-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hassan,
On 3/10/2010 10:50 AM, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Christopher Schultz
> wrote:
>
>> Just for the sake of mental mast... er, fun! you could write a
>> javascript event handler that ...
>
> ..would work until t
Christopher Schultz wrote:
...
Just for the sake of mental mast... er, fun! you could write a
javascript event handler that watched for un-focus events for the page
(which would likely happen if you were using an external utility to take
a screenshot)
Actually it doesn't. On my PC, I use Irfa
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Christopher Schultz
wrote:
>> Just for the sake of mental mast... er, fun! you could write a
>> javascript event handler that ...
>..would work until the user switched off JavaScript? or kicked off
`wget`
>with the image URL? :-)
... or someone is using screen
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Christopher Schultz
wrote:
> Just for the sake of mental mast... er, fun! you could write a
> javascript event handler that ...
..would work until the user switched off JavaScript? or kicked off `wget`
with the image URL? :-)
--
Hassan Schroeder -
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter,
On 3/10/2010 10:37 AM, Peter Crowther wrote:
> On 10 March 2010 15:30, János Löbb wrote:
>
>> When I use the DVD Player from Apple, I cannot take a screenshot even if I
>> click myself to the Finder first. So there is something already in pr
Peter Crowther wrote:
On 10 March 2010 15:30, János Löbb wrote:
When I use the DVD Player from Apple, I cannot take a screenshot even if I
click myself to the Finder first. So there is something already in practice
that prevents from taking a screenshot :-)
Yes - for an application that runs
On 10 March 2010 15:30, János Löbb wrote:
> When I use the DVD Player from Apple, I cannot take a screenshot even if I
> click myself to the Finder first. So there is something already in practice
> that prevents from taking a screenshot :-)
>
> Yes - for an application that runs as a process on
On Mar 9, 2010, at 9:35 AM, David kerber wrote:
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: Secured photo rendering
But it should not, if the server sends the image with the
appropriate
"no caching" and/or "expires" HTTP header
Joseph Morgan wrote:
I think the OP is asking how to prevent an image from being cached by a
client and, I cannot imagine there is a way if the image is to display in a
client at all, the image is now there, and the client can do anything it
wants...
But it should not, if the server sen
Everyone is right... but... I think the OP has to better describe the need at
hand.
-Original Message-
From: David kerber [mailto:dcker...@verizon.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 8:35 AM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Secured photo rendering
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
>>
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: Secured photo rendering
But it should not, if the server sends the image with the appropriate
"no caching" and/or "expires" HTTP headers.
The headers don't matter, since the cli
> From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
> Subject: Re: Secured photo rendering
>
> But it should not, if the server sends the image with the appropriate
> "no caching" and/or "expires" HTTP headers.
The headers don't matter, since the client has th
being cached, right?
-Original Message-
From: Martin Gainty [mailto:mgai...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:11 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: RE: Secured photo rendering
the easiest implementation would be
develop a security fence for your front end (https with secure
Joseph Morgan wrote:
> I think the OP is asking how to prevent an image from being cached by
a client and, I cannot imagine there is a way if the image > is to
display in a client at all, the image is now there, and the client can
do anything it wants...
>
>>But it should not, if the server s
David kerber wrote:
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
Subject: Re: Secured photo rendering
But it should not, if the server sends the image with the appropriate
"no caching" and/or "expires" HTTP headers.
The headers don't mat
Is there a way to show the photo only thru the
> page? somehow secure the photo? Thanks,
>
> Angelo
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Secured-photo-rendering-tp27829228p27829228.html
> Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Angelo,
On 3/8/2010 6:22 PM, Angelo Chen wrote:
> As I notice, the photo rendering usually uses file system/Apache to speed up
> displaying
Where did you notice this? I can't imagine that Apache [httpd] improves
the performance of rendering an image.
message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Secured-photo-rendering-tp27829228p27829228.html
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional
18 matches
Mail list logo
