Protecting your source code

[Bashh]

how?

[The Wizzard]

Impossible.

[Bashh]

cant be ive seen it done

[Bashh]

Never mind i found it

[The Wizzard]

Okay buddy, but there is absolutly positivly NO way to block your source code, unless it is done in a server-side language.

Good Luck! :)

[Bashh]

I knows... and i really meant the right click feature... sorry yall didnt mean to put the rong stuff... anywho is there a way to tell how many right clicks there have been, you know to change your alert or something like that? thanks

[mouse]

Originally posted by Bashh
I knows... and i really meant the right click feature... sorry yall didnt mean to put the rong stuff... anywho is there a way to tell how many right clicks there have been, you know to change your alert or something like that? thanks Only with a jedi websever using the hypersnarf anti source codec.

Other than that any source block or no-right click can be circumnavigated in seconds. :p

[Bashh]

I know that too :D lol i just wanted to know HOW to do it.. ya know might be usefull lol

[starglow]

I once knew someone with not only a right click proctection script but also disabled view > source and file > edit. is that done on the server? cos no right click is really a waste of time if you can't disable view source and file edit.. and if you could disable those, is there still a way around it?

[The Wizzard]

No you cannot disable the View > Source option. Atleast as far as client side scripting goes, I am not sure if this could be done with a server-side language, but as far as i know, its impossible.

[Zombie]

Wanna bet?

enter this script into the head of your document


<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="Javascript"><!--
var isNS = (navigator.appName == "Netscape") ? 1 : 0;
var EnableRightClick = 0;
if(isNS)
document.captureEvents(Event.MOUSEDOWN||Event.MOUSEUP);
function mischandler(){
if(EnableRightClick==1){ return true; }
else {return false; }
}
function mousehandler(e){
if(EnableRightClick==1){ return true; }
var myevent = (isNS) ? e : event;
var eventbutton = (isNS) ? myevent.which : myevent.button;
if((eventbutton==2)||(eventbutton==3)) return false;
}
function keyhandler(e) {
var myevent = (isNS) ? e : window.event;
if (myevent.keyCode==96)
EnableRightClick = 1;
return;
}
document.oncontextmenu = mischandler;
document.onkeypress = keyhandler;
document.onmousedown = mousehandler;
document.onmouseup = mousehandler;
//-->
</script>

[The Wizzard]

Okay, wow... That blocks the right click... Okay, so i got to View > Source, and what... WOW its not blocked...

See, you can block the right click, but its impossible to block the View > Source option...

Good Try though :thumbsup:

[Bashh]

i gots tha same effects

[jscript_junkie]

Just one simple solution that eliminates any kind of protection:

Click Here (http://validator.w3.org) - Then click on "Show Source"

I'm thinking about putting this in my sig. :D

[jkd]

mmm, I have two wonderful bookmarks in Mozilla:

javascript:void(delete document.oncontextmenu);void(delete document.onmousedown);void(delete document.onmouseup);

labelled as "reenable context menu"

And:

javascript:unescape((new XMLSerializer()).serializeToString(document).replace(/</g, '&lt;'))

To get around source code encryption in two clicks.

[mouse]

Just looking at the code from temp int files would do it anyway. Or disabling JS.

[boxer_1]

http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm :D.

[starglow]

Originally posted by The Wizzard
No you cannot disable the View > Source option. Atleast as far as client side scripting goes, I am not sure if this could be done with a server-side language, but as far as i know, its impossible.

its not impossible, I've seen it done. it must be a server side language then but I KNOW its possible

[Roy Sinclair]

Originally posted by starglow


its not impossible, I've seen it done. it must be a server side language then but I KNOW its possible

If you're using IE then that's just a bug in the browser. Whenever I see the "View Source" option grayed out I just close IE down and open the same page in it again and the option is available again.

[jscript_junkie]

javascript:(function(){%20function%20htmlEscape(s){s=s.replace(/&/g,'&amp;');s=s.replace(/>/g,'&gt;');s=s.replace(/</g,'&lt;');return%20s;}%20x=window.open();%20x.document.write('<pre>'%20+%20htmlEscape('<html>\n'%20+%20document.documentElement.innerHTML%20+%20'\n</html>'));%20x.document.close();%20})();

Add the above JavaScript as a Favorite and you can see the source of any page you're on.

