• 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

    • I don't believe them that anyone using threads, at least meaningfully. It's the same thing for Facebook, people just don't engage with Meta platforms like they are thinking. This isn't 2006.
    • Not taking AI slop on the go with me, hard pass for me.
    • Same Internet Archive seemed to grab the new version https://web.archive.org/web/20...d/Setup_MakeMKV_v1.18.4.exe Here's the link to an additional file it periodically downloads https://web.archive.org/web/20260213092148/https://www.makemkv.com/sdf.bin I think update's keys, etc. To manually trigger this update, put the sdf.bin file in the root of where the program is installed. When you launch the program it will pick up the file and import it. Typically put it here: C:\Program Files (x86)\MakeMKV\sdf.bin
    • Windows 11 KB5094126, KB5093998 bugging out Office apps but it may not be Microsoft's fault by Sayan Sen Microsoft last week released Windows 11 KB5094126 and KB5093998 as the latest Patch Tuesday updates. Following that the company also published the accompanying dynamic updates under KB5094149, KB5095971, and KB5094156. Although the tech giant did not acknowledge any major problems, some users online reported various issues ranging from OneDrive and Dropbox access problems, BitLocker recovery lockouts, to blue screens and BSODs. You can read about them in this dedicated piece. While there is still no confirmation about those problems from Microsoft the company has admitted to another bug which we did not report on. The tech giant has confirmed it has received reports of an issue in which certain third-party applications may be unable to launch Microsoft Office apps or open Office documents after installing the Patch Tuesday. This affects both Windows 11 as well as Windows 10. The company says the problem impacts a subset of applications that rely on OLE (Object Linking and Embedding) automation to communicate with Microsoft Office programs. According to Microsoft, affected scenarios involve third-party software attempting to open Office applications or documents from within their own interface. In such cases, the Office program may fail to launch altogether, or the requested document may not open. Oddly there may not be any error message, which probably makes the issue difficult to diagnose. The bug affects several Office products, including Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, and other apps in the Microsoft Office suite when they are launched through the affected software. These include tax and accounting software such as CCH Engagement and Workpaper Manager, dental practice management solutions like Dentrix and Softdent, as well as the popular research and reference management tool Zotero. Microsoft adds that other applications using similar Office integration methods could also experience the same problematic behavior. To understand the issue it is important to look at OLE, the Microsoft technology involved. OLE allows different applications to work together and share data, while its Automation feature lets one program control another. Thus this enables third-party software to launch Microsoft Office apps, open documents, and perform tasks automatically without requiring users to switch between programs. Because many accounting, healthcare, research, and business applications rely on OLE automation to interact with Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and other Office apps, any disruption can break those workflows. As a result, affected software may be unable to open Office documents or launch Office applications even though the programs themselves continue to work normally. At the moment the company has not provided a permanent fix though it has confirmed that engineers are actively working on a resolution, which will be delivered through a future Windows update. As such additional details will be shared once more information becomes available. In the meantime, Microsoft recommends a simple workaround for affected users whic is to open the Office application or document directly rather than launching it through the third-party program. For enterprise customers and organizations managing larger deployments, Microsoft says an additional mitigation is available. Admins experiencing the problem on their managed devices are advised to contact Microsoft Support for business to obtain and apply the workaround.
    • It saddens me when cars are such dull colours now. Mine is bright metallic blue and I absolutely adore it for standing out in contrast to that depressing backdrop of traffic.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Conversation Starter
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      Console General earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      184
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      106
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!