Web image protection


Status
Not open for further replies.

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#1
I would like to have your feedback and opinion of the simple protection method I just created to protect image on the web, it doesn't require plug-in, very simple and effective. Altough it is not 100% bulletproof, but at least it will prevent average people from copying the image.
You can try on my test server here:
http://202.172.43.18/test.php

(please be patient, this server is a bit slow)
 

Feb 3, 2002
1,741
0
0
Singapore
#3
Good attempt - I like the idea of "listening" for keystrokes and using a transparent gif to cover the original image.

But I guess there're always ways to work around it.

Here's a screen capture:


Click here if it doesn't load.
 

benny

Senior Member
Nov 13, 2002
2,366
1
38
48
Tokyo, Japan
Visit site
#4
Tested it. Seem to work well. Even when I click on save when the 4 icons popped up, all it does is save a blank layer. Great!!
 

james m

New Member
Dec 28, 2002
439
0
0
56
#5
Originally posted by tsdh

but at least it will prevent average people from copying the image.
unless above average people post here how the average person can beat it ;) :)
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#6
Yes, very easy to overcome it, but it will deter those who are less techie-knowledgable.

I think most of us here although know how to over-come it will not choose to do so :)

It's the minority.

I've seen I think SniperD's or togu's shots being leeched onto www.sggirls.com those are the blacksheep among us.
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#7
Yes, it is just a simple idea, quite easy for those knowledgeable. But those group of well knowledgeable will not many belong to the leechers. (... the less-knowledgeable will still be able to steal, by shooting the monitor screen using digicam ..:D )

some of my images were stolen too :( ,that's why now I almost never put my images on the website, and completely take down all images (especially portraitures) which involves other people.
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#8
Originally posted by mpenza
interesting idea. the images are still downloaded onto the browser's cache though :(
yeah, it is still in the cache. The only way to avoid this, by using a Java applet instead of just a plain HTML, but it will take longer time to download.
The only unbeatable cracking method are:
- Grabbing the screen memory directly, or from the output using video capture.
- Shooting the monitor screen using camera.
 

munfai

New Member
Apr 19, 2002
1,354
0
0
39
#9
here's another idea:

1. have a Flash movie on your website.
2. when the user clicks on a thumbnail, send a request to a server-side script, and return the binary data of the image.
3. have Flash load the image as a new movie clip.

I'm in the midst of writing something of the above for my own site. Will post the url once it's complete.
 

#10
Originally posted by munfai
here's another idea:

1. have a Flash movie on your website.
2. when the user clicks on a thumbnail, send a request to a server-side script, and return the binary data of the image.
3. have Flash load the image as a new movie clip.

I'm in the midst of writing something of the above for my own site. Will post the url once it's complete.
That sounds rather feasible. Keep us updated!

Regards
CK
 

djchris

New Member
Jul 21, 2002
712
0
0
34
www.confusedillusions.com
#11
Originally posted by munfai
here's another idea:

1. have a Flash movie on your website.
2. when the user clicks on a thumbnail, send a request to a server-side script, and return the binary data of the image.
3. have Flash load the image as a new movie clip.

I'm in the midst of writing something of the above for my own site. Will post the url once it's complete.
Can show an example of the binary data thing?
I can understand the rest of the stuff..
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#12
Originally posted by munfai
here's another idea:

1. have a Flash movie on your website.
2. when the user clicks on a thumbnail, send a request to a server-side script, and return the binary data of the image.
3. have Flash load the image as a new movie clip.

I'm in the midst of writing something of the above for my own site. Will post the url once it's complete.
That's good idea, but the browser has to support Flash.
And I don't know whether the binary data can be encrypted with Flash, if it is still in its original binary (or standard movie clip), then can be easily intercepted too.
Later I will try using a Java applet instead of Flash.
Similar as your idea, the Applet will request to a server-side script, which return encrypted binary data of the image.
 

Watcher

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2003
2,307
0
0
The heart of the Abyss
Visit site
#13
My 2 cents worth:
Flash is actually very well supported. My question is can Flash handle real encryption; not some half-a$$ ones like XOR, but just even DES.

I actually have in mind something similar but requires SSL. I will have to try to crack it first myself :D
 

nhyone

New Member
Mar 22, 2002
177
0
0
17
Singapore
web.singnet.com.sg
#14
Originally posted by tsdh
Altough it is not 100% bulletproof, but at least it will prevent average people from copying the image.
IE 6: works as expected.
Netscape 4.7x: window closes as soon as I click on another window.
Opera 6: no effect.

You might want a footnote to say that Javascript must be enabled.

There are times when the popped up window shows exactly the same page. I need to click again to get to the image. Sometimes not. I noticed the main page refreshes itself, so it could be due to some sync problem -- I'm using a 56k dial-up.

However, imo, what's the point? Images 640x480 or less are not worth protecting. They cannot be printed well.

I have a bigger problem of getting people to see my images! :D
 

Barret

New Member
Feb 1, 2003
271
0
0
33
Rosyth
www.typhoonstorm.com
#15
why not just watermark your images,
it actually more troublesome doing it this way.
get the digimarc plugin for photoshop.

its virtually transparent, and it watermarks phrintouts too.
most ad companies use this.


it does degrade picture quailty, but very little, and not noticable to the human eye. unless you really squint at it
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#16
Originally posted by Barret
why not just watermark your images,
it actually more troublesome doing it this way.
get the digimarc plugin for photoshop.
Watermarking is the best, considering that we can never prevent stealing of web-images. The only problem is: I have to pay US$49 for max 100 images every year to Digimarc, this is a running cost which may not worth for me as an amateur.
 

tsdh

New Member
Jul 8, 2002
340
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#17
Originally posted by nhyone
There are times when the popped up window shows exactly the same page. I need to click again to get to the image. Sometimes not. I noticed the main page refreshes itself, so it could be due to some sync problem -- I'm using a 56k dial-up.
Yes, you're right. The popped up window sometimes show the main page due to the out of sync session, or if the referer main page come from the browser's cache while its session has actually expired.

However, imo, what's the point? Images 640x480 or less are not worth protecting. They cannot be printed well.
I have a bigger problem of getting people to see my images! :D
Sure, it is too much to protect 640x480 images. But the goal is to prevent somebody get the original web-file easily. (right-click or shift-print-screen, are too easy). By putting a bit of protection measures, it will discourage people from stealing images, altough it would not stop the real crook.
Nowaday I notice that most of people think that it is allright to save a web-image they find appealing, and use it for their interest (as windows wallpaper, send by email to friends, etc). Their awareness regarding copyright issue is virtually not there, especially while it is too easy to get the image.
 

nhyone

New Member
Mar 22, 2002
177
0
0
17
Singapore
web.singnet.com.sg
#18
Originally posted by tsdh
Nowaday I notice that most of people think that it is allright to save a web-image they find appealing, and use it for their interest (as windows wallpaper, send by email to friends, etc).
Well, there is such a thing as fair-use. I would rather have my images spread wide and far. Put a copyright message on your images and tag them properly. Leech is simple and fast, but most casual users won't bother to do an edit.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom