Help if you can?

Discussion in 'Java' started by Joseph Arseneau, Sep 8, 2005.

  1. Hi, I am trying to disable the print feature and the print screen
    feature while viewers are visiting certain areas of my site. I
    understand this is not 100 percent secure, I just would like to make it
    a little more difficult. Are there any scripts I could put into the
    website that would disable this? Again...I understand there are plenty
    of ways around this. Thanks for any help.
     
    Joseph Arseneau, Sep 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Joseph Arseneau

    Oliver Wong Guest

    "Joseph Arseneau" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi, I am trying to disable the print feature and the print screen
    > feature while viewers are visiting certain areas of my site. I
    > understand this is not 100 percent secure, I just would like to make it
    > a little more difficult. Are there any scripts I could put into the
    > website that would disable this? Again...I understand there are plenty
    > of ways around this. Thanks for any help.


    You'd probably have better luck using JavaScript rather than Java.

    As an aside, I seriously doubt you can do anything about PrintScreen.

    - Oliver
     
    Oliver Wong, Sep 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Joseph Arseneau

    Kristian Thy Guest

    Quoth Joseph Arseneau:
    > I understand this is not 100 percent secure, I just would like to
    > make it a little more difficult.


    Ignoring that you are in the wrong group, let me ask you: Why do you
    hate your users so much?

    \\kristian
    --
    "Power is only given to the man who dare stoop to pick it up. Nothing
    more is needed, except courage. From the moment this truth had dawned
    upon me - a truth as clear as the light of the sun - I longed to dare,
    and I committed murder."
     
    Kristian Thy, Sep 8, 2005
    #3
  4. Kristian Thy coughed up:
    > Quoth Joseph Arseneau:
    >> I understand this is not 100 percent secure, I just would like to
    >> make it a little more difficult.

    >
    > Ignoring that you are in the wrong group, let me ask you: Why do you
    > hate your users so much?


    Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just took for
    and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to grab the images.

    But I agree with Oliver. I doubt there is anything that could reach from
    the browser into the OS to disable the screen capture.


    --
    Sometimes life just sucks and then you live.
     
    Thomas G. Marshall, Sep 9, 2005
    #4
  5. Joseph Arseneau

    Roedy Green Guest

    On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:28 GMT, "Thomas G. Marshall"
    <> wrote or quoted
    :

    >But I agree with Oliver. I doubt there is anything that could reach from
    >the browser into the OS to disable the screen capture.


    You see the same thing in PDF. The author can block copy/paste, but
    you can still use Paint Stop Pro and do a screen region snap.
    --
    Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
    http://mindprod.com Again taking new Java programming contracts.
     
    Roedy Green, Sep 9, 2005
    #5
  6. Joseph Arseneau

    hilz Guest


    > You see the same thing in PDF. The author can block copy/paste, but
    > you can still use Paint Stop Pro and do a screen region snap.


    You don't even need "Paint Stop Pro" or anything extra. Just press
    shift+Prnt Scrn and paste in ms paint.(talking windoz here)
     
    hilz, Sep 9, 2005
    #6
  7. On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 23:51:37 -0400, hilz wrote:

    >> You see the same thing in PDF. The author can block copy/paste, but
    >> you can still use Paint Stop Pro and do a screen region snap.

    >
    > You don't even need "Paint Stop Pro" or anything extra. Just press
    > shift+Prnt Scrn and paste in ms paint.(talking windoz here)


    I had problems with a variety of image that were touched
    by MS Paint. A pox on MS Paint.

    Personally I would use Robot to capture the screen and
    Java to write the image. You can see an example that I
    recently prepared to take a *series* of snapshots of
    animated components for tips. Chase the links from..
    <https://screensavers.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectForumMessageView?messageID=9258&forumID=698>

    HTH

    --
    Andrew Thompson
    physci.org 1point1c.org javasaver.com lensescapes.com athompson.info
    "Got no time to pack my bag, my foot's outside the door"
    Led Zeppelin 'The Ocean'
     
    Andrew Thompson, Sep 9, 2005
    #7
  8. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:28 GMT, Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
    > Kristian Thy coughed up:
    >> Quoth Joseph Arseneau:
    >>> I understand this is not 100 percent secure, I just would like to
    >>> make it a little more difficult.

    >>
    >> Ignoring that you are in the wrong group, let me ask you: Why do you
    >> hate your users so much?

    >
    > Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just
    > took for and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to
    > grab the images.
    >
    > But I agree with Oliver. I doubt there is anything that could reach
    > from the browser into the OS to disable the screen capture.


    I have seen artwork sites that open each image in its own window. When
    the pointer leaves the window, it closes. Strictly speaking the site
    does not disable the print and save buttons, but the image is gone
    before you can reach them.

    Of course a clever user can get the images in other ways (the browser
    cache for example), but if you are simply trying to make it difficult,
    then this is one way.

    /gordon

    --
    [ do not email me copies of your followups ]
    g o r d o n + n e w s @ b a l d e r 1 3 . s e
     
    Gordon Beaton, Sep 9, 2005
    #8
  9. On 9 Sep 2005 08:57:43 +0200, Gordon Beaton wrote:

    > I have seen artwork sites that open each image in its own window. When
    > the pointer leaves the window, it closes. Strictly speaking the site
    > does not disable the print and save buttons, but the image is gone
    > before you can reach them.


    You must be using the wrong browser, Gordon!

