• 0

Prevent access to files using .htaccess


Question

Hi everyone,

I'm trying to use the .htaccess file to prevent type-in access to .js (javascript) files which are located in a /scripts folder

with:

<Files ~ "\.js$">
Order Deny,Allow
Deny from all
</Files>

I can block type-in access, but the pages cannot use the scripts. I add "Allow from 127.0.0.1" but no results.

I also tried:

Options +FollowSymlinks
RewriteEngine On

RewriteCond %{HTTP_REFERER} !^http://mydomain.* [NC]
RewriteRule .*\.(js)$ http://mydomain.com [R,L]

In this case, the scripts are functional, but the first time I type the location of .js file, I can get it open. Only when I refresh the page that I get redirected. I really can't understand why this happens...

I find this really useful to block hotlinks, but it's not always bloking type-in requests.

By the way, I have no access to apache configuration.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

The refer is the page/site that you came from to load the current page. When typing in the url, the refer i expect is going to be blank, however upon a refresh it seems that it is changed to the "previous" page displayed!

What your trying to do, afaik, isn't possible; however you go about trying to block access to the js files, they need to be sent to the browser, somehow, so it can use them, there's just no getting around it, however you do that, the code is going to have to be available to the browser for it to run it, and in doing so it automatically becomes accessible to the user too!

Think about it:

1) You could stick the js files in a dir outside of the web root, so they are inaccessible publicly, and then use a rewrite or php file to get to them, but that makes absolutely no difference...

2) You could encrypt them, and have a piece of unencrypted js that decrypts them and allows them to run; the average person couldn't see the code, but anyone with js skills could easily obtain a decrypted copy...

They have to be public one way or another, all you can do is make things a little more difficult, I'd just give up if I were you, it's not worth the effort ;)

  • 0

I utilize WHMCS which utilizes .TPL files.. The unfortunate part was that a user could access the filename.tpl file by typing it directly in (assuming they know the exact filename, which if you use the script, you know it..) Because of this when I was selling premium templates, some users were stealing it by simply manually going to all 40+ TPL files and seeing the hardcoded source..

To prevent them from access the TPLs BUT still allow them to be read by the server, I used the following:

 <Files "*.tpl">
Order Allow,Deny
Deny from All
</Files>

That sample tosses a 403 Forbidden when you access the file in any browser BUT the server can still access it. For example:

http://demo.mywhmcs.com/templates/portal/ -- This is a direct link to a template I'm not utilizing nor do I have it protected as it's a default template. Notice how you can see all TPL files (and others)

http://demo.mywhmcs.com/templates/macish -- This has an .htaccess file tossed into it preventing TPL files from being shown. Notice when you view http://demo.mywhmcs.com, you're able to view the site with NO issues despite the fact that everything is powered from TPL files.

BTW, ignore the **** design on there ;).

The reason why your snippet is not working is because the ORDER of the 1st line is crucial. You can read about it on apache.org. :)

Edit: Bah, I see it's for .js though--That's not possible, sorry! Same with not being able to do it with CSS, etc.

  • 0

As far as I know, if it needs to be downloaded to the client, you can't restrict direct access since that's how the browser will obtain it too, as theblazingangel said.

There are a couple of ways you could go about making it hard though:

  1. Try Google's "Closure" compiler which will optimize, and then obfuscate (as a result of optimization), your JavaScript and make it hard for humans to read. This is the easiest and probably the optimal solution.
  2. Try loading your scripts through a PHP file that detects whether or not the request was automated by the browser loading the script, or manual by a human trying to view it. I still don't know if its possible like this, but its perhaps worth looking into if you're THAT concerned.

  • 0

The key here is understanding the difference between server side and client side code. Server side code can - and should - be 100% hidden from the user. This includes PHP, .NET, and all that kind of stuff.

JavaScript, on the other hand, is like HTML and CSS. It needs to be read by the browser - and if the browser needs to read it, humans who are interested in reading it will be able to. There isn't a way to block access to JS files, because if humans can't access it, browsers won't either ;)

  • 0

Thank you all for the answers!

I thought there was some variable (like HTTP_REFERER) that saves the url from the address bar, so I could compare it, and if ends with .js or any other file i wish to prevent typed-in access, i redirect to an error page. If the request for the file came from the browser or the server, no action is taken.

This means i can't prevent typed-in access to .js .css .txt or image files that will be used by the browser?

  • 0

Thank you all for the answers!

I thought there was some variable (like HTTP_REFERER) that saves the url from the address bar, so I could compare it, and if ends with .js or any other file i wish to prevent typed-in access, i redirect to an error page. If the request for the file came from the browser or the server, no action is taken.

