Hello Jacqueline, Richard, Mike, Pierre, and Phil,
Thank you for your helpful thoughts on web code security. I think I’ll
prototype with a combination of stacks for sensitive things (I’ll do some
homework on where to place the stacks and how to refer to them) and embedded
lines for innocuous t
On 4/21/12 11:19 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Gregory Lypny wrote:
> In developing a site using LiveCode server, I’d be interested in your
> thoughts on keeping prying eyes away from LiveCode scripts. I
> imagine that keeping the scripts in files and stacks, as opposed to
> embedded in web pages,
Conformed : LC server can handle stack's libs saved under up to the 5.0.2
version of LC
Le 21 avr. 2012 à 20:24, Mike Bonner a écrit :
> Plus you can put any included library files or stacks outside the webserver
> document root so they can only be hit indirectly.
>
> Be careful if you use a l
Plus you can put any included library files or stacks outside the webserver
document root so they can only be hit indirectly.
Be careful if you use a library stack made with 5.5 and save it in the
legacy format. I don't believe the current lc server can load up 5.5
stacks.
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at
Gregory Lypny wrote:
> In developing a site using LiveCode server, I’d be interested in your
> thoughts on keeping prying eyes away from LiveCode scripts. I
> imagine that keeping the scripts in files and stacks, as opposed to
> embedded in web pages, is the best thing.
Why not?
Jacque's right
On 4/21/12 1:02 PM, Gregory Lypny wrote:
Hello everyone,
In developing a site using LiveCode server, I’d be interested in your
thoughts on keeping prying eyes away from LiveCode scripts. I
imagine that keeping the scripts in files and stacks, as opposed to
embedded in web pages, is the best thi
Hello everyone,
In developing a site using LiveCode server, I’d be interested in your thoughts
on keeping prying eyes away from LiveCode scripts. I imagine that keeping the
scripts in files and stacks, as opposed to embedded in web pages, is the best
thing.
Gregory