    [ OK. It is dead easy to thwart your average IE user,
    but *that* is a good example of the 'wrong browser' (for
    end user control/empowerment). ]

    --
    Andrew Thompson
    physci.org 1point1c.org javasaver.com lensescapes.com athompson.info
    "We're lost in a cruel paradise.."
    New Order 'Someone Like You'
     
    Andrew Thompson, Sep 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Joseph Arseneau

    Hemal Pandya Guest

    Thomas G. Marshall wrote:

    > Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just took for
    > and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to grab the images.



    Artwork and photo sites typically showcase samples in low-resolution.
    Yes, they can still be stolen, but the quality is lost.
     
    Hemal Pandya, Sep 9, 2005
    #10
  11. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 07:08:44 GMT, Andrew Thompson wrote:
    > You must be using the wrong browser, Gordon!


    In that case, suggest a different one! I'm happy with the user
    empowerment I currently get from Firefox, and it also happens to run
    on all of the platforms I commonly use (Linux on 4 different cpu
    architectures + Solaris).

    And yes, I'm fully aware that these things can be circumvented.

    /gordon

    --
    [ do not email me copies of your followups ]
    g o r d o n + n e w s @ b a l d e r 1 3 . s e
     
    Gordon Beaton, Sep 9, 2005
    #11
  12. On 9 Sep 2005 10:36:08 +0200, Gordon Beaton wrote:

    > On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 07:08:44 GMT, Andrew Thompson wrote:
    >> You must be using the wrong browser, Gordon!

    >
    > In that case, suggest a different one! I'm happy with the user
    > empowerment I currently get from Firefox,


    [1] Depends on the exact technique they are using, but
    generally - disabling JS stops most rubbish, while if they
    are both clever (and stupid) enough to *generate* the pages
    with JS, you need to do a direct call for the script(s) and
    hunt though the source. The deployer can then obfuscate it,
    of course, but ..we are already in the realm of 'not easy'.

    OTOH, I thought FF (or Mozilla based browsers in general)
    had options for the end user to configure..
    - Where new windows appear (floating/tabbed window).
    - Whether scripts can close windows.

    >..and it also happens to run
    > on all of the platforms I commonly use (Linux on 4 different cpu
    > architectures + Solaris).


    Yes. If I did not have to have such close knowledge of
    IE, a Moz. based browser would be my choice. My choice
    would probably be Mozilla itself.

    There was a conversation recently that suggested that FF
    in particualr was not especially good for
    - *applet* developers, in that it only offers access to
    the Java console if their is a broken applet in the page.
    - web-developers, because it similarly hides (AFAIR) options
    to get at the page source, and the JS console..

    FF is more geared to the end user, than either Java (applet)
    developers or web-application developers specifically.

    > And yes, I'm fully aware that these things can be circumvented.


    Just pointing out that is is often simpler than it looks.

    --
    Andrew Thompson
    physci.org 1point1c.org javasaver.com lensescapes.com athompson.info
    "The Generals gave thanks, as the other ranks held back the enemy tanks
    ...for a while."
    Pink Floyd 'When The Tigers Broke Free'
     
    Andrew Thompson, Sep 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Joseph Arseneau

    Oliver Wong Guest

    "Andrew Thompson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > There was a conversation recently that suggested that FF
    > in particualr was not especially good for
    > - *applet* developers, in that it only offers access to
    > the Java console if their is a broken applet in the page.
    > - web-developers, because it similarly hides (AFAIR) options
    > to get at the page source, and the JS console..


    I've never had a problem access the page source from FireFox. In fact,
    FF even offers syntax highlighting of the HTML source code, while IE shows
    the sourcecode in Notepad (which obviously doesn't do syntax highlighting).

    On the other hand, FF is particularly bad when working with XML and XSLT
    documents, as I think FF caches everything in such a way so that even when
    you modify the underlying files and force the browser to refresh (via F5 or
    the menu), it still stubbornly uses the cached version.

    So when I'm writing XML/XSLT documents, I develop with IE, and then only
    at the end check if it still looks right in FireFox.

    - Oliver
     
    Oliver Wong, Sep 9, 2005
    #13
  14. "Thomas G. Marshall" <> writes:

    > Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just
    > took for and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to
    > grab the images.


    They are already "grabbed" by the HTTP GET action. You can't even know
    if there is a browser at the other end to disable in any way.
     
    Tor Iver Wilhelmsen, Sep 9, 2005
    #14
  15. Hemal Pandya coughed up:
    > Thomas G. Marshall wrote:
    >
    >> Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just
    >> took for and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to
    >> grab the images.

    >
    >
    > Artwork and photo sites typically showcase samples in low-resolution.
    > Yes, they can still be stolen, but the quality is lost.


    Or they also commonly throw in a hideous watermark right through the middle
    of the thing.



    --
    With knowledge comes sorrow.
     
    Thomas G. Marshall, Sep 9, 2005
    #15
  16. Tor Iver Wilhelmsen coughed up:
    > "Thomas G. Marshall"
    > <> writes:
    >
    >> Someone that is selling artwork, or showcasing the photos they just
    >> took for and to a customer would want to make it a little harder to
    >> grab the images.

    >
    > They are already "grabbed" by the HTTP GET action. You can't even know
    > if there is a browser at the other end to disable in any way.


    Of course. They're all just socket programs after all.



    --
    With knowledge comes sorrow.
     
    Thomas G. Marshall, Sep 9, 2005
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Doris Cox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    556
    Doris Cox
    Dec 2, 2003
  2. Dennis
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    700
    Dennis
    Dec 2, 2003
  3. Richard Dixson
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    532
    Joe Fallon
    May 18, 2004
  4. Dennis
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    458
    Dennis
    Dec 2, 2003
  5. pek
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,232
Loading...

Share This Page