Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #33563
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: JavaScript code security |
| From | "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> |
| References | (4 earlier) <ac0124ee-ead4-4bc9-91a8-c0d8cb16d673@googlegroups.com> <XnsA77F5D895B25Aeejj99@194.109.6.166> <5d5b9191-f328-48c2-906b-2cc714dbb2d9@googlegroups.com> <q9roic5gnv0duoub6t91an6cjrccktns7g@4ax.com> <11797668.dW097sEU6C@PointedEars.de> |
| Date | 2017-06-23 13:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA79D8AD80F2D1eejj99@194.109.6.166> (permalink) |
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote on 23 Jun 2017 in comp.lang.javascript: >>>All right. I'm going with the best practice of server side data >>>validation now. Thanks. > > JFTR: These approaches are not mutually exclusive. In fact, the best > server-side validation framework will also generate adequate client-side > validation code. Indeed, using the same [nonexistent] Javascript code both serverside and clientside pretty much insures validation goes the same way both before and after submission, when we ignore or heed the problem of different renderers. -- Evertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 13:02 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 13:11 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 17:56 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-05-24 02:44 +0100
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 19:06 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-24 09:11 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 05:56 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2017-05-29 14:57 -0400
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-30 09:41 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-06-23 10:53 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-06-23 13:38 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-05-24 14:28 +0100
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-24 18:07 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 06:01 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-05-24 14:19 +0100
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 10:01 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-24 19:18 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 11:39 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-24 23:07 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 14:26 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2017-05-25 16:26 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-24 01:12 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 17:15 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2017-05-24 04:14 +0200
Re: JavaScript code security justaguy <lichunshen84@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 19:47 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security Myers <xdaamanx@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 07:54 -0700
Re: JavaScript code security Myers <xdaamanx@gmail.com> - 2017-05-29 07:55 -0700
csiph-web