I intend to make some software to be sold over internet. I've only created open-source before, so I have really no idea of how to protect it from being cracked and distributed as warez. Bearing in mind that I know like two programms that aren't either cracked or not really useful I decided that the only more or less reliable way may look like this:
Connect to a server and provide licensing info and some sort of hardware summary info
If everything is fine, the server returns some crucial missing parts of the program bound to that certain pc along with the usage limit of say 2 days
That crucial stuff is not saved to hard drive, so it is downloaded every time the program starts, if the programm runs more than 2 days, data is downloaded again
If the same info is used from different computers, suspend the customer account
What do you think about this? It may seem a bit to restrictive, but I'd better make less sales at first then eventually see my precious killer app downloaded for free. Anyways, first I need some basic theory/tutorials/guides about how to ensure that user only uses a certain Java app if he has paid for it, so please suggest some.
Thanks
I work for a company selling protected Java software.
I won't comment on the scheme for user authentication, but I can comment on the online license check.
Don't make it even "work for two days": that's how I pirate most software... Virtual Machine set "back in time" and externally firewalled so that it doesn't "phone home" anymore (that is: only allowing it to contact the server once, to get the trial key), always reimaged from the point where the software got freshly installed and bingo, the 30-days trial (or two days trial) has become a lifetime trial. Why do I do this? To learn how to better protect our app of course ;) (ok, ok, I do it just for fun too)
What we do in our commercial Java software is to check the license at every startup.
We've got hundreds of customers and nobody ever bitched about it. Not once. We generate a unique class at each run, which is different at every run, which depends both on things unique for that launch on the client side and on things generated once on the server side.
In addition to that having the app contact your server at every launch is a great way to gather analytics: download to trial ratio, nb average launches per trial, etc. And it's not nasty anymore than having an Urchin/Google JavaScript tracker on each webpage is nasty.
Simply make it clear to people that your software performs the online licence check: we'got a huge checkbox either on or off saying: "Online licence verification: OK/Failed". And that's it. People know there's a check. If they don't like it, they go use inferior competitor products and life is good.
People are used to live in a wired world.
How often can you not access GMail because your Internet connection is down? How often can you not access FaceBook or SO because your Internet connection is down?
Point is: make as much computation as possible dependent on the server side:
licence check
save user preferences
backup of the data generated by your app
etc.
Nobody will complain. You'll have 0.1% of your user complain and anyway you don't want these users: they're the one who would complain about other things and post negative feedback about your app online. You better have them not to use your software at all and complain about the fact that it requires an always-on Internet connection (which 99.99% of your target demographic and hence they won't care about the complain) rather than actually have them use the app, and complain about other things related to your app.
Regarding decompiling, .class can usually be decompiled back to .java unless you're using a code flow obfuscator that produces valid bytecode but that it impossible to be generated from .java file (hence it is impossible to get back a valid .java file).
String obfuscator helps make it harder to figure out.
Source code obfuscator helps make it harder to figure out.
Bytecode obfuscator like the free Proguard makes it harder (and produce faster code, especially noticeable in the mobile world) to figure out.
If you're shipping Windows/Linux only then you can use a Java-to-native converter like Excelsior Jet (not free and kinda expensive for startups, but it produces native code from which you simply cannot find the .java files back).
As a funny side note you'll see people trying to mess with your online server... At about 30 beta-testers we had already people (which we know where part of the trial) trying to pirate our online servers.
I am sorry to turn you down, but first you should have an idea of what you want to build; then you should prove that your idea not only works, but is also loved by users to the point where they want to pirate it. Thirdly, you have to make sure that the time you are investing in making it "secure" is actually worth the value of the application.
If you sell it for a dollar, and you only sell ten copies, and you spent 100 hours making it secure, you do the math and tell me if your time was worth that little money.
The take-home message here is: everything can be cracked or copied. At the end there are much brighter people than us doing this (iPhone cracking, digital TV, games, etc) and nobody found the silver bullet. Only thing you can do is make it harder to crack your application (often at the expenses of usability, ease of installation, and by cutting corners for some use scenarios). Asking yourself if it's worth the hassle it's always a good starting point.
