| LED Digest 2135: Hiding Source Code |
|
|
|
================================================== The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" pair Networks: The LED's Web Host Hosting and Domain Reg. from a Trusted Leader pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. April 10, 2006 Issue #2135 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ==== CONTINUING ================= --== R.I.P. FrontPage ==-- ~ Rich Dudley "Pish-posh to anyone who says professionals only use Macromedia." --== Protecting Images ==-- ~ Veronica Yuill "I can't see what's so 'secret' about HTML source code anyway..." ~ Barb Radisavljevic "What I'd like to do is prevent someone from linking to [my] images..." ==== BILLBOARD =================== --== The WayBack Machine ==-- ~ Carrie MacKenzie --== Unsubscribing from Spam - An Experiment ==-- ~ Andreas Huttenrauch ~ Joe Halbrook ~ R. Neilson ======== CONTINUING =============================== From: Richard Dudley Subject: FrontPage > As someone who "cut their teeth" and started making > web sites from Frontpage 97, this change worries me > and I'm not so sure what the future holds... - Joseph Taylor, LED 2134 Disregard SharePoint Designer unless you work with a SharePoint installation. The official homepage of Expression is http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/default.mspx. This is actually a suite of tools--a graphics tool (Expression Graphic Designer), an HTML / CSS design tool (Expression Web Designer), and a Flash / VRML tool (Expression Interactive Designer). For the most part, Expression Web Designer is going to be the most direct replacement for FrontPage. I doubt that FP's themes and webbots and such will be supported. There is better technology available today, such as Master Pages in the ASP.NET 2.0 framework (think of the .NET framework as FPSE on mega steroids). ASP.NET Data Sources are FP's dataviews all grown up. There's not much indication of EWD working with the FPSE management bits, perhaps because that's not fully resolved yet. I would expect that to go away, and something better to come along, but if enough people scream, the features might be added back (this has happened with the latest version of Visual Studio -- a much loved featured is being added back because enough developers screamed). Since most of what EWD does is based on .NET, I wouldn't expect yuo to get full features on a Linux box. The Mono project is a Linux port of the.NET farmework, but it is not as full featured as the Windows version. Pish-posh to anyone who says professionals only use Macromedia. I've used FP since FP 98, by choice. What it does, it does very well. When FP lacks a feature, you're better served using a different tool anyway. But the capabilities of web servers, browser and higher bandwidth mean it's time to build better tools. Rich Dudley www.bloomeryweddings.com -------- new post - new topic --------- From: Veronica Yuill Subject: Image theft > Sending the page to the browser as obfuscated JavaScript > code is a good idea. It can hide program and HTML code > for those who want to keep their methods secret... - Will Bontrager, LED 2133 Something no-one seems to have mentioned in this thread yet is that this technique also completely hides your page content from SE spiders, which can't interpret Javascript. For Bob's page, that didn't matter because there was virtually no text on the page, but for a normal page with real content, this would be bad news! To be honest, I can't see what's so "secret" about HTML source code anyway -- it's not rocket science. Which of us didn't learn HTML by using "View source" to peek at source code and see how particular effects were achieved? ;-) Note that doesn't meant to say I condone image or content theft, which is another matter altogether. Regards Veronica Yuill Archetype IT http://www.archetype-it.com/english/ -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Barb Radisavljevic Subject: Image theft I am not so fussy about people copying my images, since they are mostly book cover images that are available almost anywhere, even though I usually do my own scanning. What I'd like to do is prevent someone on MySpace.com from linking to this image instead of copying it. I have even removed it for a week to my own detriment, changed the file name before putting it back up, and the link is no longer working (image not showing on person's page). I don't even know for sure if other images have links to them. What I do know is that the main MySpace page is the referrer for almost half my page views, and I have found one blogger there linking to one of my images so it shows on their site. Now the image doesn't show, but the site is still stealing bandwidth from me as it trys to download the image. The tricky part of this is that I'm using my site to host images for links I upload to book search sites such as tomfolio.com, biblio.com, and bookwormbuffet.com. So the images themselves cannot be blocked from downloading to other sites completely or I'm shooting myself in the foot. Is there a way I can restrict certain sites from downloading images and still allow others to do so? I use FrontPage and know very little HTML -- just enough for meta tags and fixing something that's not working right in FrontPage (such as and end tag in a bullet list or some such.) Earthlink is my web host. I currently go to images on my site that are live, get