

[smarek]

@SecUpwN will try

@banjaxbanjo please push your code somewhere online and let me know, i'll be happy to assist you to rebase it on top of latest dev (or maybe merge it with changes proposed by this PR).

[smarek]

Tracking info: https://github.com/SecUpwN/Android-IMSI-Catcher-Detector/pull/619/commits
Merge from ca1e405 to c7647a8

[smarek]

So I've rebased the original PR#619 into second commit, to be clear about what has changed.
I've also refactored the code, fixed names in whole class, formatted the code, etc.

Please note, it's possible I've broken something with this rebase, so I'd be glad for testing from original author @banjaxbanjo and code review from anyone that's interested.

[smarek]

Also I've taken some of the feedback @agilob provided to original PR, and integrated it within (checkForSms method rewritten for optimized usage of .split call, handled possible incorrect detection string and LOADED_DETECTION_STRINGS finalized)

[SecUpwN]

Huge thanks to both of you @smarek and @banjaxbanjo for working behind the scenes to improve that important part of our code. I'll be waiting for @banjaxbanjo's green light here to merge this next week.

[ghost]

@SecUpwN this is working smooth now please merge. Cheers @marek awesome merge job and nice coding.

[smarek]

Should I squash the commits so we don't spam the repo history?

[smarek]

Well I squashed them together, @banjaxbanjo thanks for testing and support in development
@SecUpwN now it's ready to be merged 👍

[smarek]

@agilob thanks for feedback, is everything OK now? Give us please a your status, so we can merge it.

[ghost]

@smarek Cheers for all the mods👍

[SecUpwN]

Waiting for the green light to merge this stunning work. 💚

[smarek]

@SecUpwN I think we're good to go here, all @agilob comments were addressed in refactoring the commit, would be nice to end up with working sms detection again 👍

[SecUpwN]

...were addressed in refactoring the commit...

So is this the point were I should merge, or shall I wait? ;-)

[smarek]

I think we can merge it 😈