Don't bother.
The gaming industry has been battling piracy for decades. Online multiplayer games with a central server typically require a subscription to play. That model is fairly resistant to piracy. Pretty much all other games are heavily pirated, despite innumerable attempts at DRM.
Your app will be cracked and pirated, no matter what language you write it in and what tools you use to prevent it. If your DRM actually works, the people who would have pirated it still won't buy it. Furthermore, legitimate users will prefer other products that don't have intrusive DRM. If there are no competing products and yours has any market to speak of, someone will create one.
Unless your application is specifically web based your users will find it to be a huge hassle to require an internet connection in order that they might access the product. What you are suggesting will work, unless it gets broken, like all DRM systems do. I understand the want to protect your intellectual property, but with many companies as examples, these systems are usually broken or the product does much worse because of them.
I have really no idea of how to
protect it from being cracked and
distributed as warez.
First, you'd be better choosing a language besides Java, if this is a concern. This is why C++ is still alive and well in the commercial apps world. Unless you are going to use an actual Java compiler to native exe, I'd reconsider Java for IP protection reasons.
For that matter, even C++ isn't impervious to cracking, but IP prorection vs. cracking are two separate, important concerns.
That's a really tricky task, especially with something running in a VM.
I would say you might be thinking in the right direction. Obfuscating it to make it reasonably hard to modify might prevent people from circumventing the built in licence checks.
However, ultimately, if your application is self-contained, it will always be crackable. If you can build it so that it uses services you provide, than you can probably command it's use.
To paraphrase a Mr Jeff Atwood, it is better to make it easier for your customer to pay you than it is to crack your app. In other words, I think you are attacking the wrong problem. Make buying your product REALLY easy and then your customers won't feel they need to go to the effort of cracking it.
I would have a look at the backlash from the game Spore before deciding on a licensing scheme. They had it phone home, and only allowed so-many installations, etc. etc. etc. Spore was supposed to be their "Killer App" and it really had a hard time simply because of the licensing. You say you are willing to have fewer sales than see people using it for free, but you may want to be careful what you ask for. I was really looking forward to spore (and so were my children) but I never did buy it because of the DRM scheme.
No matter what you do, it'll be cracked in very short order especially if the program really is worth anything.
If you do go with a licensing scheme, make it simple and usable so you are not punishing those that have actually paid for your software. Also, I would avoid any phone-home style checks, that way your customers will be able to continue to use the software even if you don't want to keep paying for that domain 3 years from now.
I see a specific weakness in your example, besides the comment most people already put in that DRM is hard(impossible) to implement and often simple to circumvent.
In your second point:
If everything is fine, the server
returns some crucial missing parts of
the program bound to that certain pc
along with the usage limit of say 2
days
This 2 (or X) days limit will most likely be extremely simple to circumvent, this would just a few minutes to find and patch (crack).
If you really want to have a DRM model the only reasonable way to go is to put at significant part of the application as a web service and require constant connection from the users.
Before you try any of this, be sure to read Exploiting Software and you will think twice before trying to do DRM.
I think, given the context, the most effective form of protection for now would be the limited demo/license key approach: it would give people time to fall in love with your application so that they are willing to pay for it, yet prevent casual copying.
Once you know that your app hit it big, and that crackers provably siphon off a significant portion of your possible earnings, then you can still add additional checks.
Another thing to consider is where your app is going to be used: if it's something people would put on the their laptops to use on the go, network connectivity is not a given.
That is some of the harshest DRM I've ever heard of, your users would hate it.
Also, keep in mind that there are a lot of good Java decompilers out there due to the nature of the language and someone determined enough could just find areas of the program dealing with your DRM and bypass/disable it then recompile it (according to this a recompilation would be unrealistic)... so you would even have to go out of your way to implement your code as complex as possible to prevent a hacker from being successful. (Which could be done with one of those code obfuscation tools they may have out there.)
As long as it's an Internet application, you could restrict it in that manner. Short of cracking the program, this would work fine except for replay attacks.
