CMS Made Simple Forums

I was wondering how people were implementing the e-commerce modules - so I checked out the' CMS Show Off' forum.
There aren't many recent examples so I did a google search on "Cart,cntnt01" taken from the view source code.

There are 8,520 results - many of them are excellent. It's worth having a look yourselves.

Unfortunately there are a lot of people ripping this meta tag out:


and replacing it with their own. Some going as far as trying to remove all signs of CMSMS, although module ID's and classes are very easy to recognise.
The worst being attempts to imply that they have slaved long and hard coding it themselves. And even giving it a completely different name.

C'mon guys, we're getting a lot for nothing here. Credit should be the least we can do in return.

Simon66 wrote: Unfortunately there are a lot of people ripping this meta tag out:

I know it's not perfect, but I usually remove that meta info because i've been burned in the past by having my site hacked because it was too easy to figure out what backend script I was running.  Granted, that site was running Wordpress not CMS Made Simple, but that's one of the things I love about CMSMS.  How easy it is to obfuscate what I'm using to run my site. With all the people out there trying to deface web sites, why would you want to make their job any easier? I'd NEVER hide that I used it in the backend though.  I make sure my clients know what I've used to set up their site.

mccord42
As usual my post was rambling and incoherant.

What I really meant was that I saw quite a few sites that were obviously CMSMS but they had replaced the
"CMS Made Simple - Copyright (C) 2004-6 Ted Kulp. All rights reserved." in a "generator" tag with a CMS that they had made up and were passing off as their own.

For example they put something like this is the generator tag:
"CMS Crispy Duck - Copyright (C) 2010 Fred Smith. All rights reserved."

Then if you follow that back to the web designers site they are advertising their 'own' CMS - Crispy Duck. This makes me believe that they have re-branded it completely, and are passing it off as their own work.

Dumping the 'Generator' tag altogether is probably OK but using it to take credit for the CMS is underhand.

I agree it is easy to remove most traces of CMSMS from the generated html code, but module classes and IDs are easily recognised and I think it would be very hard to change some of them - particularly the dynamically generated ones like formbuilder etc.

The best trick I've found for security was in the recent 'Beginner’s Guide' book by Sofia Hauschildt - change the name of the admin folder to something unique. Simple but brilliant.

I don't understand why someone would change that meta info, even for the sake of vanity. To be honest, I sell work off the back of CMS Made Simple having an established community.

It really just a case of security.

You're right in that having a great community is a selling point for CMSMS.
It's always a plus being able to point out to clients that they're not being tied in to a proprietary system and can switch developers if they want to.

But... we once had about half a dozen sites targeted when a security hole was found in CMSMS and those were all sites which we had listed in the 'CMS Show Off' topic on this forum. When we reviewed our security process we decided that one thing to do was to make it harder to identify what system the sites were built in by removing the metatag.

We love CMSMS and don't have any hesitation telling people it's great - but making sites less secure isn't a great advert for it.

Right. Time to climb off my soapbox - it's about time to start the weekend.

s.