HTML5 - Do users get to see all my client code? - html

If I am building an HTML5 web app.. And all the rendering, UI events, etc are handled on the client, then the client gets to see the source code correct?
I am working on an enterprise HTML5 application but Id like the source code to be hidden. Are there any options?
Is it also possible to somehow hide UI graphic elements (buttons, backgrounds, sounds, etc?)
What are the options here?
Thank you

My ready answer is No : your javascript code as well as links to jQuery UI code is visible on the client's asking to "view the source".
The question is : Is it possible for your code to be applied/run by the client's browser without being shown as "source?"Is there a way :- to prevent the client from seeing the "source"; or - to destroy the incoming code as soon as it has been run and displayed once?
The second eventuality seems excluded unless there are no further javascript actions on the client's side(?)
Danquest

Quick answer: No.
Why? Well, your browser (the client) effectively downloads assets like HTML, JS and CSS (along with images and other media objects), to render on the users machine.
Because all client code is downloaded to the client, the user can essentially do with the client code, whatever they wish to.
Server side code does not get to the client, because it is processed on the server, which then produces client translatable output...again, HTML etc. You only see the end result, with the source that produced it locked away on your guarded server.
Your best bet, is to simply minify and compress your JS assets. This won't do much against a savvy developer, but it may be off-putting to the casual thief.
In any case, theft is theft and if your code is found to be used by someone else's company, I guess you have a case to file a lawsuit against them...even though in a way, it's public code.
Make sure you put a license statement with all of your code, so that you're legally covered.

Related

Difference between href="#!" and href="#" [duplicate]

