WillYouHack.Me?

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by loopdoend on Monday June 23, 2014 @11:41PM (#7936082)

This only serves to illustrate why relying on obfuscation to protect you via security-through-obscurity is ridiculous. Commercial Javascript libraries with DRM should take note.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by Igglyboo on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @01:00AM (#7936258)

I've never run into one of these and am curious, do you have an example of a library that tries to do this with obfuscation?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by curiousHacker on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @01:04AM (#7936267)

What's the state of the art in JavaScript DRM?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by mantraxC on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @01:21AM (#7936295)

I think you're confusing JS minification with obfuscation. Minified code looks obfuscated, sure, but it's not done to deter "hacking", just to make the code smaller.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by loopdoend on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @10:19AM (#7937865)

The code in the challenge isn't even minified, it's just really minimally obfuscated. So, no confusion here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by mantraxC on Tuesday June 24, 2014 @10:53AM (#7938070)

I'm not talking about the challenge, but those supposed commercial JS libraries with DRM that you're advising "should take notice".

There are no mainstream examples of such libraries. You're likely confusing minified libraries for having an intent to obfuscate, or talking out your ass.

One or the other.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:WillYouHack.Me? by loopdoend on Wednesday June 25, 2014 @02:13AM (#7942514)

Yeah? Go take a look at GoJS. Then sulk off to whatever fetid corner of the internet you came from.

[ Parent | on HN ]