For example, if I can capture the traffic that is going to your server, and simply replay it back to my program each time, I'm still good. For example, I could create my own "web server" and ensure the program hits that instead of your server.
You should read "Surreptitious Software" from Collberg and Nagra. This book is really good to help you understand how software protection mechanisms work (such as Code obfuscation, watermarking, birthmarking, etc...).
As lorenzog said, total security doesn't exist and software security is like a constant race between software vendors and pirates.
You should use cheap obfuscating transformations (so the overhead they incur isn't killing the performances) to prevent as many attackers (remember most of them are script kiddies) as possible to "steal" your killer algorithms or any secret data.
If you're willing to push the security further you can birthmark your algorithms and watermark your copies in order to find who leaked your creation. But even if you do, this doesn't mean your software is 100% secured. Plus the time you'll spend adding these mechanisms might not be worth the effort.
These concepts are really well explained in the book I mentioned before which is worth reading.
If I had enough reputation points, I'd vote this question down. Commercial software protection is a waste of time, money, and effort for many reasons. Concentrate on making a piece of software worth buying. If your software is popular enough to maintain wide seeding by pirates, you're probably successful enough at that point that you won't even worry about piracy. Anyway, crackers crack software protection mostly for fun. The stronger your protection, the better the challenge it presents and the more they want to crack it. Your best effort will cost you thousands, take months, and be cracked in only days.
Related
I need some guidance in terms of the technology stack to choose for simple small business websites. I've had experience in .NET and Java for the back end. Occasionally worked with some Wordpress sites. I never did much development in PHP and so never was a big fan of Wordpress. But I always have people around me that want a website for their small business or just family and friends. At this point, I'm thinking do I just give into the who LAMP stack and start learning it as I don't see any open source good/easy solutions in Java and .Net or I should say that there are options but not sure if they can be a good replacement for
Wordpress. Ideally I would like to keep developing in Java.
I already have so much on my plate that I want to learn and adding the LAMP stack just makes my goals even difficult.
Any advice?
Thanks
For most sites, you don't need to touch L, A or M.
What little PHP (if any) you'll need to set up a normal WP site for a small business, personal homepage, blog etc pp, I'm sure you won't have any trouble dealing with.
Almost all database interaction is (or should be...) done via WP's functions, so you don't even need to learn about MySQL's intricacies.
I say go for it. I've never liked PHP or WP either, but it's just so easy to get something running with WP, and it's very hacky, inviting you to build something that just works. I wouldn't choose WP if somebody asked me for a solution that he wishes to use continuously for the next 20 years, but honestly, most sites I see get relaunched every 3-5 years.
Plus the WP eco system is huge, there are lots of plugins (of variable quality, granted), so lots of things are already solved and just a few clicks away from being deployed in your site. And it's not made for developers but for users, so developers usually have no problem quickly getting things done.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Let's assume that after a few years of work I would have a 3D game ready, that can be downloaded by millions of people worldwide, it would be a game running on a client-server model.
As far as I understand anyone can look at other people's source code if they possess the .jar (the client one in this case). What are the risks of other people having a client .jar?
The checking part (anti-cheating) will be done on the server side anyway, so I doubt there will be much risk here, but I'm just wanting to have a good view of what can exactly happen, so to be more precise I'm asking the following questions:
What can be done to protect, let's say, client.jar from other people reading the code?
What is the harm that even if people would have full control to the client.jar source code, could be done to the game itself in a singleplayer environment?
What is the same harm that could be done in a client-server multiplayer environment?
What is the harm that could be done to me/my business on a personal and/or legal level?
What could if other people decide to copy the game, okay I know this can also happen if others just build their own game 1:1 mirrorred to my game.
I thought about putting it up on gamedev, but I think it's better suited here as it is directly about a programming language - Java - and an abstract programming problem.
On this one, I should emphasize that all opinions are my own and do NOT necessarily reflect those of my employer.
