On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:40 PM, sebastian.zim<sebastian....@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Anything that makes it harder to reverse engineer (even if it doesn't > make too much difference) is a good thing for security.
This is so ludicrous that I don't know what to say, other than to recommend you go read on 'security through obscurity'. uriel > > On Aug 24, 12:33 pm, Uriel <lost.gob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Aaron Boodman<a...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:13 PM, >> > If you really do want this, you have the option to include NPAPI >> > plugins in your extension written in native code. Those are a lot >> > harder to reverse engineer. >> >> They still can be reverse engineered easily enough, and anyone that >> relies on this for security, or for anything else, deserves to be >> fired on the spot for being totally incompetent. >> >> uriel >> >> >> >> >> >> > But the JavaScript, HTML, and CSS in Chromium extensions will never be >> > obfuscated. Any compilation will just be an optimization, and >> > transparent to the developer. >> >> > - a > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-extensions" group. To post to this group, send email to chromium-extensions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to chromium-extensions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-extensions?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