I've just noticed that the long, convoluted Facebook URLs that we're used to now look like this:
http://www.facebook.com/example.profile#!/pages/Another-Page/123456789012345
As far as I can recall, earlier this year it was just a normal URL-fragment-like string (starting with #), without the exclamation mark. But now it's a shebang or hashbang (#!), which I've previously only seen in shell scripts and Perl scripts.
The new Twitter URLs now also feature the #! symbols. A Twitter profile URL, for example, now looks like this:
http://twitter.com/#!/BoltClock
Does #! now play some special role in URLs, like for a certain Ajax framework or something since the new Facebook and Twitter interfaces are now largely Ajaxified?
Would using this in my URLs benefit my Web application in any way?
This technique is now deprecated.
This used to tell Google how to index the page.
https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/
This technique has mostly been supplanted by the ability to use the JavaScript History API that was introduced alongside HTML5. For a URL like www.example.com/ajax.html#!key=value, Google will check the URL www.example.com/ajax.html?_escaped_fragment_=key=value to fetch a non-AJAX version of the contents.
The octothorpe/number-sign/hashmark has a special significance in an URL, it normally identifies the name of a section of a document. The precise term is that the text following the hash is the anchor portion of an URL. If you use Wikipedia, you will see that most pages have a table of contents and you can jump to sections within the document with an anchor, such as:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Early_computers_and_the_Turing_test
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing identifies the page and Early_computers_and_the_Turing_test is the anchor. The reason that Facebook and other Javascript-driven applications (like my own Wood & Stones) use anchors is that they want to make pages bookmarkable (as suggested by a comment on that answer) or support the back button without reloading the entire page from the server.
In order to support bookmarking and the back button, you need to change the URL. However, if you change the page portion (with something like window.location = 'http://raganwald.com';) to a different URL or without specifying an anchor, the browser will load the entire page from the URL. Try this in Firebug or Safari's Javascript console. Load http://minimal-github.gilesb.com/raganwald. Now in the Javascript console, type:
window.location = 'http://minimal-github.gilesb.com/raganwald';
You will see the page refresh from the server. Now type:
window.location = 'http://minimal-github.gilesb.com/raganwald#try_this';
Aha! No page refresh! Type:
window.location = 'http://minimal-github.gilesb.com/raganwald#and_this';
Still no refresh. Use the back button to see that these URLs are in the browser history. The browser notices that we are on the same page but just changing the anchor, so it doesn't reload. Thanks to this behaviour, we can have a single Javascript application that appears to the browser to be on one 'page' but to have many bookmarkable sections that respect the back button. The application must change the anchor when a user enters different 'states', and likewise if a user uses the back button or a bookmark or a link to load the application with an anchor included, the application must restore the appropriate state.
So there you have it: Anchors provide Javascript programmers with a mechanism for making bookmarkable, indexable, and back-button-friendly applications. This technique has a name: It is a Single Page Interface.
p.s. There is a fourth benefit to this technique: Loading page content through AJAX and then injecting it into the current DOM can be much faster than loading a new page. In addition to the speed increase, further tricks like loading certain portions in the background can be performed under the programmer's control.
p.p.s. Given all of that, the 'bang' or exclamation mark is a further hint to Google's web crawler that the exact same page can be loaded from the server at a slightly different URL. See Ajax Crawling. Another technique is to make each link point to a server-accessible URL and then use unobtrusive Javascript to change it into an SPI with an anchor.
Here's the key link again: The Single Page Interface Manifesto
First of all: I'm the author of the The Single Page Interface Manifesto cited by raganwald
As raganwald has explained very well, the most important aspect of the Single Page Interface (SPI) approach used in FaceBook and Twitter is the use of hash # in URLs
The character ! is added only for Google purposes, this notation is a Google "standard" for crawling web sites intensive on AJAX (in the extreme Single Page Interface web sites). When Google's crawler finds an URL with #! it knows that an alternative conventional URL exists providing the same page "state" but in this case on load time.
In spite of #! combination is very interesting for SEO, is only supported by Google (as far I know), with some JavaScript tricks you can build SPI web sites SEO compatible for any web crawler (Yahoo, Bing...).
The SPI Manifesto and demos do not use Google's format of ! in hashes, this notation could be easily added and SPI crawling could be even easier (UPDATE: now ! notation is used and remains compatible with other search engines).
Take a look to this tutorial, is an example of a simple ItsNat SPI site but you can pick some ideas for other frameworks, this example is SEO compatible for any web crawler.
The hard problem is to generate any (or selected) "AJAX page state" as plain HTML for SEO, in ItsNat is very easy and automatic, the same site is in the same time SPI or page based for SEO (or when JavaScript is disabled for accessibility). With other web frameworks you can ever follow the double site approach, one site is SPI based and another page based for SEO, for instance Twitter uses this "double site" technique.
I would be very careful if you are considering adopting this hashbang convention.
Once you hashbang, you can’t go back. This is probably the stickiest issue. Ben’s post put forward the point that when pushState is more widely adopted then we can leave hashbangs behind and return to traditional URLs. Well, fact is, you can’t. Earlier I stated that URLs are forever, they get indexed and archived and generally kept around. To add to that, cool URLs don’t change. We don’t want to disconnect ourselves from all the valuable links to our content. If you’ve implemented hashbang URLs at any point then want to change them without breaking links the only way you can do it is by running some JavaScript on the root document of your domain. Forever. It’s in no way temporary, you are stuck with it.
You really want to use pushState instead of hashbangs, because making your URLs ugly and possibly broken -- forever -- is a colossal and permanent downside to hashbangs.
To have a good follow-up about all this, Twitter - one of the pioneers of hashbang URL's and single-page-interface - admitted that the hashbang system was slow in the long run and that they have actually started reversing the decision and returning to old-school links.
Article about this is here.
I always assumed the ! just indicated that the hash fragment that followed corresponded to a URL, with ! taking the place of the site root or domain. It could be anything, in theory, but it seems the Google AJAX Crawling API likes it this way.
The hash, of course, just indicates that no real page reload is occurring, so yes, it’s for AJAX purposes. Edit: Raganwald does a lovely job explaining this in more detail.