No, they can't look at your source code if they've got the jar. They can decompile it into equivalent source code, which will be significantly harder to read but can be figured out... just as they could dis-assemble object code (which would, admittedly, be a bit harder to figure out). Code obfuscation will indeed slow them down, but the folks who would do this are used to dealing with that too. Java is more vulnerable than some other languages to being reverse-engineered.
Copy protection generally works only to keep honest people honest. Luckily, most folks are at least moderately honest. The dishonest treat it as a free puzzle included with your product. You can slow them down. But realistically, you can't stop them unless you use specific kinds of hardware-assisted security (basically, running critical parts of the program inside a separate encapsulated machine) -- which tends to drive the cost up and/or annoy people enough that they avoid your product. Most companies have instead moved to a model of requiring that code be registered in order to get upgrades, support, online services, or whatever... and to either pricing it with the assumption that some piracy is going to occur, or pricing low enough that pirating it just isn't worthwhile.
Or, for commercial code, going after the pirated copies in court. For serious code, most companies are very aware that they have much more to lose by allowing a pirated copy onto the premises than they can save by pirating; I've seen employees fired on the spot for making a pirated copy at work.
In fact some companies have made "pirating" part of their business model. "If you got this program from a friend, and you like it, please consider sending us money to support the developers and/or buying an upgrade to the current version." Surprisingly, for good products, many folks are perfectly willing to pay voluntarily. Not everyone, but it helps.
Addressing your questions about alteration of the code:
I AM NOT A LAWYER, AND YOU SHOULD CONSULT ONE FOR THIS QUESTION, but my best understanding is that you have no new liability. If they mess up the code, that's their fault and their problem.
In a singleplayer environment, all they can do is mess with their own copy. If they break it, that's their problem. If they cheat, they're only cheating themselves out of the gaming experience they paid for.
Multiplayer is a much larger problem; if they reverse-engineer the game they can mess with your databases and other player's experience of the game. The only way to solve this, as far as I know, is to design your servers to (a) only allow the client to do things which can't cause much damage, and (b) watch player actions to try to detect abuse and kick abusing players out of the system. It's annoying, but it's the reality. And if you can show that you've made a reasonable effort to do this, it should guard you against any possible liability at this level.... but again, I AM NOT A LAWYER and free legal advice from programmers is like free programming advice from lawyers...
Building their own game mirroring yours: If you can detect that they're accessing your servers, that's legally actionable. If you've got something as simple as Tetris or Minehunter then you're going to get knock-offs and unless you're willing to go after them in court there isn't much you can do about it except by offering upgrades and so on to registered players that the knock-offs won't get. if you've written something complicated, then for the effort of duplicating yours they could create their own so this is less likely to be a problem than pure piracy is.
And as far as industrial-level piracy in the far east etc... Again, there really isn't a good answer.
If you find a solution that actually works, THAT should be your product; the world will beat a path to your door. But in the long run, I really don't think it's possible; all you can do is slow them down and use copyright and license agreements, and build a loyal enough fan base that they'd rather work with you than against you.
What can be done to protect, let's say, client.jar from other people reading the code?
Obfuscate the code, it makes reading the code harder but not impossible.
What is the harm that even if people would have full control to the client.jar source code, could be done to the game itself in a singleplayer environment?
They'll have control over everything (change anything they like), I have no idea how would that effect your game, business wise. but many games offer ways to change the game environment and that makes the game more desirable by players.
What is the same harm that could be done in a client-server multiplayer environment?
It will make it easier to reverse engineer the game protocol and you'll start having [BOTs] instead of real players play the game, besides any constraint imposed by the game UI will be rendered useless.
What is the harm that could be done to me/my business on a personal and/or legal level?
Depends how you monetize and in what country do you operate (local lows). I think you should consult a legal expert on this one.
"anyone can look at other people's source code if they possess the .jar" - this is not true. You can create special jar with the source code, but you are not obliged to do so in order to run a program. The program may contain only "binary jar" - that is, containing compiled java code and/or resources, no source. Corrected: since binary code can be decompiled back to java code (for example, with http://jd.benow.ca/ ), it will be important to obfuscate or encrypt the compiled code ( google for JODE, RetroGuard, etc.)