I found this on the link that Boxer provided. Works in IE, not sure about the rest.

<edit my="post" />
The frown is the result of a : ( after "javascript" Just take out the space I put.

That was a pretty weird effect.

To avoid smilies showing up in your code where you don't want them, just click "Disable Smilies in This Post" before you submit your reply ;)
boxer_1

[jkd]

jscript_junkie, I use this for IE:

javascript:document.documentElement.outerHTML.replace(/</g, '&amp;lt;')

[jscript_junkie]

That is shorter code. But the code output just follows one line. The method in Boxer's link follows the breaks in the document but removes any extra spacing or tabs.

It might seem like longer code, but I think it's to remove the spacing and stuff like that. I only understand the window.open and the document.write at the end anyway. Yours is straightforward but the output is a little hard to read.

I'd like to see webmasters try to block this! :D

[Bashh]

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>W3C HTML Validation Service</title>
<link rev="made" href="mailto:gerald@w3.org" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="base.css" />
<meta name="keywords" content="HTML, Hypertext Markup Language, Validation,
W3C HTML Validation Service" />
<meta name="description" content="W3C's easy-to-use
HTML validation service, based on an SGML parser." />
</head>

<body>
<p class="navbar">
<a href="about.html">About...</a>
<a href="feedback.html">Feedback</a>
<a href="whatsnew.html">What's&nbsp;New</a>
<a href="source/">Source&nbsp;Code</a>
<a href="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/">CSS&nbsp;Validator</a>
<a href="checklink">Link&nbsp;Checker</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/">HTML&nbsp;Home</a>
<a href="file-upload.html">Upload&nbsp;Files</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/">HTML&nbsp;Tidy</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/">XHTML&nbsp;1.0</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/">HTML&nbsp;4.01</a>
</p>
<h1 id="title"><a href="http://www.w3.org/"><img height="48" alt="W3C"
id="logo" src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/WWW/w3c_home" /></a>
HTML Validation Service</h1>
<div class="intro">
<p>
Welcome to the W3C HTML Validation Service; a free service that checks
documents like HTML and XHTML for conformance to W3C Recommendations
and other standards.
</p>
</div>
<div class="nsnote">
<h2>Why does this page render badly?</h2>
<p>
Most likely this is due to a bug in your browser's support for the
<a href="http://www.w3.org/">W3C</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/">Cascading Style Sheets</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1">Recommendation</a>.
</p>
</div>

<div>
<h2><a name="recent">Recent Updates</a></h2>
<p class="intro">
These are the most recent major changes to this service. See
"<a href="whatsnew.html">What's&nbsp;New</a>" for more details.
</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="whatsnew.html#2001-09-13">Added support for XHTML 1.1,
XHTML Basic 1.0, and MathML 2.0</a> <small>(Sept 13, 2001)</small></li>
<li><a href="whatsnew.html#2001-06-22">Improved and expanded Character
Encoding support</a> <small>(June 22, 2001)</small></li>
</ul>
</div>

