How to disable View source

[Parker1]

hi!!! can you help me plsssss... i just wanna know how to disabble the source code i mean not just when you right click the mouse. i have a code that well disabble when you right click your mouse, and i want the whole source code will disabble so that all my visitors cant view my source code.. anyone plsssssss i rely need your help...thanx

I picked up this archived thread browsing and it seems that know one really answered the original question It got sidetracked.

There are many reasons why someone may want to hide the source code of a site and it is a subject that is a bit of a black art and mostly reserved for the profs

It is possible to completely hide your source code on any website using encryption.
Yes and for the smart a***s it can be undone if you have the time, patience and knowledge and really want to but in reality it is rare to find someone that possesses all 4 of these attributes at the same time.

Protware do a fair website encryption tool and I believe that this now includes graphic protection as well. Graphic encryption is one of the most difficult .......... the best way to achieve it is to break a graphic down into small parts and this makes it virtually impossible to re-assemble. It also can have the added advantage of makinng large graphics load faster.

There are others out there if you look around but for small low budget sites this is prob one of the most economical and reliable.

Another way I have seen used is to convert the whole site to PDF but anyone with Adobe Acrobat can still sort it out and it tends to be slower to display.

Please excuse me for butting in but I really felt in this instance I should ----- I am sure this is an oft asked and rarely answered question and security is my thing

[Twey]

There are many reasons why someone may want to hide the source code of a site and it is a subject that is a bit of a black art and mostly reserved for the profs

It is a black art because it is impossible to do absolutely, and most people don't know enough to implement half measures without degrading their sites.

It is possible to completely hide your source code on any website using encryption.

Yes, but in order for the browser to display it you must also enclose the means to decrypt it, which makes the whole exercise rather pointless. This is without addressing the accessibility problems that result from implementing all this, which will make your site totally reliant upon the scripting language chosen -- a big "no-no" in the world of web design.

Yes and for the smart a***s it can be undone if you have the time, patience and knowledge and really want to but in reality it is rare to find someone that possesses all 4 of these attributes at the same time.

This is true (on the knowledge and motive; any scheme implemented can be cracked in a matter of seconds with the right knowledge, so time and patience aren't really issues), and if not for the accessibility issues there would be no technical issue with implementing a half-measure to confuse the newbies (although the ethical implications of hiding one's source still require consideration).

Protware do a fair website encryption tool and I believe that this now includes graphic protection as well.

You look to be a sensible person, so I'm going to assume that that was really a statement of fact and that you're not associated with Protware in any way Please, do set up a demo. I shall bypass it, and time myself. I must say, I'm getting to rather enjoy these things -- I consider them time trials My current record is 12 seconds, but that was only for a simple image protection.

Graphic encryption is one of the most difficult .......... the best way to achieve it is to break a graphic down into small parts and this makes it virtually impossible to re-assemble.

But a screenshot will do the job just as well, and is a lot faster than manually reassembling the image.

It also can have the added advantage of makinng large graphics load faster.

Not at all. It may seem to load faster due to the graphics being shown before they're fully assembled, but factor in the additional HTTP requests and responses (all with their own headers), image meta data, and HTML required to display all the images, and you're looking at a significantly greater loading time, plus decreased page performance due to the numerous image elements.

Another way I have seen used is to convert the whole site to PDF but anyone with Adobe Acrobat can still sort it out and it tends to be slower to display.

As you say.

[Parker1]

It is a black art because it is impossible to do absolutely, and most people don't know enough to implement half measures without degrading their sites.

This is why ready written scripts are useful.

(although the ethical implications of hiding one's source still require consideration).

I believe it is more unethical to nick somfink than to persuade folks not to bother trying. And, I'm sorry, but there is no way you're going to convince me that the WWW is still driven by ethics, morality or anything else idealistic

OK so you (and I) could crack even a good one in less than 10 min
Point is is why would we?
You can prob code just as well as you can crack
Fact is
Most Can't
And that's why some want to nick it
They are the folks that some want to protect their code from
Right click scripts are useless because they still leave other easy methods open to get the source.
A simple encryption will hide source from most that don't have the ability to code or can't be bothered to learn
Sometime we all forget that not everyone has the same capabilities
And sometimes the best security is to leave the door open !

And No I do defiantly not work for or are in any way otherwise associated with protware I mearly examined their software a while back and found that, for what it claimed and for what it cost it was good value and fairly impressive in the fact that it would hide source from all but the determined hack so (as I said) for small low budget sites requiring a little more than a right click script -------- Never did see the point in them anyway......My rodent is disabled and doesn't have a right button thingy

You could probably do just as good a job with a few lines of script but the person asking the original question couldn't ------- we don't all have the same capabilities needs or desires and many folk just want a simple cost efective solution

[Twey]

This is why ready written scripts are useful.

True.

I believe it is more unethical to nick somfink than to persuade folks not to bother trying.

You're looking at the Web like the real world. Theft is the action of taking, directly or indirectly, property from another person. The immorality isn't in the benefit gained by the perpetrator, but the loss suffered by the victim. On the Web, "stealing" someone's code doesn't negatively affect the webmaster at all, unless he or she was planning to sell that code; therefore, it isn't immoral, or unethical in most codes of ethics. Depending on the webmaster's personal philosophy, it may be considered unethical to benefit from his or her work without giving credit, which is fair enough, since he or she put a lot of effort into that work and deserves recognition for it. To this end, licenses such as the Creative Commons and the GNU General Public License exist.

And, I'm sorry, but there is no way you're going to convince me that the WWW is still driven by ethics, morality or anything else idealistic

Unfortunately as true on the Web as it is anywhere else. However, people like the FSF are trying to do something about this. Every little helps.

A simple encryption will hide source from most that don't have the ability to code or can't be bothered to learn
Sometime we all forget that not everyone has the same capabilities

How much skill does it take to click Tools->DOM Inspector->#document->Copy XML?

And sometimes the best security is to leave the door open !

True that.

And No I do defiantly not work for or are in any way otherwise associated with protware

I surmised as much, although your defiance towards their job offer was a little off-topic

A point you have neither contested nor explicitly conceded in the above is the main one: the technical disadvantages of this kind of "protection."