html protection stuff - Page 2 - HTML Forums

Vege · 08-21-2006, 03:19 AM

Hmm, if you have cazaam serverspeeds, you could make a serverside code that would draw an scrambled image for you, then slize the image to tiny peaces and make ajax call to "rearrange" the tiny peaces in serverside to correct places when image is hovered and make it look like a image. Thus taking a screenshot from the image would include the cursor and making the image look kinda "ugly". And if javascript is forced to be on thisway, you can do whatever you want to prevent the copying.

This would not make it impossible, but pain to copy.

Somebody can see a flaw in my theory?

-i-dont-know- · 08-21-2006, 06:28 AM

So people have to hover over an image to see it? That sucks does it not? Imagine having to hover over every image on this site to see it. Oh and also, print screen doesn't include the cursor in the output.

erisco · 08-21-2006, 07:04 AM

Vege, at that rate of complex algorithms and piles of image slices causing rapidly increased processing time, why not just watermark the images?

Vege · 08-21-2006, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -i-dont-know-

So people have to hover over an image to see it? That sucks does it not? Imagine having to hover over every image on this site to see it. Oh and also, print screen doesn't include the cursor in the output.

Well i was thinking like imagegallerys where people would come to see the images, not the images that builds the page.

Dang, i remebered that cursor was visible in the screenshot, my theory is ruind

But while we are onit, we could build a javascript cursor that would be visible inside the image while hovering it, but it would be hardcoded inside the image, thus taking a screenshot would make the cursor inside the pic.

Doable, ill test it

Vege · 08-21-2006, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erisco

Vege, at that rate of complex algorithms and piles of image slices causing rapidly increased processing time, why not just watermark the images?

Sure, we could, but would that disable the copying process? nope.
Ill see what I can do as i have too mutch free time.

scoutt · 08-21-2006, 08:23 AM

if you copy a watermarked image then who cares, what are they going to do with it with a big ole watermark all over it. Wehn you watermark a image it is all over the image, not in the corner. go to www.stockedphotos.com, see the watermarking? that is how to do it. then if they copy it who cares.

watermarking is the only true way to stop people from taking the images.

hmmm, I must have scared buzincarl, they haven't come back to let us know how he did it.

eddy9 · 08-21-2006, 11:34 AM

Water marking is the only way to go.

Vega, I guarantee I'd be able to simply rip your ajax script and changed the onmouseover event to onload, then your work will have been pointless, much like trying to hide html/images/css/client-side sripts, using the base tag to link into the image files.

(I can't believe how many times people have gone over this subject in so many forums.)

buzincarl · 08-24-2006, 12:19 PM

get over it iv moved on im not posting on this topic anymore its starting to annoy me

all of this is right

Code:

Well I am gunna jump on the band wagon here

- You CAN stop people from hotliking images from your site
- You CANNOT prevent people from downloading images from your site
- You CANNOT hide or 'disable' source code
- You CANNOT disable someone viewing your page offline
- You CANNOT disable right click
- You CANNOT stop text/images from being copied to the clipboard
- You CANNOT disable printing or screen capturing

Frankly ANYTHING done in javascript CANNOT CANNOT CANNOT guarentee anything. Anyone who is going to steal your content and do something with it would know javascript can be disabled with a click of a button. Then all your special javascript protection is completely and utterly useless.

Passwords and other sensitive information MUST be stored in a database, and/or hash, and only made available to the server. This is done with server side languages such as PHP, and ONLY THEN is that content invisable to the person viewing your page. However all the statements above apply to PHP and any other server language as well.

Keep sensitive data in secure location, and let a less knowledgable user be able to use their familiar browser functions.

END

Vege · 08-24-2006, 03:38 PM

Basically only problem is the printscreen. Serverside code can hide all image sources.