What can be done to protect, let's say, client.jar from other people reading the code?
you can create "thin client", that does nothing, but downloads the main code from the designated server. Of course, you'll have to protect traffic and use such key authentication that makes it impossible to trick client into using fake server.
What is the harm that even if people would have full control to the client.jar source code
that assume you don't give source-code level control to anyone
What is the same harm that could be done in a client-server multiplayer environment?
bots and DOS-attacks at least
What is the harm that could be done to me/my business on a personal and/or legal level?
it depends on concrete implementation and business model
What could if other people decide to copy the game, okay I know this can also happen if others just build their own game 1:1 mirrorred to my game.
If your client program is reverse-engineered, than hardly you can protect it from copying. Otherwise you should implement such network protocol, that makes copy impossible/useless.
The Security and Design guidelines go to great length outlining various methods to make it more difficult for an attacker to compromise in-app billing implementation.
Especially noted is how easy it is to reverse-engineer a .apk file, even if obfuscated via Proguard. So they even recommend modifying all sample application code, especially "known entry points and exit points".
What I find missing is any reference to the wrapping certain verification methods in a single method, like the static Security.verify() which returns boolean: A good design practice (reducing code duplication, reusable, easier to debug, self-documenting, etc.) but all an attacker needs to do now is identify that method and make it always return true... So regardless how many times I used it, delayed or not delayed, randomly or not, it simply doesn't matter.
On the other hand, Java doesn't have macros like in C/C++, which allows reducing source code duplication, but doesn't have a single exit point for a verify() function.
So my questions:
Is there an inherent contention between the well known software engineering/coding practices and design for so called security? (in the context of Java/Android/secure transactions at least)
What can be done to mitigate the side-effects of "design for security" which seems like "shooting oneself in the foot" in terms of over-complicating software that could have been simpler, more maintainable and easier to debug?
Can you recommend good sources for further studying this subject?
As usual, it's a tradeoff. Making your code harder to reverse-engineer/crack involves making it less readable and harder to maintain. You decide how far to go, based on your intended user base, your own skills in the area, time/cost, etc. This is not specific to Android. Watch this Google I/O presentation for various stages of obfuscating and making your code tamper resistant. Then decide how far you are willing to go for your own apps.
On the other hand, you don't have to obfuscate/harden, etc. all of your code, just the part that deals with licensing, etc. That is usually a very small part of the whole codebase and doesn't really need to change that often, so you could probably live with it being hard to follow/maintain, etc. Just keep some notes on how it works, so you remind yourself 2 years later :).
The counter productivity you are describing is the tip of the iceberg... No software is 100% bug-free on release, so what do you do when users start reporting problems?
How do you troubleshoot or debug field problems after you disabled logging, stack tracing and all kinds of other information that help reverse-engineers but also help the legitimate development team?
However tough the obfuscation methods are, there is always a way to reverse engineer them. I mean, if your software gets more popular among the hakers community, eventually someone will try to reverse-engineer it.
Obfuscation is just a method to make the process of reverse engineering tougher. So is packing. I think many packing methods are available, but so is the process to reverse-engineer them.
You can check the www.tuts4you.com to see how tons of guides are being available.
I am not an expert like many others, but this is my experience in the process of learning reverse-engineering. Also recently I have seen a lot of guides for Android applications reverse-engineering. I have seen even in nullc0n (not sure) CTF, there was an app in Reversing Android. If you want, I can mention the site after searching.
I need some tips on how to authenticate licenses (user / license key ) .
Is it better to do what many games do, which is validating the cd key from company servers. Is there a guide on how to implement this without becoming "cracked" or "patched" ?
OR is it better to just validate user / license key within the software ? Would you not see keygens floating around the net after a while ?
Please advise.
How much is your program selling for, and how many sales do you expect to get? If either answer is below 50, then very likely you shouldn't over-think it. Yes you can decompile Java, but if you are selling to a handful of people you know, they won't have the knowledge to do so (or they would have done it themselves). Games get cracked because millions of people want to play it. Some random program you are trying to sell for $10 or whatever should slip under the radar :) And if it does get cracked, release a version 2.0 with better protection...
