In comp.lang.javascript message <er********@drn.newsguy.com>, Mon, 26
Feb 2007 11:18:13, Lee <RE**************@cox.netposted:
>je**********@hotmail.com said:
>>
Does anyone have any recommendations for a JavaScript Obfuscator?
Did you consider looking in the FAQ, before asking?
http://jibbering.com/faq/obfuscate.html
That's not a very good document - clearly written purely from the
Microsoft point of view.
Any method of protection that is believed by some coder to work will be
reasonably effective against coders of similar or lesser ability. That
can be sufficient to justify using it.
Its first paragraph contains "I", an undefined concept. Likewise
"myself". Anonymous authors are not trustworthy, though they may be
right.
Re 1 (b). Many organisations publish material that they "own", yet are
able to defend against copying. A good example is book publishers.
Copyright in creative material is automatic in all civilised countries
and many others; it covers scripting. Copyright is protected by law,
for those who can afford lawyers.
Re 2 (b/c). I once acquired some Fourier Transform (IIRC) code, in
Algol. The compiler understood it perfectly, and I could, as intended,
use it. But, as the variable names and the ample comment were written
in something like Hungarian or Polish, I could not understand it without
undue effort. Obfuscation does offer partial protection.
2 (d) Link has changed.
I regularly use Web pages by a certain company. If they were obfuscated
I'd not be aware of how bad they are - I've seen, in CSS, 'itallics' and
'san-serif', for example.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/clpb-faq.txt RAH Prins : c.l.p.b mFAQ;
<URL:ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/link/tsfaqp.zipTimo Salmi's Turbo Pascal FAQ.