This means i can't prevent typed-in access to .js .css .txt or image files that will be used by the browser?

the referrer header tells you the page the user came from. in other words, the page they were previously on, not the current one.

it is extremely unreliable since it is easily spoofed (just like all browser headers), and very often is simply empty because a) the user didn't visit anything before your page; or b) more likely, their browser/security software is configured not to send any referrers, for privacy/security reasons.

for future reference, if you're writing anything that does anything at all, never rely on anything the user sends to you.

you can prevent type-in access to the files, but it's pointless since you will eventually be sending the whole content to the user anyways. say, for example, you put all your files in a directory that's forbidden to the public, and have a php script which reads the files and serves it back if a certain variable exists, and you set the variable in the index file. this way you've effectively prevented type-in access in the strict sense, but the php script is still giving the user an exact copy of the file. this is useful in some circumstances, but not very many, and it certainly won't protect the contents of your files. anything that you have to send to the user, can't be protected.

I can protect a folder or have a login check to a page, but I can't protect .js or image files from direct download, just hotlinks?

hotlink "protection" also relies on referrer headers, it's much more trouble than it's worth.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Microsoft fixes one of Excel Copilot's most frustrating limitations by Usama Jawad Microsoft began integrating Copilot into Excel a couple of years ago and has been upgrading it with new functionalities since then. While some changes have been controversial, Microsoft is hoping to win over users by allowing them to be more productive via Copilot. To that end, it has now announced a Copilot improvement that may actually be appreciated by people who use it regularly. Excel customers often use the Copilot prompt box to issue instructions to format and customize their data, but it can become quite tiring to keep repeating the same instructions again and again. Microsoft now allows you to define Copilot personalization rules for formatting, naming conventions, formulas, and report styles. These can be accessed via Settings > Personalization, where you can explain your rules in natural language like "Always format currency in USD with no decimals", and just let Copilot take care of the rest. Microsoft is going a step further in this direction by allowing you to set workbook rules too. These rules are stored as a .Rules sheet, and are preserved while the workbook is shared. This fosters collaboration while making sure that standard rules govern the Copilot editing experience across the organization. Other advantages of this capability include pointing it to specific examples, defining dynamic formulas, and referencing an entire sheet and asking Copilot to infer rules based on that. You can leverage this feature by opening Copilot in Excel, clicking on "+", and selecting Create workbook rules. If you have an existing .Rules sheet, you can simply start listing the rules in column A as well. Personalization features are available to all Copilot in Excel users across the web, Mac, and Windows. Meanwhile, workbook rules are currently being previewed for Windows and Mac customers on the Insiders channel. General availability is scheduled after a few weeks, but a concrete date is currently unknown. Overall, the Excel capability is quite similar to ChatGPT's memory features, which allow you to permanently store items in the AI model's context window.
    • Imagine you still haven't discovered Total Commander that is doing all those things for three decades already...
    • This sounds like underneath the nice marketing spin, either someone at Adobe got tired of their lazy devs and asked Microsoft to help them sort at least some of Adobe's ancestral spaghetti code to make it go faster, or Microsoft wanted Adobe's crap to run better on Windows to make it look better when compared to Apple, so they offered to intervene. Either way, GOOD.
    • My favorite file manager for Windows 11 finally gets a long-requested feature by Taras Buria Files is among the best File Explorer alternatives for Windows 10 and 11. This free app is packed with all sorts of features and conveniences, but there is one crucial feature that is still missing—Tree View. Fortunately, the latest update in the Preview channel finally delivers it. With version 4.1.4, which is now available for download in the Preview channel, developers implemented Tree View, a new mode that displays folders in an expandable hierarchy. Windows 11's stock File Explorer always had this feature, but it was nowhere to be found in Files until now. Starting with the latest preview update, you can expand each drive and its nested folders without leaving the current location and then open the folder you need in the main view. To try Tree View in Files, update the app to the latest preview version, then click the small arrow next to a drive to expand its content. The developers say they are rolling out Tree View in Preview first to gather feedback from users and improve the feature before bringing it to all in the stable channel. In addition to Tree View, Files 4.1.14 improves the Windows Fonts folder. You can now preview each font directly in Files with no need to open the built-in font viewer. For now, these two features are only available in the Preview channel. For those using the stable release, developers recently released version 4.1.3, with improvements for the built-in tag system, on-demand folder size calculation, and plenty of various fixes. You can check out the full release notes here. You can download Files from the Microsoft Store (paid version) or its official website (free).
    • Who is paying for this 30x scale-up? Its sounds expensive.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      174
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      90
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      81
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!