<div class="stb">
<h2><a name="byURI">Validate by URI</a></h2>
<form method="get" action="/check">
<table>
<tr><th><label for="uri">Address:</label></th><td colspan="2"><input id="uri" name="uri" size="50" /></td></tr>
<tr>
<th><label for="charset">Character Encoding:</label></th>
<td colspan="2">
<select id="charset" name="charset">
<option value="(detect automatically)">(detect automatically)</option>
<option value="utf-8 (Unicode, worldwide)">utf-8 (Unicode, worldwide)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-1 (Western Europe)">iso-8859-1 (Western Europe)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-2 (Central Europe)">iso-8859-2 (Central Europe)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-3 (Maltese)">iso-8859-3 (Maltese)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-4 (Baltic Rim)">iso-8859-4 (Baltic Rim)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-5 (Cyrillic)">iso-8859-5 (Cyrillic)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-6-i (Arabic)">iso-8859-6-i (Arabic)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-7 (Greek)">iso-8859-7 (Greek)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-8-i (Hebrew)">iso-8859-8-i (Hebrew)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-9 (Turkish)">iso-8859-9 (Turkish)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-10 (Latin 6)">iso-8859-10 (Latin 6)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-13 (Latin 7)">iso-8859-13 (Latin 7)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-14 (Celtic)">iso-8859-14 (Celtic)</option>
<option value="iso-8859-15 (Latin 9)">iso-8859-15 (Latin 9)</option>
<option value="us-ascii (basic English)">us-ascii (basic English)</option>
<option value="euc-jp (Japanese, Unix)">euc-jp (Japanese, Unix)</option>
<option value="shift_jis (Japanese, Win/Mac)">shift_jis (Japanese, Win/Mac)</option>
<option value="iso-2022-jp (Japanese, email)">iso-2022-jp (Japanese, email)</option>
<option value="euc-kr (Korean)">euc-kr (Korean)</option>
<option value="gb2312 (Chinese, simplified)">gb2312 (Chinese, simplified)</option>
<option value="big5 (Chinese, traditional)">big5 (Chinese, traditional)</option>
<option value="tis-620 (Thai)">tis-620 (Thai)</option>
<option value="koi8-r (Russian)">koi8-r (Russian)</option>
<option value="koi8-u (Ukrainian)">koi8-u (Ukrainian)</option>
<option value="macintosh (MacRoman)">macintosh (MacRoman)</option>
<option value="windows-1250 (Central Europe)">windows-1250 (Central Europe)</option>
<option value="windows-1251 (Cyrillic)">windows-1251 (Cyrillic)</option>
<option value="windows-1252 (Western Europe)">windows-1252 (Western Europe)</option>
<option value="windows-1253 (Greek)">windows-1253 (Greek)</option>
<option value="windows-1254 (Turkish)">windows-1254 (Turkish)</option>
<option value="windows-1255 (Hebrew)">windows-1255 (Hebrew)</option>
<option value="windows-1256 (Arabic)">windows-1256 (Arabic)</option>
<option value="windows-1257 (Baltic Rim)">windows-1257 (Baltic Rim)</option>
</select>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th><label for="doctype">Document Type:</label></th>
<td colspan="2">
<select id="doctype" name="doctype">
<option value="Inline">(detect automatically)</option>
<option>XHTML 1.0 Strict</option>
<option>XHTML 1.0 Transitional</option>
<option>XHTML 1.0 Frameset</option>
<option>HTML 4.01 Strict</option>
<option>HTML 4.01 Transitional</option>
<option>HTML 4.01 Frameset</option>
<option>HTML 3.2</option>
<option>HTML 2.0</option>
</select>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th rowspan="2">Options:</th>
<td><label><input name="ss" type="checkbox" value="" /> Show Source</label></td>
<td><label><input name="sp" type="checkbox" value="" /> Show Parse Tree</label></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><label><input name="outline" type="checkbox" value="" /> Show Outline</label></td>
<td><label><input name="noatt" type="checkbox" value="" /> ...exclude attributes</label></td>
</tr>
<tr><td />
<td><input type="submit" value="Validate this page" /></td>
<td />
</tr>
</table>
</form>
</div>

<div>
<p>
Alternatively, you can <a href="file-upload.html">upload
files</a> from your computer to have them checked.
</p>

<p>
You can also check your
<a href="http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/">Cascading Style Sheets</a>
using W3C's
<a href="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/">CSS Validation Service</a>.
</p>
</div>
<address>
<a href="http://validator.w3.org/check/referer"><img
src="http://validator.w3.org/images/vxhtml10" height="31" width="88"
alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" /></a>
<a href="/feedback.html">Gerald Oskoboiny</a><br />
$Date: 2001/09/19 00:37:52 $
</address>
</body>
</html>

is pretty long to put in your sig

[jscript_junkie]

I just want people to realize that nothing is safe on the internet.

If they even blocked every way to get source on their homepage, there's always other methods. You don't even need to be on their site to get the source. Just run a W3C Validation test on it.

These topics are starting to get really old, and annoying. :rolleyes:

[Tonz]

I've just had a client insisit I block access to the photos on her web site.

