Overkill. Just pay for a good host that is widely used, encrypt your sensitive data and don't over engineer things for a "what if" scenario.
The problem with client side encryption is that if you are eavesdropping, you have everything you need to break the encryption. Client side encryption requires sending keys to the client, which is a no-no. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Davej <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Peter <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> windows 2008 server license is too expensive, if I use asp.net to > >>> develop a "public website" with 5 servers hosting it. I need to pay > >>> $2000 (for server license)+$1999 (for external connector) for each > >>> server. I need to invest totally $20000 USD for the license. > >>> That's why asp.net is not good for starting a public website. > >>> thanks > >>> from Peter ([email protected]) > >> > >> On Feb 14, 4:49 pm, Jamie Fraser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Which is why most people start off by using external hosting. > > > > On Feb 14, 11:51 pm, lauhw <[email protected]> wrote: > > One of my customer almost fainted when he saw my proposal on the IIS > > solution. The final decision is external hosting and taking up some of > > the risk on the data piracy. > > > > Could client-side scripting encrypt/decrypt the data so that an > insecure host could safely store the data? Is that approach practical? >