How to prevent viewing website code

I have a website that has a lot of data and that is sensitive to the website so I made a code that prevents right clicks but if you are using Safari it is easy to see the data I need to hide the info also so safari cant view it ether.
Client side, you cannot secure your code from view. Firebug will still show the code. You should have sensitive data on the Server.
You can't.
If the data is sufficiently sensitive that people shouldn't be able to view it, don't put it on a web site.
I m not sure if there is a completely safe solution.
if its images, use flash to load them dynamically.
yet people who knows swf-bin specs can decompile your swf files and find out the real image path.
if its data & text.
as much I can do is to
1: use pure js to render all views.
use XMLHttpRequest/ActiveXObject to load data and import these ajax js code # runtime.
compress your js/css code before deploy
here is one of my mockups
2: on the server side
check the request header to drop command line request.
exchange cookie/session key for each time.
BUT, this will make google-bots don't know how to inspect your site.
so DON'T do that on your landing page.

Flash/HTML Architecture: SEO Implications?

A client of mine has a full-Flash site and an HTML site (wordpress). Currently, the HTML site lives at http://www.domain.com, while the Flash site lives at http://www.domain.com/flash (swfobject detection at http://www.domain.com redirects flash users to the flash URL). The client isn't entirely pleased with this arrangement in terms of SEO, as links to their site sometimes point to http://www.domain.com and sometimes to http://www.domain.com/flash.
In a few weeks, the client will be rolling out a new version of their Flash site, which features deeplinking, among other things. Instead of living in its own folder off of the domain, the full-Flash site will be a "progressively enhanced" version of the HTML site, so if a user supports Flash, all HTML content will be replaced by Flash content.
Once the new site is launched, each page/URL in the Flash site will have a corresponding HTML page/URL; for example, the Flash content at http://www.domain.com/#/about/clients corresponds to the HTML content at http://www.domain.com/about/clients.
We're going to implement a 301 redirect so the old /flash path points to the domain itself, but we're not sure how to proceed in terms of redirects between the HTML and Flash versions of the site. One possibility would be to simply do client-side detection of capabilities and redirect the user to the appropriate version; under that scenario, a non-Flash-capable client that attempts to visit http://www.domain.com/#/about/clients would be JS-redirected to http://www.domain.com/about/clients, and a Flash-capable client visiting http://www.domain.com/about/clients would be JS-redirected to http://www.domain.com/#/about/clients.
Is this a reasonable approach? Are there any potential SEO red flags that we should be aware of before proceeding?
Thanks for your consideration!
The redirect from /#/about/clients to /about/clients sounds reasonable, but applying the reverse could cause problems - if your Flash detection doesn't work correctly (perhaps Flash is blocked etc.) then you may send the user into an infinite redirect loop.
Personally, I would recommend that non-hash links always load their content as expected, in a static manner. If the user then navigates, you may either end up with a URL like /about/clients#/ (if they went to the home page) (this shouldn't be an issue as crawlers will never end up visiting them this way) or you can have them redirect to / next time they navigate.
IMHO, I'd say that a pure JavaScript solution to the hash problem would be easier to manage as there are already many good examples of this.
Also consider using #! instead of # - this 'hash-bang' technique is being pushed by Google as a way of identifying to search engines that your hash is important and that its contents differ from what you would see without the hash part. Google can already point to specific parts of a page using # and if you follow the hash-bang technique on the client and server-side, it will be able to index your AJAX/Flash links just like regular links (see the implementation details and the requirements you need to fulfill).