Darn good photos, but she would not accept that they can not be completely protected.

She insisited that she had heard of a way to stop "save as". So I put a no right click in, explained it was not too hard to get around, but she was happy.

Who am I to make a lady unhappy.

The point of all this......

If you come across the site, please remember it was not my idea.

<embarisment="on">
Build site
</embarisment>


Tonz
:cool:

[dysfunctionGazz]

could you get around the view>source thing by using window.open on a splash page to open the main site into a new window with no toolbars etc?

[Richard]

Can yous lot stop going on about how you cant stop people viewing source ?

If someone wants a no right click script... just give them one... don't go on about nothing being safe.

Getting on your high horse about how you can get round no right click and view source from the menu makes you sound as stupid as you think they are :rolleyes:

[whackaxe]

can a mod put a sticky up the top of the board with all the things that have been disscussed at least a thousnad times pleez so that people will get the message ?

[jkd]

Good point, I'll make this thread sticky.

[select sires]

Originally posted by boxer_1
http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/hidesource.htm :D.



haah i liked the <invisible></invisible>

[Spookster]

Originally posted by Tonz
I've just had a client insisit I block access to the photos on her web site.

Darn good photos, but she would not accept that they can not be completely protected.

She insisited that she had heard of a way to stop "save as". So I put a no right click in, explained it was not too hard to get around, but she was happy.

Who am I to make a lady unhappy.

The point of all this......

If you come across the site, please remember it was not my idea.

<embarisment="on">
Build site
</embarisment>


Tonz
:cool:

You better put a no left click in there too as one can simply left click on the image and drag it to the address bar and then right click and save or go to file save.

[codewarrior]

You can always scramble it! :eek: All people see is numbers :D

[stuntboy]

Doesnt work, remember the browser doesnt render scrambled code. It has to descramble it. you can use things like jkd posted to see it or you can just run the code snippet yourself for descramling the code either way it will be had in short order.

Why bother slowing the loading your page down with useless code is the thing.

[Richard]

Originally posted by Tonz
She insisited that she had heard of a way to stop "save as". So I put a no right click in, explained it was not too hard to get around, but she was happy.

Have the main site open in a kind of pop-up window from an intro page ? Then specify the main menubar not to show up in the pop-up

[jscript_junkie]

There is still the first page. When the pop-up goes up, I can just click on the first page in the Windows taskbar. Then, View > Source.

Don't forget that even if it could be possible to close the first page on load, then have the popup appear after, I can still get the source by using the W3C Validation Service. Just can't stress enough that the service can reveal source from any page.

Through all of the things you can do to protect source, it falls apart when I'm not viewing your page from your address. Plus, I can just disable JavaScript and get your source that way.

Simply put: It's impossible. (Try the W3C service in my sig to find out, if you never used it)

[stuntboy]

I actually made this real quick a long time ago: http://www.brwebdesign.com/bob.php

puts it in a convenient textbox

[Bashh]

sorta like this

My site is chromless, so it obviously has a link to page. they could veiw the source code of the link to page, and find out the source code for the page that loads in the chromless window, then load it in a reg window, and veiw the code. i get it. although it doesnt matter to me, because if you notice on my site that i dont have the right click disabled. because if you must steal from me, go right ahead!

[Bashh]

dude thats cool!

[scroots]

YOU CAN NEVER STOP IT.
you could, it would scare the odd person put it in the tos:
"by using this site you agree :
1)to not copy the site, or any parts of it
2)not mirroring the site
3)not to steal its source code
etc. etc...

Anyone found breaking the tos will be liable for legal action to be taken against the offender."

But not everyone reads the Tos.
You can never stop it if they found out how something was done they can code there own.

scroots

[mouse]

Threads like this should only have two posts really; the question and the answer. I don't understand why people waste such energy creating blocking scripts nor why people scour the net looking for them.
I landed on Website Abstraction about 3 years ago - yes that long ago - and my first question was answered by JKD, something about soundovers... since then I've come to learn that JKD is in fact Jesus, God and Satan rolled into one. If he says it can't be done, believe him. If not take a look at the technology; JavaScript is not compiled, it's sent to the users computer as with all html and css markup. How can you protect it? well don't send it to the users computer, basically don't use it on a public access website.
Apologies for the rant Newcastle Utd have just lost...

