How to completely destroy a script and make it disappear forever.

[Jorge]

Hi,

I have a web app that loads 2 scripts incrementally. The first one
handles authentication/login. If a user is authenticated, a second
script gets loaded by inserting a script tag in the header, and code
execution is transferred to that second script by means of a
setTimeout(glob alReferenceToAS econdScriptInit Function), in that 2nd
script's InitFunction any remaining references to any data or variable
or function of the first script are destroyed, plus the first script's
script tag is removed from the header and any reference to that tag in
JS is destroyed as well.

The question is, why does it still appear after that in firebug ?
Is there any way to make it dissapear forever ?

TIA,
--
Jorge.

[Laser Lips]

On Oct 17, 10:47*am, Jorge <jo...@jorgecha morro.comwrote:

Hi,

I have a web app that loads 2 scripts incrementally. The first one
handles authentication/login. If a user is authenticated, a second
script gets loaded by inserting a script tag in the header, and code
execution is transferred to that second script by means of a
setTimeout(glob alReferenceToAS econdScriptInit Function), in that 2nd
script's InitFunction any remaining references to any data or variable
or function of the first script are destroyed, plus the first script's
script tag is removed from the header and any reference to that tag in
JS is destroyed as well.

The question is, why does it still appear after that in firebug ?
Is there any way to make it dissapear forever ?

TIA,
--
Jorge.

Just clap your hands together and say hey presto..

[Evertjan.]

Jorge wrote on 17 okt 2008 in comp.lang.javas cript:

Hi,

I have a web app that loads 2 scripts incrementally. The first one
handles authentication/login. If a user is authenticated, a second
script gets loaded by inserting a script tag in the header, and code
execution is transferred to that second script by means of a
setTimeout(glob alReferenceToAS econdScriptInit Function), in that 2nd
script's InitFunction any remaining references to any data or variable
or function of the first script are destroyed, plus the first script's
script tag is removed from the header and any reference to that tag in
JS is destroyed as well.

The question is, why does it still appear after that in firebug ?
Is there any way to make it dissapear forever ?

Secure clientside scripting authentication is a contradictio in terminis.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Jorge]

On Oct 17, 4:08*pm, "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivo. [e-mail] wrote:

>
Secure clientside scripting authentication is a contradictio in terminis.

I neither do nor said nothing about "secure clientside scripting
authentication" .

--
Jorge.

[Jorge]

On Oct 17, 12:14*pm, Laser Lips <loudsphi...@gm ail.comwrote:

>
Just clap your hands together and say hey presto..

Doesn't work. Got a better idea ?

--
Jorge.

[Erwin Moller]

Jorge schreef:

Hi,

I have a web app that loads 2 scripts incrementally. The first one
handles authentication/login. If a user is authenticated, a second
script gets loaded by inserting a script tag in the header, and code
execution is transferred to that second script by means of a
setTimeout(glob alReferenceToAS econdScriptInit Function), in that 2nd
script's InitFunction any remaining references to any data or variable
or function of the first script are destroyed, plus the first script's
script tag is removed from the header and any reference to that tag in
JS is destroyed as well.

The question is, why does it still appear after that in firebug ?
Is there any way to make it dissapear forever ?

TIA,
--
Jorge.

Hi Jorge,

Why it still appears in firebug?
Well, you should actually ask the firebug developers.
My best guess is that firebug thought it might be handy for you for
debuggingpurpos es. Next browser/debugging environment might make other
choises.

Why does this bother you?

Regards,
Erwin Moller

[Jorge]

On Oct 17, 6:27*pm, Erwin Moller
<Since_humans_r ead_this_I_am_s pammed_too_m... @spamyourself.c omwrote:

>
Hi Jorge,

Why it still appears in firebug?
Well, you should actually ask the firebug developers.
My best guess is that firebug thought it might be handy for you for
debuggingpurpos es. Next browser/debugging environment might make other
choises.

Why does this bother you?

I'm obfuscating the entry code. That script isn't in the .html file.
It gets loaded, quickly does its things, and inmediatly after that I'd
like it to disappear from sight...

Any ideas ?

Thanks,
--
Jorge.

[Erwin Moller]

Jorge schreef:

On Oct 17, 6:27 pm, Erwin Moller
<Since_humans_r ead_this_I_am_s pammed_too_m... @spamyourself.c omwrote:

>Hi Jorge,

Why it still appears in firebug?
Well, you should actually ask the firebug developers.
My best guess is that firebug thought it might be handy for you for
debuggingpurpo ses. Next browser/debugging environment might make other
choises.

Why does this bother you?

I'm obfuscating the entry code. That script isn't in the .html file.
It gets loaded, quickly does its things, and inmediatly after that I'd
like it to disappear from sight...

Any ideas ?

Thanks,
--
Jorge.

Hi Jorge,

Is this all about obfuscating?
In that case you might reread Evertjan's short answer, because that sums
it up quite nicely.
Sorry, that is just the way it is.

Remember that everything you send to the browser is, well, send to the
browser. Anybody can get his hands on it, inspect it, tweak it, etc.

If you need security for something, please restate your problem in more
detail. Maybe somebody can help.

Regards,
Erwin Moller

--
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the
other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious
deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult."
-- C.A.R. Hoare

[Evertjan.]

Jorge wrote on 17 okt 2008 in comp.lang.javas cript:

On Oct 17, 4:08*pm, "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivo. [e-mail] wrote:

>>
Secure clientside scripting authentication is a contradictio in
terminis.

I neither do nor said nothing about "secure clientside scripting
authentication" .

You don't need to. your Q is clear as it is.

It can be the only reason you asked about
getting rid of a login page script on the client.
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Jorge]

On Oct 17, 7:07*pm, Erwin Moller
<Since_humans_r ead_this_I_am_s pammed_too_m... @spamyourself.c omwrote:

>
Hi Jorge,

Is this all about obfuscating?
In that case you might reread Evertjan's short answer, because that sums
it up quite nicely.
Sorry, that is just the way it is.

Remember that everything you send to the browser is, well, send to the
browser. Anybody can get his hands on it, inspect it, tweak it, etc.

I know that. The authentication is done at the server and I could
leave it as it is now. But I'm obfuscating the code that builds the
authentication request as that will disuade most (not all) people to
even try to guess the details of the structure of the auth. request,
even though, I repeat, the authentication is done at the server side.

With the previous version of firebug, it was disappearing from the
scripts popup menu.

if (!obfuscated) { tinker(); } === (!obfuscated && tinker())

--
Jorge.