html protection software, any downside??

I am about to purchase a html protection package. I would like to know if there are any downsides to using these packages.

I am a little worried that using this may mess up my google ranking, but the authors of these packages do allow you to keep your meta tags info in tact.

the packages i am looking at are :

http://www.html-protector.com/encrypt/menu.htm

http://www.antssoft.com/htmlprotector/

http://www.weblockpro.com/home.php


Any advice would be most appreciated

Regards

Dan

http://www.unlockme.co.uk

none of them work, so save your money.

these posts will help you understand why --
[Dead Link]

http://www.ozzu.com/programming-forum/hiding-source-code-t117.html

As far as I know, Google doesn't do much with metatags. It caches all of your pages, but since they'll only contain this ascii-stuff like %48 (which is A), Google will just find this crap on your page. It will not execute the javascript on your page, so it can't make anything out of your page that makes sense. I don't know for how many percent Google takes the page-content into account compared to the amount of others sites linking to you (the whole PageRank system), but I'm sure this whole encrypting thing won't do any good to your ranking.

well thanks for the responses all, very interesting threads, if a little (or a lot) over my head.

Although the protection is not very thorough, i need to try something to stop the less knowledgable web thief from stealing my tutorials.

If google spiders are not able to run the java script and not read my content then it sounds like a bad idea for my site.

I assume these progs will allow me to disable copy and paste and text selection without encrypting my entire source.

Many thanks for your quick responses.

Regards

Dan

I had an idea (quite a long time ago now but i'm still thinking about creating it) for a html "locker". You might like to do something like this:

Use your html page to point to an offsite javascript:


now here's the trick. That offsite.pl file will output your page content inside of a document.write command. But it will only do so if the perl file is being requrested through the page orignally intended, and not if it is being requrested directly.

Just add no right click and no text selection javascripts, and your thing is more secure than even the most expensive HTML encryptors.[/code]

wouldnt it be offsite.js? not pl?


cool sig btw

it doesn't have to be offsite.js or offiste.pl - it could be either. Either way, the browser would access it and pull the javascript out of it. If you wanted it could probably be offiste.js.pl or offsite.pl.js . The file name doesn't really matter (unless your running on a windows server, in which case it does matter - the file name would have to be offsite.pl or mabe offsite.js.pl ).

cool idea... be interested to see if it would work or not

speed would be a concerm but I'm sure it would work.

good point unflux. I have cable so it's not as if I'd notice if it were slow. I can't help wondering how long it would take bigwebmaster to crack this one. Look at the really long thread that was mentioned above, where people posted their HTML encryption schemes and bigwebmaster cracked 'em, one by one.

Of more concern is how I get the perl script to decide wether or not to give out its content. The obvious way is to retreive a referral URL, but bigwebmaster already broke that. I'm going to have to think about this one a little longer.

OMG! Deja Vu!

look at it? that post? THAT post?!?! no way jose!

If I never have to get into that thread again I won't miss it.