|
Socoder -> Off Topic -> Web Content |
|
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 12:48 | |
|
dna |
Hello All. I was wondering which web language was the best as far as being secure. Primarily I was concerned about avoiding the right clicking view source command. Does Flash, Java, or some other language prevent the source from being shown? -=-=- DNA |
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 12:53 | |
HoboBen
|
I assume you're asking about front-end languages such as HTML vs Java or Flash for content? I wouldn't worry about people copying your HTML code. Seriously, it's a complete non-issue. Use whatever method suits the content. 99% of the time this is HTML. -=-=- blog | work | code | more code |
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 13:06 | |
|
dna |
But which language prevents the viewing of any of the source? -=-=- DNA |
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 13:37 | |
Jayenkai
|
Obfuscation hides a lot of Java stuff, but... It's still interpreted, so... I'm pretty sure there'd be ways to see bits of what you coded, if the person really wanted to. It's an issue you'll have to live with. -=-=- ''Load, Next List!'' 
|
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 13:51 | |
|
dna |
What about Flash? I have not used it in a while but does it prevent the viewing of the source? -=-=- DNA |
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 14:09 | |
JL235
|
You can view the source in all three. With HTML/JavaScript stopping right-click is more annoying then secure (tonnes of ways around this). With Java it is _trivial_ to get your source code back. At times I've even read compiled Java code directly (using one of the JDK tools) as compiled Java code is damn easy to understand. In regards to Flash, I'd expect it's the same as Java. The best method is to find something that obfuscates the language. There are two ways: 1) to use an obfuscator and there are some excellent ones for JavaScript. 2) Write it in a different language that compiles to your language. The second doesn't always work, but I've heard compiled JRuby code is practically unreadable. But I second Ben's suggestion; this is typically a non-issue. If it does occur, then you must have built an excellent piece of software for someone to have done that. It's an excellent problem to have. |
| Wed, 13 Oct 2010, 14:09 | |
Stealth
|
You should write your websites in HTML. Anything else is just sloppy. Don't worry about people stealing your website source code. HTML isn't really code. It's no more code than XML is. It's just structuring.
-=-=- Quit posting and try Google.
|
| Thu, 14 Oct 2010, 11:08 | |
Afr0
|
 You should write your websites in HTML. I bet if you wanted to, you could write an interpreter in Blitz that converted BlitzBASIC, BASIC or even C to HTML... -=-=- Afr0 Games Project Dollhouse on Github - Please fork!
|
| Thu, 14 Oct 2010, 11:14 | |
|
JL235
|
Afr0 I bet if you wanted to, you could write an interpreter in Blitz that converted BlitzBASIC, BASIC or even C to HTML...You couldn't directly translate it from one to the other, but you could certainly emulate it. There is lots of stuff you can do in C which you don't have a direct version of in JavaScript. Although this wouldn't include libraries, and without them there wouldn't be much point. In answer to the original question, there you can also write Java apps and compile them using GWT (Google Web Toolkit), but you have to use their GWT libraries (only a small subset of the Java API is available). One of the main features of GWT is that the code is heavily obfuscated, and I'd suspect this will be one of the best ways of obfuscating your webapp. |
| Thu, 14 Oct 2010, 20:10 | |
|
mindstorm8191 |
Dna, I'm not really sure what you're working on, but would an Ajax solution help problems? You could download your page / application in portions, leaving all the access of your app up to the server. If you can limit the functionality to require access to your specific server, you may be better able to control it. Another option would be to be sure everything on your site is copyrighted, maybe with your name in the source in multiple locations. But I don't know... -=-=- Vesuvius web game
|
| Thu, 14 Oct 2010, 22:53 | |
|
Stealth
|
Just write HTML. I don't know why you guys are suggesting Blitz-to-HTML interpreters. Remember the phrase: Keep it simple, stupid. Don't overcomplicate a simple problem. -=-=- Quit posting and try Google.
|
| Fri, 15 Oct 2010, 03:58 | |
|
Afr0
|
Just write HTML. I don't know why you guys are suggesting Blitz-to-HTML interpreters. I wasn't suggesting it, just pointing it out. I don't see how doing that would be 'sloppy' - just different! -=-=- Afr0 Games Project Dollhouse on Github - Please fork!
|
| Fri, 15 Oct 2010, 11:00 | |
|
JL235
|
Stealth HTML/JavaScript isn't good for all situations. Pages can very quickly get into a hacky mess of different bits of functionality overlapping. Plus JavaScript itself isn't that great a language; it doesn't even support proper classes!Just write HTML. I don't know why you guys are suggesting Blitz-to-HTML interpreters.GWT is an excellent alternative to writing big GUI HTML pages, and this is mainly because it works! I'm not writing this to say "use GWT over HTML/JavaScript" but rather that there are alternatives which can fit certain problems better. Although I can think of plenty of languages I'd rather be using then BB for writing a web-page. |
|
|
| |||
|
| ||||