[jkd]

Originally posted by mouse
since then I've come to learn that JKD is in fact Jesus, God and Satan rolled into one. If he says it can't be done, believe him.

Err, thanks? :D I've been known to make mistakes though, but its cool that I'm your savior and lord of destruction at once ;).

[joh6nn]

Originally posted by mouse
...JKD is in fact Jesus, God and Satan rolled into one...

JKD is Shiva?

[Kang He]

Originally posted by Tonz
I've just had a client insisit I block access to the photos on her web site.

...


Why not add a light watermark?

And to add to the discussion: the only way to hide your source so no one can steal it is to copy it to a CD, dig a hole in your backyard, bury the CD, and delete the files from your server.

Though a huuuuuuge Java applet tends to scare people off :).

[jscript_junkie]

Or use the following code in your page:

<body dontsteal="yes">

:D

[Tonz]

Originally posted by Kang He


Why not add a light watermark?

And to add to the discussion: the only way to hide your source so no one can steal it is to copy it to a CD, dig a hole in your backyard, bury the CD, and delete the files from your server.



Yeah, watermark is a good idea.

We use it on another site. sales (of the clients photos) have increased since we started doing this.

Not big on pop-ups, but a goood sugestion - thanks.

I think I may just stick to the ...

<body dontsteal="yes"> code.....

One of the best yet.:thumbsup:



Tonz:cool:

[Kang He]

There was this web site on which you had to retrieve their password, and each level was harder (going from simple Javascript to Flash to Java applets etc), though they could all be cracked.

Makes it rather clear that nothing is safe on the internet.

[WebPlaya]

You can have a link on the Index.html page and then open the webpage in a popup window and disable the menu bar. Sure that will work for IE and you will not be able to do " View > Source". But how about in NS?

If you open the same site in NS the pop up window still opens and has no menu bar. However, netscape has it's on short cut to view source code. Unfortunatly I don't have netscape on my computer so I don't know what that short cut is but I am very sure that people who use NS know about that short cut. So even if you can't go to menubar and do "view > source" can still press the short cut and will show the source code of that html page.

That way you don't have to use "W3C". And even if you want to use "W3C", what about the people who are encrypting thier source code? You sure can get the source code by using "W3C" but it is still encrypted!! So "W3C" does not help!!!

The best way to protect your souce at this point would be using Flash. I know our friend "Oracle Guy" has this thing that can still any swf or html or jpg file but if your swf file is protected with Password then it doesn't help does it? This way you don't only protect your html source but also pictures too!!

And the thing that the "oracle guy" made was available by real player. People who has or had "Real Download" from real player, know that using "real download" not only you can download html, swf, or jpeg files but you can download anything and everything unless it's protected by server side script.

[oracleguy]

Originally posted by WebPlaya

The best way to protect your souce at this point would be using Flash. I know our friend "Oracle Guy" has this thing that can still any swf or html or jpg file but if your swf file is protected with Password then it doesn't help does it? This way you don't only protect your html source but also pictures too!!


I don't get what you mean by passwording it but anyways a 100% all flash site is inpractical. Flash doesn't help protect pictures really, i mean there is always the print screen button. And you can't stop that. Just add watermarks to your images with your address; that is the easiest and probably the best way to protect images.

And i believe there is programs that can decompile swf files into the fla format.

[jscript_junkie]

I've done some searching and I came to this address which allows SWF to be converted:

Click here (http://buraks.com/asv/index.html)

[WebPlaya]

When I said passwording, I meant that when you create the SWF file, you can protect it with password so if someone does steal it, they will need the password to open it or edit it.

And you are right, anyone can use printscreen and get the copy of it but not when you have series of pictures or kinda like a movie because it becomes too hactict to just sit there and play movie over and over and pirnt screen of every frame or picture and edit it.

Adding a watermark is such a good idea. However, the question is where do you add it? Right bottom of the picture? Left bottom, right upper end, left upper end or middle of the picture?

