DDLCMS question?

[Curtis129]

im so supirsed this thread didnt get locked?

Leave it as: DDL CMS, DID have the allow_url_include exploit, however now, thanks to a few webmasters bringing it up, NOT badmouthing, it has been updated, and now is not vunerable to this exploit.
@Little Dragon, i think you are taking everything the wrong way, and instead of taking this as constructive criticism, for future dev, you have taken it as flame.
As for JmZ getting frustrated at you, i think he is just retaliating to your insults.

[DEViANCE]

topddl reloaded ftw!

But on a more serious note,




A script that comes blank, has 4000x more possibilities then a script that's preloaded with mods. Think of it as a spider web outline, the tree won't go as far with DDLCMS as it would with WCDDL, and the mere fact that your in the warez scene for money is shameful, if anything, you should be considered the selfish one. And I highly doubt WCDDL is gonna fail, I use it for some of my sites! And I will never switch to DDLCMS because it's too feature packed.

Overall, both scripts are solid, for both types of webmasters, ones that want to learn and experiment to become better in the future should use WCDDL, and ones that are strickly for profit and only want a site full of duplicate content then go for it, I mean, yea I feel that strickly making money is disgraceful to the warez scene, however some people are going to no matter what. But if you're looking to be super cool and have millions of super awesome friends use TOPDDL

-Bread

First i agree in part... BUT, I am not in the warez scene for money, though yes evilddl was built with money in mind but just look at my other site/s if you know them, they are all add free???

And sorry but there is more pontential imo for ddl cms, as i can code myself expanding on that is a far better and more easy option than expaning on wcddl, yes it may be more secure as there is so little to secure, simple as that.

You guys are obviously bashing it as you been in the ddl script scene a while and quite clearly fear the competition you now face.

And sorry but i have three hosting accounts, two that must be paid monthly and one yearly, about twenty domains, multiple other costs... most of my sites are ad free, i don't care what you think of evilddl, if your stupid enough to sign up for sharing zone i deserve your money. So there are three sponcered links and a few box images on index, sponcered search results at bottom, some ads on search results, are you forgetting the 11,000+ free links i am providing??? And as of yet have not made a single $, i am minus $2 right now lol...

On top of that i have a huge flat in centre of town, my living expences are around $400+ per week, i relly only on work i do online, i have no other job.. if you begrude me making cash i don't care you probably are 15 and live with your mom.

[Hyperz]

Any new code will have its issues, nothing wrong with that. Infact, flawless programming or scripting is near impossible. But criticism and suggestions are best taken for what they are. Even IF someone is hating/bashing on your script ignore it but take what is being said into consideration for possible future improvements .

[DEViANCE]

@hyperz i agree but it seems some people are putting it the wrong way.. i mean i have found issues but i have politly put them across on his site or in private if a risk to others (apart from the main exploit that was posted on milworm by somebody).

Now as i have given my honest opinion people are now starting to bash me for having ads on my phucking site? i mean wtf!!?? Anyone that knows me will tell you im not about the money, evilddl is kinda but so what, i wouldn't use it anyway i use forums (where all the links come from anyway).

[Curtis129]

Guys, WCDDL and DDL CMS, do the same thing essentially.
DDL CMS, was compared to WCDDL for no reason, at no point did JmZ ever say, WCDDL is better, faster, easier to modify then DDL CMS.

[JmZ]

And sorry but there is more pontential imo for ddl cms, as i can code myself expanding on that is a far better and more easy option than expaning on wcddl, yes it may be more secure as there is so little to secure, simple as that.

I'm sorry but I have to reply to this. I did want to stop replying to this thread but I can't let it go without clarifying things which you're assuming or stating.

First of all, the reason WCDDL was made was to give experienced webmasters a clean code base which they can then build on. So your reasoning stating that DDLCMS is better for expanding is really irrelevant. I'd say they're equally as useful for expanding, your opinion favours DDLCMS, not the facts.

Secondly, the reason WCDDL is secure is actually because when I code something, the primary objective I set is to make sure every single line is clean and not vulnerable. It's a habit, every script I code, I'll even escape integers for inserting into databases (which isn't needed obviously since it's an integer). That, is the reason why WCDDL is secure.

Put simply, WCDDL was coded for experienced webmasters, DDLCMS was coded for the general public (and to generate income for the creators). Two completely different audiences aimed at, so of course people from each audience are going to have conflicting opinions.

And so you know where im coming from when I say it was made for experienced webmasters, 90% of popular DDL sites are still based on KDDL purely because they want simplicity rather than complexity. Those are the people I aim at as WCDDL doesn't contain hardcoded visual elements so they can make it look how they want.

Anyway this isn't going anywhere, you're a DDLCMS-fanboy nobody can change your mind. Thread may aswell be locked or something.

[DEViANCE]

I am experinced to a certain level, have made a few poplular scripts myself, and for me wcddl seems to much work, simple as that.

Its just my opinion though which is why i choose ddl cms, and this thread is about ddl cms not wcddl....

Im a fan boy of nothing. Just like things that work well for me... how the hell could i of done what i have with evilddl if i used wcddl, in three days?? And no don't lock the thread... nobody is being rude, there is no problem.

[ChosenOne]

I am experinced to a certain level, have made a few poplular scripts myself, and for me wcddl seems to much work, simple as that.


And they are..?

[Little Dragon]

im so supirsed this thread didnt get locked?

Leave it as: DDL CMS, DID have the allow_url_include exploit, however now, thanks to a few webmasters bringing it up, NOT badmouthing, it has been updated, and now is not vunerable to this exploit.
@Little Dragon, i think you are taking everything the wrong way, and instead of taking this as constructive criticism, for future dev, you have taken it as flame.
As for JmZ getting frustrated at you, i think he is just retaliating to your insults.

Thanks Curtis for the reply. But where did I insult this guy?

The exploit was fixed and confirmed on the test site (which is undisclosed by the way). I reported the fix on like page 2 of this thread.

Read pages 3, 4 of this thread, where JmZ started.

From the beginning, I said to JmZ, that the exploit was fixed, and asked him to go find something productive to do. But no.

After I clearly stated that the exploit WAS FIXED even before it was reported to me, JmZ keeps coming back and repeatedly blurting out the same thing "DDL CMS has exploits" -- am I to ignore that? To let people think the script has exploits when I have fixed them? No, I want people to know that the exploit was fixed, so I 'm going to reply that "No, it's been fixed." So why must JmZ keep coming back 5, 6, 7 times, even more, to say things like "your script has exploits" and "I'm merely pointing out a fact" ? What should I make of this? Is this really necessary? Why so much effort from JmZ to stir up strife and controversy?

This thread is about DDLCMS. It's my responsibility to hear what people say and everyone, (everyone but JmZ) has given me helpful information. All JmZ has done is make sly comments like "you fixed one of many" and "too bad if you can't find them" etc etc, stirring up strife and controversy, hijacked the thread, and attempted to fill people's minds with the notion that the script has security holes and exploits, when in fact, it does not.

What could I have done? Ignore him? Let him post his BS on this thread about my script having exploits?

No, only one thing i could do -- reply, and repeat myself, that the exploit was fixed. Now, I'm under fire for "arguing"?

[DEViANCE]

http://www.hotscripts.com/listing/mobilechat/
Publisher site visits: 8,258 Average rating: 3.86 Total ratings: 112
http://www.hotscripts.com/listing/evilddl-top-site/
Publisher site visits: 6,690 Average rating: 5.00 Total ratings: 3
example of a recent project: http://ddl.warez.ms/
-and some more legit ones that i used my real name for and would rather not post here.

*raises middle finger*