3 ms·
I was under the impression that the main concern is theft of HTML/CSS/JS sources without payment. Anything that allows access to those files would still be vuln
by TheMakeA 13y ago
I was under the impression that the main concern is theft of HTML/CSS/JS sources without payment. Anything that allows access to those files would still be vulnerable. The idea was to have the site rendered real-time in the cloud and transmitted so that no source assets could be stolen.
- bobwaycott 13y agoApologies, I believe I interpreted the protection for freelancers a bit more broadly. Rarely have I seen/heard of clients who have resorted to blatant theft of the sources without payment. They usually just try to get away with using the sources. That is no different from theft, in my book, but it seemed going so far overboard as to obfuscate/hide it all vs. just getting oneself a proper attorney and initiating legal action would be better. Better yet, get an attorney to draft a contract that you can reuse with [nearly] all clients. I was speaking more to sensible protection--do not deploy & resolve DNS, do not transfer source code ownership, do not relinquish copyright ownership, etc. until the final invoice is paid. And make sure it is written that way in a contract and that the client signs the contract before work commences.