If you add it at any of the corners, then it's very easy to get rid off it. Either just crop the picture or use the eraser or even a brush and make it blend in. And if you add it in the middle of the picture then I don't think visitor would want to look at anyother pictures of yours because all the attention of the picture is drawn to the center where your watermark is consequently, the beauty of the picture is lost. So that doesn't work too well either.

[dopee]

heres a cool method to confuse people when they trying to view your source. Use frames, and disable the right-click option. Now when they go edit, view source, they will just see the source for declaring the frames and not the source for the pages IN the frames. Obviously when the frames are set, you need to specify url's, but they dont change. So just make a 'are u sure you want to enter' page before you move into your actual site. Now wat about file > save as? That should download the pages in the frames that you're viewing, which will give you the source code. Sorry, it is impossible!!
:mad: :confused: :thumbsup: :rolleyes: ;)

[Richard]

Originally posted by WebPlaya
And you are right, anyone can use printscreen and get the copy of it but not when you have series of pictures or kinda like a movie because it becomes too hactict to just sit there and play movie over and over and pirnt screen of every frame or picture and edit it.

You can find the source of the swf file, or if not go to Temportary Internet Files and copy it out... and then open it in the main Flash Player thing. Then there's a hotkey thing that lets youplay it a frame at a time... however fast or slow you want.

:p

[mouse]

Alternatively there's a program that allows dismantling of *.swf files. Not tellin' what it is though :p

[WebPlaya]

Richard, that is what I meant when I said passwording the swf file. I know you can get the swf file anyhow; however, author of the swf file can put a password and when you try to open it you will not be able to open it and will require the password.

so that will not work.

and according to mouse, there is a program that allows dismantling of swf files. well, i red somewhere that if you have hex decoder then you can open the file in that and you have to add couple of lines or may be delete couple of lines that will delete the password and then you can open it and edit it or whatever you want to do it.

i personally don't know if that works or not!!

[whackaxe]

kang he, that was a war game if i remeber rightly, nothing about source code more about supposed hacking

[mkalishoek]

how do you put a NO LEFT CLICK in your page then??

[jscript_junkie]

Then people won't be able to click links :D

[mkalishoek]

ow yeah, that was stupid of me :o

if someone has a NO RIGHT CLICK BLOCK....

you simple do this: click left, hold it, then click right to...and there you go: view source...

[jscript_junkie]

Wow. Haven't tried that method. That's creative! :thumbsup: :D :cool:

[mkalishoek]

hehe, cool isnt it?

actually, i think microsoft windows should make a windows..with a "disable view source mode", thats the only way to stop it...

[jscript_junkie]

Mozilla has a function to stop popup ads and other JavaScript functions, but I can't use that browser. In IE6, I can rearrange the address bar, customize what buttons I want (back, forward, stop, etc.), and other customizations. The other browsers have a fixed template, I guess is a good way to describe them.

Whenever, I encounter a site that misuses JavaScript (popups, no rightclick, etc.), I put their site in the Restricted Zone and I have a custom security level with everything disabled. I have a ton or sites in that zone. I have CodingForums in the Trusted Sites zone with everything enabled :D

If IE would make a IE6.5/7 and include an option to disallow "unrequested windows" (<- mozilla) then it would be perfect.

[jkd]

Originally posted by jscript_junkie
The other browsers have a fixed template, I guess is a good way to describe them.

On the contrary, I can control the layout of Mozilla as easily as I can control the layout of a webpage due to it being written in an XML application called XUL.

[jscript_junkie]

How many web languages are they going to have :confused: :D

Haven't heard of that one.

[BrainJar]

actually, i think microsoft windows should make a windows..with a "disable view source mode", thats the only way to stop it...

That would not work either. I suggest anyone really interested in knowing how the web works read the HTTP specification at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt

Web servers are basically file servers connected to the Internet. HTTP is a really simple protocol that basically lets you copy files from one computer to another. It was intentionally designed to be simple, so web applications (like browsers and web servers) could be easily built for hundreds of different types of computers and operating systems.

When you put a file on a web site, anyone who knows the URL can get a copy of it. A browser is just one type of application that uses HTTP. Anyone with a little programming know-how can build their own HTTP client program, grab files from web sites and view them however they want.