If you do it client side then the code can be decompiled and the algorithm learned. Keeping it on the server side prevents that.
If you simply return "true/false" type of thing a proxy server could be developed that simply returns "true" all the time so the client thinks it is enabled when it wasn't.
You will need to do the work on the server and provide some means of encryption for the network communication.
Even then it is still possible to defeat such a scheme (I won't go into the details, but pretty much all apps that do this sort of thing are defeatable). To really make this work you have to do some of the actual work on the server instead of the client so that the results cannot simply be faked.
Is there a guide on how to implement this without becoming "cracked" or "patched" ?
Nothing you can do will make it impossible for someone to crack your license key system. The more popular your program is, the more likely it is that people will attempt a crack, and someone will succeed.
I'm not sure that you will find a good publicly available guide on how to make cracking difficult, because such a document would also give the crackers lots of clues for their cracking efforts. (Software DRM is a perpetual arms race between the "good guys" and the "bad guys".)
IMO, it is simply not worth trying to get every last drop of revenue for your software. Those cracked keys don't really represent lost sales. The chances are that the people who use them wouldn't buy your software anyway. Just write them off as a revenue source, and focus your efforts on making your software a good experience for the honest people who have bought a license. (The worst thing you can do is to use some DRM scheme that makes life difficult for honest customers!!)
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
What do you do when your manager wants you to implement something in a quick and dirty way and you just know it's going to backfire?
My manager wants me to develop a web app for a client and to do it as quickly as possible. This is the first web app we're building for this client, and I think it's important that we do it right so that we will be able to build upon it when they inevitably ask us to enhance it or create a new one.
I'd like to spend some time setting up a framework (even if it's just something simple like Stripes), and configuring tomcat to use DBCP. I also think we should be using css templates, and giving at least a minimum amount of thought to the presentation and design of the app as, in my opinion, nothing looks quite as unprofessional as a poorly designed web page (unless it's an email with really bad grammar).
The problem is not so much that we're under pressure to get this done, but more that my manager does not feel he can justify billing extra hours for something he himself does not consider a necessity. His "just get it done ASAP" approach has already backfired a few times - once, for example, he told me not to design the code to handle a certain error situation as it was very unlikely to occur, and then when it did occur it was a big mess (that I had to clean up).
So what do I do? Do I really do it "quick and dirty"? Do I decide that the quickest way is to do it right and deal with the fallout if it takes me longer than he had hoped? Part of the issue here is that while I have done web development in the past, it's always been within an existing framework, so setting up a framework from scratch involves a learning curve for me.
Keep in mind that in his point of view, billing lots of hours makes the sale less appealing to the customer. This could be a good marketing approach (even if it's a horrible design decision) to write it quick and dirty now so the client likes it, and when they want changes he can bill more hours in the future because now he has the client "in his net".
But my advice is: look around you, he's in charge, so do it his way otherwise you're only creating problems for yourself. If you want to do things right, become the boss or find another company that does believe in doing things the right way. But simply going against the grain will only get you fired or in the doghouse with this guy, this is how life works.
Do quick and dirty. That's what they want, that's what they're willing to pay for. Take the money and deliver that.
Later, when the system is unmanageable because it's complete and utter chaos in there, and the client is in a position to want and pay for a robust, well-engineered solution, take the money and deliver that.
See, you get paid twice!
Furthermore, a crap solution will end up with some ongoing manual processes. These can be charged for. You get paid again!
No wonder your manager likes that approach!
In spite of the risks, I'll offer a management perspective on this. :-)
One challenge I've had with some team members is that they sometimes have a hard time seeing the big picture. That's obviously a statement that developers can make about their managers too--certainly managers (especially nontechnical managers) can fail to appreciate how hasty decisions now will lead to problems later. But I'll repeat that it's not just managers who can miss the big picture. Developers can too.