Sourcecode in the url

normally you go on a website and by right click you can choose to see the source code. Or you just use firebug and select an element you want to analyse. Is it possible to write the source code in the URL so that it wouldn't be shown by right click + choosing or selecting an element?
I'm asking because I've already seen this phenomenon once by using an iphone simulator in safari.
Any ideas or hints what I'm exactly looking for? Your help would be great.
Edit: Based on wrong information. You can see the sourcecode by rightclicking. But the url still contains all information about the site. I'll get back to you as soon as I got more information to write them down clearly. Sorry for all the confusion.
Edit: This is the code in the url containing information about the site.
data:text/html;charset=utf-8;base64,PCFET0NUWVBFIGh0bWw%2BDQo8aHRtbCBtYW5pZmVzdD0naHR0cDovL25vdm93ZWIubWZ1c2UuY29tL3dlYmFwcC9TcG9ydGluZ2JldC9wb3J0YWwvc3BvcnRpbmdiZXRQb3J0YWwubWFuaWZlc3QnPg0KPGhlYWQ%2BPHRpdGxlPlNwb3J0aW5nYmV0PC90aXRsZT4NCiAgICA8bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PSdjb250ZW50LXR5cGUnIGNvbnRlbnQ9J3RleHQvaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD11dGYtOCc%2BDQoJPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0ndmlld3BvcnQnIGNvbnRlbnQ9J21heGltdW0tc2NhbGU9MSwgd2lkdGg9ZGV2aWNlLXdpZHRoLCBoZWlnaHQ9ZGV2aWNlLWhlaWdodCwgdXNlci1zY2FsYWJsZT1ubywgbWluaW11bS1zY2FsZT0xLjAnPg0KICAgIDxtZXRhIG5hbWU9J2FwcGxlLW1vYmlsZS13ZWItYXBwLWNhcGFibGUnIGNvbnRlbnQ9J1lFUyc%2BDQogICAgPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0nYXBwbGUtbW9iaWxlLXdlYi1hcHAtc3RhdHVzLWJhci1zdHlsZScgY29udGVudD0nYmxhY2snPg0KICAgIDxzY3JpcHQgdHlwZT0ndGV4dC9qYXZhc2NyaXB0JyBsYW5ndWFnZT0namF2YXNjcmlwdCc%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%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%2BPC9zY3JpcHQ%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%2BPC9zY3JpcHQ%2BDQogICAgPHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSd0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQnIHNyYz0naHR0cDovL25vdm93ZWIubWZ1c2UuY29tL3dlYmFwcC9TcG9ydGluZ2JldC9wb3J0YWwvUGFydHMvQnV0dG9uSGFuZGxlci5qcycgY2hhcnNldD0ndXRmLTgnPjwvc2NyaXB0Pg0KICAgIDxzY3JpcHQgdHlwZT0ndGV4dC9qYXZhc2NyaXB0JyBzcmM9J2h0dHA6Ly9ub3Zvd2ViLm1mdXNlLmNvbS93ZWJhcHAvU3BvcnRpbmdiZXQvcG9ydGFsL1BhcnRzL1RyYW5zaXRpb25zLmpzJyBjaGFyc2V0PSd1dGYtOCc%2BPC9zY3JpcHQ%2BDQogICAgPHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSd0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQnIHNyYz0naHR0cDovL25vdm93ZWIubWZ1c2UuY29tL3dlYmFwcC9TcG9ydGluZ2JldC9wb3J0YWwvUGFydHMvU3RhY2tMYXlvdXQuanMnIGNoYXJzZXQ9J3V0Zi04Jz48L3NjcmlwdD4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IG9uTG9hZD0nbG9hZCgpOyc%2BDQogICAgPGRpdiBpZD0nc3RhY2tMYXlvdXQnPjxkaXYgaWQ9J3NlbGVjdGlvbi1wYWdlJz4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2xhbmRpbmdwYWdlJz4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSdjZW50cmVUb3BCRyc%2BPC9kaXY%2BPGRpdiBpZD0nY2VudHJlQm90dG9tQkcnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2xvZ28nPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2ljb24nPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2Rpc3BhbHlib3gnPg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDEnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDInPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgY2xhc3M9J3ZpZXcyJyBpZD0naXBob25lJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSd2aWV3MicgaWQ9J2Nhc2lubyc%2BPC9kaXY%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgPGRpdiBpZD0nZGlzcGFseWJveDMnPg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDUnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDYnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDcnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDgnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDknPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDEwJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgPGRpdiBpZD0ndGV4dHAxMSc%2BPC9kaXY%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J3RleHRwMTInPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSd0ZXh0cDEzJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgIDwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICA8L2Rpdj48ZGl2IGlkPSdpbnN0YWxsLWFwcC1wYWdlJz4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2luc3RhbGwnPg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2NlbnRyZVRvcEJHMSc%2BPC9kaXY%2BPGRpdiBpZD0nY2VudHJlQm90dG9tQkcxJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSdkaXNwYWx5Ym94MSc%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J3RleHRwMyc%2BPC9kaXY%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J3RleHRwNCc%2BPC9kaXY%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgPC9kaXY%2BDQogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgPGRpdiBpZD0naWNvbjEnPjwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIDxkaXYgaWQ9J2xvZ28xJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICA8ZGl2IGlkPSdidXR0b24yJz48L2Rpdj4NCiAgICAgICAgICAgIDwvZGl2Pg0KICAgICAgICA8L2Rpdj48L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4=