[joh6nn]

it's not wrong to want to protect your code. but in my 6 years on the web, to my knowledge, no one who has visited any of my sites, has ever looked at the source, let alone taken it. no one has stolen my one copyrighted image, and even if they have, i have the certificate of copyright, so what do i care?

also, i would never have been able to get into webdesign at all, if i hadn't been able to copy what i saw. if i see something cool, i want to know how it was done. a lot of my early scripts were things i took off other people's pages, pulled apart till they didn't work any more, and then tried to put them back together.

i spent the 3 months from october to december of last year, trying to figure out how to hide or encrypt my source, and found out that in the end, nothing works. nothing is fool proof. and i also found out that it's not worth it. the internet doesn't thrive on secrecy. it thrives on openness. the sites that promote sharing code, like this one, look how popular they are. the ones that do things like spy on you with cookies, look how much people hate them. do you know anyone who actually likes bonzai buddy?

you're not a bad person for trying to protect your hard work. but you'll end up getting more credit for sharing it, than you will for hoarding it.

the more i think about keeping my code to myself, the less sense it makes.

if you don't agree with me, that's fine. don't agree with me. but don't keep this argument going, either, because you won't win it (http://www.insane.com/jargon/html/entry/holy-wars.html). there's no point in continuing an argument like this, because everyone is entitled to their opinion, and no one is right.

[ddubs]

Originally posted by mkalishoek
actually, i think microsoft windows should make a windows..with a "disable view source mode", thats the only way to stop it...

I agree they could incorperate it into the server...but it would never work for every computer, and every browser. SO who cares...

WHy not share code?? I doubt there are many people out there coding scripts, apps, flash, or anything at all that isn't being unintentionally mimicked elsewhere on the net...in other words..
WHat ever you could possibly be working on, there has to be someone else in the world doing the same thing. There is barely any meaning to the phrase "cutting-edge" in cyber world.

Hiding code is a cheap shot at what the internet has been designed to do since day #1....share.

No offense to anyone of course ;)

I hope this is the last post for this silly thread.

[zoobie]

Originally posted by mkalishoek
ow yeah, that was stupid of me :o

if someone has a NO RIGHT CLICK BLOCK....

you simple do this: click left, hold it, then click right to...and there you go: view source...

Oh dear...The oldest trick in the book and someone thinks it's new. :rolleyes:

No right click scripts make left handers very happy. :cool:

(I'm soooooo glad I only read the last page of this lame thread unlike you. :thumbsup: )

[cg9com]

i have not read all of the posts in this subject but has anyone yet mentioned the "view-source:" idea?
IE view-source:http://www.website.com

[^KoalaBear^]

Originally posted by jscript_junkie
[B]javascript (function(){%20function%20htmlEscape(s){s=s.replace(/&/g,'&amp;');s=s.replace(/>/g,'&gt;');s=s.replace(/</g,'&lt;');return%20s;}%20x=window.open();%20x.document.write('<pre>'%20+%20htmlEscape('<html>\n'%20+%20document.documentElement.innerHTML%20+%20'\n</html>'));%20x.document.close();%20})();

Add the above JavaScript as a Favorite and you can see the source of any page you're on.



jj... can you please explain to this newbie just how one goes about 'Adding the above JavaScript as a Favorite'? Thanks

Cheers!
KB..

[ionsurge]

I have just figured how to get myself .asp extensions, from a site on to my computer. I know already how to get .php files.

It can be msn, or what have you. I can get it - so not even they are safe.

By the way, I have also managed to download a 350 page website made by asp onto my machine to see if I could, and also another 117 page .php site too.

Pretty interesting when you know how.

Oh, and I can easily get .html or .htm files too.

I am in need of a challenge, hrmmm.

NB: I did once download an encrypted file... I managed to decrypt that too in about 3 seconds.

[ionsurge]

By the way, you may wonder why it is I am saying this. If you think that you can protect your source code, so long as you can encrypt it, or what have you, someone out there can also decrypt it.

You can use .asp - but that needs to be written, and uploaded onto a server. But it can be downloaded too.

You can use .php. No point.