One time my team was supposed to develop a simple demo, and I had two people working on it. This was in all likelihood a throwaway demo. Was there some chance that we might end up keeping it and elaborating it? Sure. The chance was even decent--maybe (just making up a number here) 25% just for argument's sake. After nearly a month there was no deliverable and finally I called BS. It turned out that the developers were "engineering" the thing. Setting it up to be modular, pluggable, testable, etc. I told them to stop and I wrote the demo myself in a single afternoon. The "big picture" was to deliver a proof of concept to the customer quickly, and if for whatever reason we decided that we wanted the demo to evolve into an actual piece of production software--fine--in the worst case we throw away a single afternoon's worth of "hard work". And that was the worst case. It wasn't like I was able to make a few hundred lines of code that complicated.
No doubt sometimes managers make bad calls in the name of expediency, but just because I ask my team to do something quick-and-dirty doesn't mean I'm being short-sighted. Most of the time it means that delivering value quickly is more important in the situation that getting the engineering right. Unfortunately for some developers (a minority, to be sure), the very suggestion is blasphemy.
Start polishing up the resume.
If by 'first web application' you mean prototype then you should probably do it quick and dirty. Your client probably wants to see something before they commit to anything. You CAN do something quick however; without making it dirty. If you were careful about how you designed the web app and wrote it you could probably turn the web app into a work of art in no time after you've released the first version.
Allow your boss to learn from their mistakes.
If you always strive to protect them from themselves then they will never be able learn from their bad decisions, and you will always be trying to mitigate their next bad decision.
It is also important that you don't shield them from the repercussions of a bad decision, for example by quietly putting in a weekend for something that you feel guilty for.
You can and should of course do all this graciously with no hint of spite. Better still, diplomatically talking through the reasons for each approach as early as possible can work wonders.
Of course some people never learn ;-)
I feel that sometimes you have to make choices based on integrity and not fold to the demands of expediency or just because your under pressure from your boss. That doesn't mean I have an answer to your question, only you have to decide for yourself what is appropriate in this situation, with this customer, in your organization. Ask yourself:
How much does your boss really know about what the customer wants?
Do you know better than your boss? Is your relationship with the customer stronger?
Where is the pressure coming from to do it quickly?
Does the customer realize the costs/benefits associated with "quick and dirty"?
What kind of orginization do you work in? Would you consider yourself kind of more of a consultant (very close to the customer) than an employee or vice versa?
How well thought of is your boss (at your company or by the customer? Similarly how well thought of are you?
Is the code truly throw away or if its going to actually be used in the future
If it's just a demo for a client I think a quick-and-dirty solution is sufficient, but ultimately it is you're job as a developer to protest if you think it's going to backfire. Uncle Bob in Clean Code drives home the point well:
"What if you were a doctor and had a
patient who demanded that you stopped
all the silly hand-washing in
preparation for surgery because it was
taking too much time? Clearly the
patient is the boss, and yet the doctor
should absolutely refuse to comply.
Why? Because the doctor knows more
than the patient about the risks of
the disease and infection. It would be
unprofessional (never mind criminal)
for the doctor to comply with the
patient.
So too it is unprofessional for
programmers to bend to the will of
managers who don't understand the
risks of making messes."
This is a case where you need to manage up. Your boss doesn't see the need to implement a good design because he doesn't see that it's going to be easier in the long run. You can either convince him now or make sure that he sees the problem when modifications end up taking longer. At the very least you can steer his thinking over several small tasks so that you train him to go for good design over time.
Just do the quick-and-dirty implementation. Your job is to turn the spec into a working program, not to analyse tradeoffs between immediate costs & future benefits. I've worked with engineers who insisted on adding loads of layers of indirection, wrappers, unused code etc. which no-one was paying for, insisting they knew better than the PM. I've also been that guy (for a couple of years after I graduated) and it does not make you popular. I don't do it anymore.
Hmm, if your boss is only willing to fund quick-and-dirty and you disagree with the assignment, then find another job. Sounds like you don't like doing what you are being paid to do.
I'd go quick & dirty if that's what you've been asked for, as jcollum suggest, Ruby on Rails mught be a solution.