No, it's not possible to hide a website's source code. The reason for that is simply that the browser needs that code to display the website, so whenever you see a website, you'll always be able to see as much code as is needed to make the website look like that.
You can mangle the code a bit, but as you have said yourself, things like Firebug are able to display the current state of a website, so you'll also be able to see the correct code.
edit
Just a note: Just because Safari with an iPhone user agent isn't able to display the source code, it doesn't mean that the code is not there or somehow encrypted into the URL. If you can see the website, the code is there.
I guess it's a bug (or a feature?) that Safari isn't able to display it in iPhone mode (maybe because the iPhone itself isn't able to display the code either).
edit 2
Okay, it indeed set the URL to the following for me:
data:text/html;charset=utf-8;base64,PGh0bWw%2BPGhlYWQ%2BPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0ndmlld3BvcnQnIGNvbnRlbnQ9J21heGltdW0tc2NhbGU9MSwgd2lkdGg9ZGV2aWNlLXdpZHRoLCB1c2VyLXNjYWxhYmxlPW5vLCBtaW5pbXVtLXNjYWxlPTEuMCc%2BPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0nYXBwbGUtbW9iaWxlLXdlYi1hcHAtY2FwYWJsZScgY29udGVudD0nWUVTJz48bWV0YSBuYW1lPSdhcHBsZS1tb2JpbGUtd2ViLWFwcC1zdGF0dXMtYmFyLXN0eWxlJyBjb250ZW50PSdibGFjayc%2BPE1FVEEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0ncmVmcmVzaCcgY29udGVudD0nMTtVUkw9aHR0cHM6Ly93ZWJhcHAubWZ1c2UuY29tL1Nwb3J0aW5nYmV0L2lwaG9uZS9pbmRleC1lbl9HQi5odG1sP2lkPTU4NjIwNEE2MEE0MDQ2MTUwMTM5MEZDQTFBQTdGNDFBJmxvY2FsZT1lbl9HQiZhZmZpbGlhdGVJRD0nPjwvaGVhZD48c3R5bGU%2BYm9keXtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNvbG9yOiMwMDA7dGV4dC1hbGlnbjpjZW50ZXI7Y29sb3I6I0ZGRjtmb250LWZhbWlseTpBcmlhbCwgSGVsdmV0aWNhLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToyMHB4O308L3N0eWxlPjxib2R5PjxwPmxvYWRpbmcuLi48L3A%2BPC9ib2R5PjwvaHRtbD4=
This however just encodes to a loading & redirect page that itself redirects to a different webpage with a special session-like parameter. I guess they didn't want to create real server side sessions for this and just put the parameter into the redirect page and encoded the whole junk using the data: URI to not create a custom page for it. This however does neither help the browser (in terms of speed or anything else) nor does it hide the source code, as you can just decode it again to see the original source code.
What you're referring to is the data URI scheme, which allows base64 encoded data to be included locally (within a request), where normally http/etc URLs are used to initiate new requests.
The data URI scheme is a URI scheme
that provides a way to include data
in-line in web pages as if they were
external resources. It tends to be
simpler than other inclusion methods,
such as MIME with cid or mid URIs.
Read the Wikipedia page for more details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_URI_scheme
i don't know what you're trying to achive, but if you want to hide the source code because of "anybody can steal my code": that isn't possible. the sourcecode has to get to the browser in any way, so the browser can display it - and if the code is on the client-machine (in the browser) there will always be a possibility to grab it.
Even if you restrict right clicking, or viewing the source, it is impossible to hide it from everybody. Also, placing it in the URL would be bad, very bad (I can't even imagine it).
the html is needed for the browser to render the UI. You can't hide it.
You could compress and obfuscate the javascript though, to make it difficult to read and understand. But that's evil :)
Internet Explorer has a character limit of 2048 characters, so you would have to compress the content and pray it will fit in the url after it's been base64 encoded. Then you can use javascript to decode it. It will also be extremely difficult to update your pages or allow for bookmarking. It could also result in users exploiting the system.
Chances are nobody will want your sauce code anyway, and if they did, it wouldn't affect you one little bit. Facebook shows it's sauce, I don't see it's popularity dropping. So just stick with serving your pages the normal way.
1. The length of an URL is limited, so that you couldn't write a whole page into it even if it were possible.
2. Once a thing has been displayed at a client machine the code cannot be protected.
(well, using javascript right-click disabling could repell a few noobs, but it is still fairly easy to grab the code)

