Talk:PHP-Nuke: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:55, 11 July 2006

(Previous talk page deleted, see history) JamesHoadley 10:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny MCE introduces security holes?

This is news to me. Firstly, PHP-Nuke non-patched has holes that a truck could drive through. Secondly, what about Chatserve's patch series? I've got it, and used it up to 7.6, and it seems to close all SQL injection holes. Does TinyMCE introduce new issues, like XSS? JamesHoadley 10:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hitwalker

This has been going on for sometime. I would like to know if anyone thinks hitwalker is a notable site for the PHP-Nuke community. It has been added and removed many times. If you don't think it should be listed please say why. -- murder1 04:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion it's pointless to have two PHP-Nuke resource sites that are almost identical with what files they offer. PHPNukeFile is a more reputable source, well respected by the community, and has been around longer. Also, I would like to point out WP:NOT. — stephen 17:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As i was pointed to this old article i would like to explain a few things.Phpnukefiles doesnt excist longer then my Phpnuke database.Also the Phpnukefiles website is not well maintained and not uptodate.So in my believes you should not publish or write about something you dont know much off,and specially if its done by a 16 year old,that doesnt realy qualify as having the proper knowledge.At Phpnuke database quality is more important the quantity.

Easynuke.org

I was wondering, would it be beneficial to have a link to a free PHP-Nuke site? PHP-Nuke was released as a multi-version recently, and hence my business partner decided to take it up, adding to his free phpbb and invision forum host. Although it is not released yet, it is ready, and the website is: easynuke.org I posted this here now, incase anybody had any problems with me editing the main page when easynuke is actually released. It would be beneficial for those seeking a free, easily set up (litirally a few clicks, no messing with servers) PHP-Nuke setup. PAz 13:48, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Alex[reply]

Lack of security

Hey, I'd like to know more about the supposed lack of security in PHPNuke.

The article currently claims "Because PHP-Nuke is so widely known, it is a frequently attacked target of those looking for security flaws." Umm, rubbish, this argument has been refuted many times in case of many other programs. For example, Windows isn't insecure because a lot of people use it and thus hack it, it's because it's not designed with security in mind at all. And that's exactly what I heard about PHPNuke: Sloppy coding practices and no security consciousness among the developers.

Sloppy coding is highly subjective. No security consciousness is speculative at best. And Windows has been coded with security in mind since NT - check out Microsoft Windows#Security. And despite what you think, people do target visible softwares simply because they are visible. It's the same reason the September 11th hijackers attacked the World Trade Center and not the lone Exxon Mobile gas station in Any Town, USA. 216.40.225.203 09:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet, even when that particular sentence has to go, I can't go claiming the abovementioned things in the article right off without sources - just hearsay and lots of people saying "PHPNuke sucks". Does anyone know any real published researched critique of PHP-Nuke? I think it's pretty easy to find security advisories and stuff like that though. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:41, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone removed this: 18:20, 17 January 2006 Drmike (→Lack of security - Removed Trolling) Let's ignore that. My intention was not to troll or anything - I'm looking for constructive, sourced criticism of the project whose security and efficiency has been doubted a lot. PHP-Nuke has faced some severe allegiations along these lines. I just think these facts are not covered to necessary extent in the article. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Windows#Security discusses the security issues in a chronological fashion. This helps to distinguish between issues that, today, merit concern, and issues that are little more than historical footnotes. This article, in contrast, just blurrs them all together. And doesn't provide any citations what-so-ever. Also, look at Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words. ~~

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 This has been going on for sometime. I would like to know if anyone thinks hitwalker is a notable site for the PHP-Nuke community. It has been added and removed many times. If you don't think it should be listed please say why. -- [[User_talk:Murder1|murder1]] 04:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 :In my opinion it's pointless to have two PHP-Nuke resource sites that are almost identical with what files they offer.  PHPNukeFile is a more reputable source, well respected by the community, and has been around longer.  Also, I would like to point out [[WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_mirror_or_a_repository_of_links.2C_images.2C_or_media_files|WP:NOT]]. — [[User:Stephen2417|stephen]] 17:06, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
+As i was pointed to this old article i would like to explain a few things.Phpnukefiles doesnt excist longer then my Phpnuke database.Also the Phpnukefiles website is not well maintained and not uptodate.So in my believes you should not publish or write about something you dont know much off,and specially if its done by a 16 year old,that doesnt realy qualify as having the proper knowledge.At Phpnuke database quality is more important the quantity.
 == Easynuke.org ==