Best Forum software?

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: AgaBoogaBoo
vbulletin is nice, I'm trying this out right now though: http://www.jaia-interactive.com/

You can see my setup of it here: Surfjunky.NET

How do you like that forum so far?

It's pretty different from what I've seen, I need to figure out how to modify the template easily, mainly the header and footer for ads. Besides that, I'm liking it so far.

 

[SALvation]

I have used phpBB, Invision, and vBulletin for my forums and I can say that vBulletin is by far the best that I have used. phpBB started to get very slow around the 100k post mark, and Invision started to slow down for us around the 400k post mark. vBulletin has been running for us ever since and is very fast and has a MUCH smaller database footprint size than Invision. Our database size was around 300MB with Invision and shrunk down to about 50MB under VB.

 

[Codewiz]

"however it isn't opensource, which makes it less vulnerable"

What a crock of you know what. Yeah Windows is more secure than Linux because it is closed source. :roll:

Security by obfuscation is truly no security at all. It allows the bad guys to reverse engineer the product and find the holes where if you let the good guys at the code, they would more than likely tell you the security holes.

 

[edmicman]

Just my .02: I've gone from Invision to phpBB and now to SMF. If I were to pay for a board, I'd probably go with vBulletin from what I've used of it. Invision was good until they started charging for it. phpBB seems pretty robust, and seems to be the OSS standard, but to get any of the "invision-like" functionality I wanted (quick reply, file attachments, cosmetic things on the index) I had to manually hack in the MODs that are available. They're there, but its a pain. SMF has most of that functionality out of the box, PLUS an integrated update and mod package system within the adminsitration settings. A new version is out? Click the in the admin panel and boom! its installed for you. Find a mod you want installed? Browse to it in the admin panel, click on it, boom! its installed. Seems much easier and more intuitive to manage IMHO.

 

[GT1999]

Originally posted by: Codewiz
"however it isn't opensource, which makes it less vulnerable"

What a crock of you know what. Yeah Windows is more secure than Linux because it is closed source. :roll:

Security by obfuscation is truly no security at all. It allows the bad guys to reverse engineer the product and find the holes where if you let the good guys at the code, they would more than likely tell you the security holes.

I'm a Linux user at heart (I've been using Slackware since 7.1), and I use FireFox as my primary browser, but stating that reverse engineering is easier than looking at source code is obviously not true. Rethink your statement.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Geekish Thoughts

Originally posted by: Codewiz
"however it isn't opensource, which makes it less vulnerable"

What a crock of you know what. Yeah Windows is more secure than Linux because it is closed source. :roll:

Security by obfuscation is truly no security at all. It allows the bad guys to reverse engineer the product and find the holes where if you let the good guys at the code, they would more than likely tell you the security holes.

I'm a Linux user at heart (I've been using Slackware since 7.1), and I use FireFox as my primary browser, but stating that reverse engineering is easier than looking at source code is obviously not true. Rethink your statement.

He didn't say it was easier. He said it's more vulnerable. Security through obscurity slows down the bad guys while blinding the good guys, but security through disclosure puts everyone on an even playing field and lets the good guys find the holes for you.

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: Geekish Thoughts

Originally posted by: Codewiz
"however it isn't opensource, which makes it less vulnerable"

What a crock of you know what. Yeah Windows is more secure than Linux because it is closed source. :roll:

Security by obfuscation is truly no security at all. It allows the bad guys to reverse engineer the product and find the holes where if you let the good guys at the code, they would more than likely tell you the security holes.

I'm a Linux user at heart (I've been using Slackware since 7.1), and I use FireFox as my primary browser, but stating that reverse engineering is easier than looking at source code is obviously not true. Rethink your statement.

You miss the ENTIRE point. When your security is based on obfuscation, then you are cutting out the good guys from looking at your code. So you can have plenty of security holes. The bad guys WILL find them. It is a matter of time. Knowledge of the security holes also come too late in the game. By the time you find it out there is a hole it is often too late and you have been comprimised.

With open source, you have everyone looking at the code. Obvious holes are fixed and any security holes that are found are patched quickly because you have a lot of eyes looking at the problem.

If you don't believe me then believe cryptographers. The only way an encryption is considered secure is when it can be peer reviewed. Secure encryption NEVER relies on hidden algorthms. The algorthms are open for everyone to see. That makes things MORE secure, not less.

 

[Codewiz]

BTW, I am not an open source advocate by any means. Heck I don't even run Linux. I use a product that helps me do my job best and meets my needs. That happens to be Windows XP right now. I just also understand coding, basic cryptography, and software design.

 

[imported_obsidian]

Anything but what these guys use.