How to make html file encrypted?

I want to know, how to make my html file code to encrypted?
So that if normal user see the code,
then they don't understand the code?
I don't remember how I did it, but I was just reading some of my own code recently and I couldn't even understand it. A normal user would not have a chance. I don't thing encryption was involved however.
You can't. If the user can't see it, the browser wouldn't be able to either!
This is called obfuscation, but it's pointless. People can still view your complete DOM tree in DOM Inspector or Firebug. As this Yahoo blog entry says, "If you don’t want people to see your programs, unplug your server." This applies equally to HTML.
Don't bother. All encryption will do for you is slow down your site. It's not worth 'hiding' it. Any moron can just open up Firebug and see everything without even having to decrypt the source code anyways.
This might be good: http://www.iwebtool.com/html_encrypter
it's free and online makes your code into unicode hope less to copy and edit!
You may try disable the mouse right click.
JS (jQuery):
$(document).bind('contextmenu',function(){return false;});
Again as shown in other posts this is actually meaningless because if someone want to view the source they can just press F12 to open the console and view all the codes.
Also, I don't think a normal user will want to see this kind of things. If they see that, they just think they're pressing the wrong button and close it.
You can use StatiCrypt to encrypt your HTML file using AES-256 encryption. You then get a simple HTML page with a password prompt, see example.
Two cautionary notes from the project's repository:
Disclaimer if you have extra sensitive banking data you should probably use something else!
...
AES-256 is state of the art but brute-force/dictionary attacks would be trivial to do at a really fast pace: use a long, unusual passphrase.
A similar tool is clientside-html-password. There might be others as well, but the bottom line is that you can make an HTML file encrypted.
I've written a tool to encrypt HTML files called PageCrypt. The tool asks for a password at the time of encryption, then spits out an encrypted HTML file. Then, when a user views the encrypted file, they need to input the set password to be able to unscramble and view it.
The tool is hosted here:
https://www.maxlaumeister.com/pagecrypt/
with source code available here:
https://github.com/MaxLaumeister/pagecrypt
Description of the project, from the project page:
PageCrypt - Password Protect HTML
This tool lets you securely password-protect an HTML file. Unlike other password-protection tools, this tool:
Has no server-side components (this tool and its password-protected pages run entirely in javascript).
Uses strong encryption, so the password-protection cannot be bypassed.
All you need to do is choose an HTML file and a password, and your page will be password-protected.
You can try DRM-X 4.0, it supports protect HTML JS CSS and Images. it also supports protect Dynamic Website.
https://www.haihaisoft.com/HTML-Encryption.aspx
https://www.haihaisoft.com/Dynamic-Website-DRM-Protection.aspx