Any page, I can read the code - and I can guarantee that there will be thousands of other people that can do what I can too, maybe even faster. It often takes me about - at most 45 seconds to decrypt a file even it is scrambled in 128bit format.

Oh, and my personalized browser that I made with (C++ Builder 6 - legally registered to me) can overcome the no-right click script, so that is a waste too.

By the way, if I want I can find the exact location of your server too, and the distance that it is from my machine within 0.2 seconds. That is from a neat trick that I learnt when I was 14. I am now 20.

But trust me, I am not one of these computer geeks. So image what some of these true geeks can achieve. I am a minor compared to them. So what will a program like 'web protector' do? Nothing - I can decrypt that within half a second. So don't bother using them.


Happy surfing! :thumbsup:

NB: I AM NOT TRYING TO MAKE YOU FEEL INSECURE. I DO THIS LEGALLY - AS I HAVE TO ENCRYPT AND DECRYPT MY COMPANY SITE ALL THE TIME - SO I AM USED TO IT. I DO NOT WANT TO START A FLAME WAR OR NOTHING. IF YOU FEEL OFFENDED, I APOLOGISE.

[TheTree]

Okay-----FIRST......

cg9com: Why were you suggesting website.com, in reference to the subject of "view source code"?? I went to that site thinking there was information about protecting/not protecting source codes.......

Secondly------way back------about a hundred pages ago, on this thread------somebody said there was a way of protecting one's source code, and that they have seen it......

"I" have, TOO!! I'm thinking the way the person did it, was by obtaining a PATENT for their site!!

.....NOT, "copyrighting"-----NOT, "trademarking"------but, obtaining a PATENT for the whole da'gone site!!

Does anybody know if THIS would eliminate all of the "get-arounders" y'all have mentioned??? I don't care if there is/isn't for my OWN benefit------I was just thinking that if someone knew this to be true, or not, it would help someone ELSE!!

Thanks!!

[TheTree]

Whoops-----I forgot......

I'm sure everybody already knows this, but......

just adding a whole bunch of spaces (blank LINES [hitting the Enter key a whole bunch of times]) at the beginning of your code-----BEFORE the <html> tag, makes the "view source code" APPEAR blank!!

.....it ISN'T, obviously-----but, I'm thinking to the average surfer/beginning coder, it would deter them!!

***********

I sure do love this site/board------been lookin' for a nice place like this, for a hundred years!!

[cg9com]

TheTree,

I was not referencing website.com as a website for source protection

but if you type view-source: before any webpage in your browser it will pull up the source for it

[TheTree]

Oh, Okay-----Thanks, cg9com!!

[ionsurge]

By the way, if you use lots of "enters" on your sourcecode to make it seem as though it is empty, you would notice that it isnt when you find that the scrollbar is really tiny... and it also can make the page load that much slower.

[TheTree]

I knew about the scrollbar thing------that's why I said: ".......obviously it isn't"-------but, I wasn't gonna give-away why it wasn't, to those who didn't know!! LOL I DIDN'T know about the increased load time, though-----Thanks, ionsurge......

[ionsurge]

No worries.

[Mr J]

Oh what a tangled web we weave

[Steven_Smith]

Funny thing. On a mac you can 'view source' with control clicking the page... gets around the no right click thing.

Steve

[joh6nn]

...

there's only one button on a mac mouse, which i would have thought to be a much more effective way around the "no right click" scripts.

i kind of have to wonder how much longer this thread is going to last though. we're not breaking new ground anymore (not that we ever were); we're just repeating what we've already said. time to close the thread maybe?

[boxer_1]

Originally posted by joh6nn
...

there's only one button on a mac mouse, which i would have thought to be a much more effective way around the "no right click" scripts.

i kind of have to wonder how much longer this thread is going to last though. we're not breaking new ground anymore (not that we ever were); we're just repeating what we've already said. time to close the thread maybe?

I agree, the additions to this thread are becoming redundant and it seems somewhat pointless to allow this thread to remain open just for the sake of sitting around collecting posts.

Given the size this thread has reached and the above, I’m making the decision to close it. It will remain as a reference, but there is really nothing further that could be added that would not be lost in the 6 pages of posts already contributed to this thread.