the image URL, and paste it into a field in my bookseller upload software data base to upload to the various selling sites. These sites do not host images themselves. Any help in saving my bandwidth from theft would be greatly appreciated. Barb Radisavljevic www.barbsbooks.com The best books for children and education ==== BILLBOARD =================================== From: Carrie MacKenzie Subject: WayBack Machine > The WayBack Machine at archive.org shows only > 8 changes in the past two years (look for asterisks > beside the dates... - Mike Banks Valentine, LED 2134 Now this... is another example of why I keep subscribed to this newsletter, and why I cannot file them until I have read them all the way through. (And the very fact that I do file them speaks for itself) I had NO idea this resource existed, that I could look up frequency of updates on here... Way to Go... Thank you :) Carrie MacKenzie -------- new post - new topic -------- From: Andreas Huttenrauch Subject: Spam experiment > I would *really* like to explore this unsubscribe > matter further... - Tom Aman, LED 2133 Regarding Tom's Spam experiment, I think there's more to it than meets the eye. Let's remember that there's a (potentially) huge difference between Spam and UCE. Real spammers will not include unsubscription options, will fake sender addresses, will relay via multiple servers, etc, etc, etc. Most UCE that has unsubscription options is probably sent by business newbies who purchased a cheap list believing that the members "opted in" to receiving random crap. This may explain why unsubscribing does work most of the time. Any time the unsubscribe link creates more spam, the spammer can be tracked, reported, and with any luck, stopped and / or prosecuted. For the newbie business that thinks the world wants to get their message via bulk email, you could look for the 800 number in the ad and repeatedly dial it. Their phone bill and lack of sales may discourage them from buying opt-in lists again. Andreas Huttenrauch Globi Web Solutions www.globi.ca -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Joe Halbrook Subject: Spam experiment > This may sound silly, but the easiest way is to quit trying to > filter out SPAM. Instead, filter the good messages and send > them to a "Good" folder. Almost everything left will be SPAM. - Tom Aman, LED 2133 Tom, what you have described is the exact premise I've used behind my small CleanMyMailbox web-based spam filtering service from the first day of it's operation in late 2001. It's a server-side solution, so my only twist is that I leave the "good" email in your mailbox, and move the "bad" email out of your mailbox to a safe holding area on my server, which you can view, restore to your mailbox, and even whitelist the Sender for no future filtering. The concept I used to designed the service was that it is, in effect, easier to filter the "good" mail - based on both a subject line and address-based whitelist, assuming everything else was sent without permission. (If you use a web contact form instead of posting your email address on your web site, the service can even auto-whitelist anyone who uses your web contact form, so you never lose email via the contact form.) As I stated, the filtered "bad" email goes to a holding area, where you can use automated reports (which can be seen here: http://www.cleanmymailbox.com/howitworks.html ) to easily manage your whitelist or restore an email - right from your mailbox. I only have a few users, over the years, because I have not heavily promoted the service, and it was more of a solution to handle my own needs. But, I challenge you to ask any one of them to give up their accounts because, as they have told me over and over, it the easiest way to manage unwanted email, and it really works. One other comment, I limit my filtering to a storage limit on the "bad" email to 10 Megabytes at any given time. Otherwise, the spammers would try to use my service to catch and clear out all those bounce-backs when they send out a broadcast. Tom, your LED post caught my eye, considering I have been using your suggestion for quite a few years now (in fact, CleanMyMailbox was one of the first of it's kind back in 2001). I'll be very interested to see the results of your study. Incidentally, I've filtered the same email address with my mailbox cleaning service for years. I don't unsubscribe, I simply delete the emails, and I've seen my unwanted email drop from the thousands per day to less than twenty per day. Best of success on the study, Tom and other LED readers. Joe Halbrook http://www.cleanmymailbox.com -------- new post - same topic -------- From: R. Neilson Subject: Spam experiment Try getting Barracuda spamware -- it does a good job and you can specify what is and isn't spam. Also another way is to change your e-mail -- you drop off the radar so to speak and don't get as much spam for about 6 months. Course it is a pain letting all those you really want to get e-mail from know your new e-mail. R. Neilson H. L. Supply www.hansons.net ------------------------------------------------------- The LED Digest is sponsored by pair Networks: pair.com for Hosting | pairNIC.com for Domains © Copyright 1995-2006 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. "Advice is like snow -- the softer it falls, the longer it dwells upon, and the deeper in sinks into the mind." - Samuel Taylor Coleridge |