The reason I'd go for quick a dirty, is that if the user and your manager have a time frame and budget, and you can provide a stable solution that meets these and any other requirements, you should do so. Bottom line, if you're working for someone else, it is about meeting their requirements, not necessarily your own ideas about best practice or framework design. That said, if you can convince your manager and the client of the long term benefits of more upfront investment for a better long term outcome, go for it, and fair play to you.
My guess is once you have done a few more implementations, you will be better able to combine fast & good.
On the one hand you're not necessarily privy to all of the factors and pressures on the boss. Perhaps he/she knows this is a "one-off" and you won't be doing any business with this client.
The bottom line is that you're getting paid to implement whatever they tell you to implement. Yes, you have a responsibility to point out the pros and cons but, in the end, it's their decision.
But, to be safe, document EVERYTHING! If people start playing the blame game you can at least have your backside covered. (Might not do any good but always protect yourself.)
My advice would be to say that there is a quick and dirty way to meet the requirements within X days/weeks/months and that if there are major enhancements or features then there will be a cost to move to something larger that can handle what is now required.
Something to consider here is the idea of YAGNI if the client doesn't want anything more than the basics that they wanted in the first implementation. There is also the question of how much of a framework will you be building in this first go round.
If you were in charge, I would imagine you'd do it the "correct" way with a good design, even if it takes longer. The problem though is your manager is in charge. So, this sounds like a conversation you should be having with your manager.
Remind him (subtly) of the times his approach resulted in a mess and suggest that a bit more attention be made to the project. Suggest it may be a good marketing decision to put a little more effort into this project because the relationship with this client may be crucial. Don't get into an argument, just make yourself heard. At least it may get him to stop and think again about his decision - maybe he can have another conversation with the client about how much they're willing to pay.
In the end, respect his decision but make sure he does realize it was his decision and you're simply following orders. That way if a problem does develop in the future, it doesn't end up being your problem.
If he's not the approachable type, I think you're stuck doing it the quick-and-dirty way. I would document the situation though to minimize future ass-biting potential.
Ruby on Rails. If that's an option. I've heard plenty of times that it's the fastest way to get a CRUD site up and running well.
[edit]
Building your own framework is a huge waste of time, you're not going to be able to build a world class framework in any reasonable amount of time. Don't reinvent the wheel. I've heard plenty of programmers say "oh yeah I could build that soooo much better." Sure but could you build it even close to as good in the 5-10 hours of paid time that it will cost your company to just buy it outright? Unlikely.
If this is something that your company does frequently then you should talk your boss into letting you find an off-the-shelf solution to the "quick and dirty but still decent" problem. It might mean extra time now but will save time in the future.
[/edit]
I wouldn't be too judgemental on the boss. Like many people say, he/she has a POV just as you do. You need to adapt to handling this type of demand by learning some kind of rapid prototyping tool. I use the Microsoft platform for business and web applications (Java for scientific tools) so whenever someone wants to see a prototype web site I can hack something together on my local dev platform pretty quickly using ASP.NET. Usually for a prototype, ugly doesn't matter as much as functionality. If the customer knows a thing is possible then they will be apt to buy into the beautification (unless its internal - then who cares what it looks like - ha!).
Think about the fact that you are supposed to be a "professional software developer".
Being a member of a professional group means adherring to some codes and rules. That means that you don't just give up on your principles just because management tells you to.
If you really believe that setting up a framework and using CSS templates is necessary to deliver a product of proper quality, then insist on doing it.
Imagine if a construction engineer was told to do a bridge design in a quick-and-dirty way by his manager. Would he do it even if he knew the design was of poor quality? What would be the consequences if he did, for him personally and for construction engineering as a profession?
I think we as software engineers need to take more pride in our work, and show more professional responsibility.
I'd interpret "Q&D" to "Quick and Feature-Poor". Dirty is seldom Quick, even for a demo or proof of concept. Whatever you do to start, you'll be refactoring it anyway. Just give it the time available, and focus on YAGNI and Minimum Sufficient Solution.