Why no-right-click scripts are bad.

	You are not logged in. (log in or register)

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Why no-right-click scripts are bad.

Pages:

Showing posts 26 - 34 of 34, (reverse)

Author

Thread

jab119

09/14/2004 08:54:46 PM · #26

Originally posted by jadin:

The point is that it is annoying. VERY annoying, I despise websites that disable right-click.

So you think it is annoying for people to try and take measures to protect their photos by using the disable right click script?

I read some of the links above and MANY complain that it is annoying, so what, its only annoying to those who let it be annoying. they should not be trying to take my photos for their use with out my permission.

The only real way to protect your photos is to not share them or display them on the web. Unless you want to pay gobs of money to electronically watermark them, but im sure there is a way around that too.

James

dwoolridge

09/14/2004 09:45:36 PM · #27

There's more in the right-click menu then just "steal this photo". There are legitimate uses of right-click (like "block images from this server" in mozilla). Car analogies are bad.

dwoolridge

09/14/2004 09:49:40 PM · #28

Originally posted by jab119:

Unless you want to pay gobs of money to electronically watermark them, but im sure there is a way around that too.

At least one of the ways around right click works (screen capture). You can use steganography to embed quite a bit of information in your on-line images. Utilities like outguess and steghide are free. They only work if people make bit-for-bit duplicates of the images. Hell, resaving the jpeg in another format will remove the watermark.

jab119

09/14/2004 11:20:26 PM · #29

Originally posted by dwoolridge:

There's more in the right-click menu then just "steal this photo". There are legitimate uses of right-click (like "block images from this server" in mozilla). Car analogies are bad.

i dont understand this one. If you are going to use the right click on Website XYZ123 to "block images from this server" then I guess that would stop you from seeing ANY images on that site correct??? if so is there are way to right click again to allow the viewing of the images again?

If so this function seems pretty useless to me and not sure what its good for. Please tell me.

James

bmatt17

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/15/2004 12:04:37 AM · #30

I personally would stop going to any site that disabled my right click. I use firefox, and mouse gestures. right click and drag left to go back, drag up to refresh, etc. Of course, I have Firefox, and have the extension to disable the right click block anyway. I have to agree that it's an annoying method that offers no protection.

dwoolridge

09/15/2004 12:15:01 AM · #31

Originally posted by jab119:

Yes, there is a way to see the images again. I use it primarily to block ad images from servers like "yimg.com" and such. (Actually, I maintain a private dns cache for the big sites and point them at a dummy web address, but that was before Mozilla had image blocking abilities). I also use it to block images in DPC forums when posters won't refrain from posting full size images.

Eventually, I'll have to block images from dpc too; it'll make voting tricky, but I'll manage somehow.

Message edited by author 2004-09-15 00:17:06.

jadin

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

09/15/2004 12:59:15 AM · #32

Originally posted by jab119:

You bet it's annoying, it's not an effective way to prevent stealing. It disables a lot more than just 'save picture as'.

Some of the more useful features of the right-click menu are 'back', 'forward', 'view source', 'refresh', 'properties', and most important of all if you right click on a link you can 'open in new window'.

I use open in new window all the time, I find I can read quite a bit more info before the next link is finished loading. And many times that link isn't what I wanted to view anyway. So I just close the linked page and don't have to wait for the old one to reload.

It's extremely narrow-minded to assume that anyone who right-clicks is trying to steal your images. I have nothing against protecting your images. I dislike when I find my images on other people's websites.. but disabling right-click is definately NOT a good solution to the problem.

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

09/15/2004 01:29:26 AM · #33

The worst part about annoying and insulting the vast majority that is not trying to steal images, is that it is completely useless against those it was meant to stop. Seriously, if someone has enough computer savvy to learn to use the right-click menu, they are going not going to be stopped by disabling it -- they will just learn another way, there are dozens to choose from.

The bottom line is, the internet was created as a medium for the free exchange of ideas and has no built in security measures. All security measures are hacks on top of the existing framework. Until the security is built into the hardware, bypassing it (especially for digital media) is trivial.

There are initiatives in the works, but competing standards and media generated hysteria are slowing their adoption to a crawl. All the while the big media houses are putting pressure on lawmakers (quite heavily here in the US, but it is surely not just here) to make laws governing digital content. The way I see it, we will have a solution to the problem within the next decade; it's just a question of who is going to supply it -- the technology giants that have the knowledge to do the job right or politicians who are only vaguely aware of the problem. I'm hoping for the former myself -- the latter will just create more problems. :(

David

skylen

Nikon D200

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

09/15/2004 02:50:22 AM · #34

Originally posted by Britannica:

The way I see it, we will have a solution to the problem within the next decade; it's just a question of who is going to supply it

I beg to differ. It is simply impossible to display an image on the user's computer screen and prevent them from capturing the image. Even assuming, for instance, a completely secure and encrypted channel (SSL?) from the server to the browser, and security features in the OS and browser (oh, what about open source operating systems like Linux or BSD? I'm a programmer and I compiled everything I'm running on this computer from the kernel to the web browser from the source. I can make any changes I like), you could hook a device up to the DVI video output and capture a pure-digital lossless image of the screen.

It's the same thing with audio and video formats. The iTunes DRM has been cracked. DVD encryption has been cracked. I can save streaming media from any site on the net using commonly available tools like mplayer. If the player can play it, the player can be hacked to save it. The only factor is, how difficult it is to hack, not whether it can be hacked.

It's a perpetual game of catch-up between the hackers and the corporations. And the corporations are always the ones trying to catch up. The other side does it for the fun of it.

Pages:

Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 05:08:15 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.

Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 05:08:15 PM EDT.