| Secure & Organize | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 25 2008, 05:49 PM (248 Views) | |
| bustya | Mar 25 2008, 05:49 PM Post #1 |
![]()
The Master Bitchslapper
|
We're all going different directions with this script and that's great, but it seems we need to define a method to proceed so we may maximize our efforts. I believe this is the order of importance: Security, Optimization, Functionality. Of course ideas will surface as they may, but security should always be at the forefront of our minds. This is where I'm beginning as I start working this script again. As you probably know, we have an inherent vulnerability because we're publicly sharing our live scripts. The remedy to this of course is to rename our directories and functions. Unfortunately this will end up confusing us as much as it will the would-be hackers and will make sharing our source a painstaking process of decoding every single function, class, file name and so on. Nightmare, right? Well, I've come up with a very cool idea to fix this problem, but it's going to take some work from all of us before we proceed any further. I'm proposing: 1. Re-release an updated version of the source on a periodic basis. Each release will have it's own name (such as a date or version) so we may differentiate them. 2. Create a list of all User-Defined Functions, User-Defined Classes, files and directories which we'll update each version. I suspect the original script will render approximately 100 of these terms. Of course we organize them by what file/directory they belong to (alphabetically), and list them in the order they appear in the script (top to bottom). 3. Once we compile this list, we create a form that we'll update with the term-list and post along side each version of the updated source code. The form will allow each of us to rename (encode) the terms and output our personalized version of the original source along with a key which will be specific to each of us. 4. We can also create the form to work in reverse (decode) our personalized code and perhaps show any changes we've made (that don't match the current generic version) in another color. 5. We can compare our decoded source (with the mods highlighted), agree on a generic name for new user-defined functions, classes, files and include them in the next version. Yes this is a lot of work, but it'd mean no more fear to post your code and once the system is in place, it'd allow us to proceed in an orderly fashion to maximize our collective efforts. I believe we'll be amazed at how quickly we'll refine and further develop this source if we proceed in this fashion. So what do you guys think? Is it worth the trouble? Or would your rather continue modifying in the chaotic fashion? I imagine some of you might believe I'm being paranoid, but I've already be attacked (numerous times) because I was posting live source at evolt.com. Furthermore, if you still think I'm being overcautious about this search and read up on all the hacks, cracks and whatnot MySpace has dealt with. The larger and more successful our sites becomes the more attractive they'll be to those wanting to abuse or leave their mark on us. |
![]() |
|
| Admin | Mar 25 2008, 07:21 PM Post #2 |
|
Administrator
|
im in |
![]() |
|
| Lamez | Mar 26 2008, 04:47 AM Post #3 |
|
ya, sounds good. |
![]() |
|
| claudia | Dec 19 2008, 08:43 PM Post #4 |
|
Sorry if this is in the wrong topic, but I believe it has relevance to what is being discussed, for those of us who might not have a mutil- find and replace in their code editors, I find this free software to do the trick when you are looking to replace say a syntax for another and you have so many files to do it in... it save me time when changing function names etc.. NB. please always make a back up, a a simple typo can render the code useless! http://www.emurasoft.com/replall/
|
![]() |
|
| feartec | Dec 19 2008, 09:38 PM Post #5 |
|
i think this topic is too old, nobody is working on this. May'be i could try something after i finished aus. |
![]() |
|
| feartec | Dec 19 2008, 09:40 PM Post #6 |
|
WOW Claudia nice post i saw it and yeah thats we looking for. Only you should use it carefully. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Other · Next Topic » |






12:49 AM Jul 11