Search options (Page 18 of 19)

What do you mean by "moving"?

If the database stays in place all you have to do is go (with phpMyAdmin or the likes)
to your MYBOARDconfig table and change the value of "o_base_url" to the new url you want to use.

What a "danish d2 board" is - I do not know....

You might want to read this thread:

http://punbb.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=8051

or check out this mod:

http://www.punres.org/viewtopic.php?id=217

What is going on is that most probably some bored schoolkids read about a flaw in a BB system, then they find as amany sites as posible using this system. This is just a google search away. Then they play around on your board and think they are real hackers.
That's the same thing that became known as the santy worm, Google even had to block the search for related terms at thhat time because the "hackers" were at least intelligent enough to use robots for the search.
It affected phpBB and was one good reason not to go with phpBB...
Mind you - there is no board without a flaw, punBB 1.2.6. will have its share as well (no offense meant, just experience ).
There is something really basic things that you can do.
It will not prevent real hackers from doning damage, it is by no means a serious protection, but it does help against bored teenies finding your site through google:

Rename viewtopic.php & viewforum.php (as that's what most idiots will be looking for) to something else like foo.php and bar.php, then change the links in all other pages accordingly.

It's a bit of a hassle because you have to do that every time you mod or update but when the next robot (or some really desperate clown doing it manually) searches for punbb boards they will probably not find you.

I know it sounds like a joke and as I said it is really nothing that gives you *real* security, just a bit of obfuscation that doesn't hurt your users.

What really *is* a great security tool is the apache module mod_security so if you have your own server I highly recommend that one.
Amongst a lot of other things it filters out requests that are likely to be malicious.

There is a very good article on that one here

Sounds indeed a lot like what I want...

100% ACK

another 100% ACK
It's just that in the past I often ended up writing apps myself because I found it easier to code from scratch than dive into mountains of poorly written documentation and try to make sense of them. I suppose you know what I mean...
However, nucleus/nupusi definitely look easy enough to give them a try.
Does your latest build include PunBB 1.2.6?

Didn't mean to offend you or what you did with nucleus.
I like the looks and the functionality, and maybe it can do what I want, it's just not obvious to me.
I do not want a system where anybody can post, just something that makes it easier for me building a complete, and maybe even complex, website.
With file management, a gallery (only available to the authors to chose images for their articles) and different layout schemes for different purposes.
I could not find these features mentioned in the nucleus or on your site but of course that doesn't mean a thing.

A content management system is surely a lot more than that.
Full blown CMS systems like Typo3 even integrate print and web content, have version control, let you chose different layouts for different parts of your website, build menus of any level depth and so on...
The least you can say is that a real CMS is for building a complete website and has the ability to show anything you like in the style that you like.

I totally agree with you that it's no good turning one into the other.
What Connor seemed to work on was to make a CMS that can integrate PunBB and that would take the engine, CSS, caching - well, all the great things of punBB. If I got him right.
And I am just interested if this can/has/should be done or if I have to go on searching or build something myself.

Check
Have a look at the table YOURBOARDstatviews_all with phpMyAdmin or the likes.

Are there entries to display for the period you are asking?

Hmmm... what exactly is your error message?
I went through the post and Atxy had 3 different errors at a certain stage

Then:
Can you enable debug mode and see what it says?

Then: Can you take out the Topic-read - mod and see if the problem is still there?

Then, can you take out the userstats mod and see if it's still there?

Some hassle I know but this way we might get closer to the solution

Oh - and first of all, try changing

$db->query('INSERT INTO '.$db->prefix.'statuser (user_id, user_ip) VALUES('.$pun_user['id'].',"'.$db->escape(get_remote_address()).'")') or error('Could not insert into statistics', __FILE__, __LINE__, $db->error());

to

$db->query('INSERT INTO '.$db->prefix.'statuser (user_id, user_ip) VALUES('.$pun_user['id'].',\''.$db->escape(get_remote_address()).'\')') or error('Unable to insert into user statistics', __FILE__, __LINE__, $db->error());

Yeah, that is much easier. It can be turned into a mod as well so that the admin can set if external urls are to be opened in a new window or not.
Nice, thanks.

Yes, you are right.

The reason why I thought about a centralised system though:

If you run  PunMod  on your machine it must run under the apache useraccount which means all files have to be writable by the webserver, or it has to run as a shell program.

The first is no option when it comes to security on a live system, the latter leaves out everybody who PunMod is designed for , or am I wrong there?

This still does not solve the "invited only"-issue

The absolute easiest way is write some code into register.php that prevents user from registering who have no vaild invitation.

Motis has done it. Ask him

No, don't think so, because if the web server wants to do a mkdir() then the directory where it wants do this must be world writable as well.
I mean if your layout is like this
myboardroot    user    group      drwx-r-x-r-x
Then the apache running as "nobody" can not do a mkdir() inside this directory.

And we don't want that, do we?

I really think the way it is done now is the best possible.

Thanks,

so this is a workaround to play the XHTML strict game, right?

Wow.... quite a lot of code to replace [i]target="_blank"[i].

I still think it is better to stay with transitional then.
I changed my board to target="_blank" and it works fine.... I think sometimes rules that are set up to simplify things just reach the opposite...like in this case.