And basically it's just stupid to say something cant be done -.-

erisco · 08-24-2006, 06:51 PM

Vege, how practical is it to have to hover over every image you want to see? Not to mention the look of the scrambled images, it wouldn't be too pretty. If javascript was disabled you wouldn't be able to unscramble them at all. Finally you have the delay time while javascript rearranges the image...

If you think the things I have said you can't do can actually be done, please say how because many people would benefit from it. Everything the user sees must be sent to them, they get all the images, they get all the source. Otherwise they can't view it. The only things you can hide are the server side languages, and they don't have the ability to do anything of what I stated.

scoutt · 08-24-2006, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vege

And basically it's just stupid to say something cant be done -.-

I want to see you prove it as well. what was said on here is a can't be done. it is not stupid, it is the truth. server side code cannot stop print screen either. doesn't matter if you do hide the paths, not one person here said you can't hide the paths. but what good does it do if you do hide the paths? I can still get to the image. page info has every path to every image. hidden or not.

Vege · 08-25-2006, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scoutt

I want to see you prove it as well. what was said on here is a can't be done. it is not stupid, it is the truth. server side code cannot stop print screen either. doesn't matter if you do hide the paths, not one person here said you can't hide the paths. but what good does it do if you do hide the paths? I can still get to the image. page info has every path to every image. hidden or not.

True true.
But you have to admit that you can make it pretty darn timeconsuming process to steal pictures if you want to and usually people who can steal em, know they shouldnt.

scoutt · 08-25-2006, 10:12 AM

yup, I agree, that is all you can do. but there will be users out there that will spend the time.

if anybody wants that image bad enough, they will get it.

erisco · 08-25-2006, 01:32 PM

http://www.runescape.com goes through a lot of trouble to hide the source of their server list page... but I have seen a site with backdoor links to all the individual servers. I personally didn't spend the time to try and find the server locations but, obviously it was possible and someone did spend the time.

Juparis · 09-01-2006, 10:14 PM

Ok, I'll be the devil's advocate if I must--tis for the sake of argument, you can say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by erisco

- You CAN stop people from hotliking images from your site
- You CANNOT prevent people from downloading images from your site
- You CANNOT hide or 'disable' source code
- You CANNOT disable someone viewing your page offline
- You CANNOT disable right click
- You CANNOT stop text/images from being copied to the clipboard
- You CANNOT disable printing or screen capturing

A more valid list would be:
- You CAN stop people from hotliking images from your site
- You CANNOT prevent people from downloading images from your site
- You CAN hide or 'disable' source code
- You CAN disable someone viewing your page offline
- You CAN disable right click
- You CAN stop text/images from being copied to the clipboard
- You CANNOT disable printing or screen capturing

I'll agree that th emost practical thing to do is to just watermark you images, but that doesn't mean we should claim all other methods of protection (no matter how deprecated) don't work.

As per the source code (someone might have mentioned this, I didn't read in detail), you can always encrypt it with a special server-side encryption method. The users computer can download the encryption tool (or would it be un-encryption??), but it is only temporary (as in, a rotating encryption method). That's the only way I could think of hiding your source code.

You can disable people viewing you page offline, but this is assuming that the user is not just loading the page, then logging off the internet with the page still opened.

Even if that were the case, however, you can set refresh-methods to stop people from viewing your page longer than what would be required for its purposes (and once it tries to refresh offline, the cache is lost).

I say you can disable right-click, but only through JavaScript. That, of course can be disabled, but the point remains that disabling a right-click on the PC is still possible.

Additionally, I say that you can stop images from being copied simply by using layers. Even setting images as backgrounds (and then using a randomized spacer.gif [by which i mean it is not named 'spacer,' but something more convincing]) will prevent people from directly getting at your photos.

__________________
I'm sure y'all are dying to rebut now, but I'll make one final arguement. Put everything in a Flash file. Aside from using a screen capture, it's virtually impossible to steal anything from your site, if it's all in flash. SO you lose a few dial-up visitors. Big whoop. It's still worth it to most companies, and I'd assume the same for you, if your content is truely that precious..