Hi.
I dont mind guests being able to read my forum, but I want to remove the option for them to print pages since part of my forum is a beginners guide and I would rather they became members first
Im sure there must be a way, but can't find anything in the permissions that covers this
There is no way.
You can remove the "print" option from the display of the message....
But they can always use their browser print option.
The print button just removes a bunch of formatting and makes the display more printer friendly, but you can not stop users from printing
You can do something like this in php/css but you would need to do $user_info['is_guest'] php code to add the code to the headers of SMF or not.
<style type="text/css" media="print">
* { display: none; }
</style>
Of course, any user can just undo that by manually changing the css using the browser
Thanks all, I think I'll leave it as is.
I suppose even if I could do something, they could always just take screenshots
Lets add this in the 2.0.16 Wish list among with an additional function of database restoration tool due the SMF.
Let's not. Partially because it'll delay 2.0.16 even more and partially because it's actually impossible to prevent people printing things, you can just hide the "print friendly view" but even that a user can make for themselves and SMF can't stop it.
for the most part we are not adding features to SMF 2.0, especially those that are requested from the community.
Quote from: Illori on November 22, 2019, 04:53:40 AM
for the most part we are not adding features to SMF 2.0, especially those that are requested from the community.
Ha .. lets gather around the fire once more ... here we are talking about missing permission setting at
General Permissions - "Guests" board. Its just a line of code.
Guest printing option
aloud content thief and content creators HATE IT.
Database download due SMF this is a bad joke lasting for eight years now.
Why to use it when backup copy can not be trusted ?
You are all responsible for making us
sound as Fools when we do complaining.
you can print either way, one line of code does not stop that.
we don't recommend anyone use the backup in the admin panel. it has been removed from SMF 2.1 for this reason.
Quote from: Illori on November 22, 2019, 08:05:07 AM
you can print either way, one line of code does not stop that.
We do not fear regular users with a browser, but the automated services which harvest entire forum in a few minutes, and store the copy by the excuse of
Internet Achieves collection and they keep seven backup of it at data-room with out name and address.
Quote from: Kiriakos GR on November 22, 2019, 08:11:55 AM
Quote from: Illori on November 22, 2019, 08:05:07 AM
you can print either way, one line of code does not stop that.
We do not fear regular users with a browser, but the automated services which harvest entire forum in a few minutes, and store the copy by the excuse of Internet Achieves collection and they keep seven backup of it at data-room with out name and address.
Which has nothing to do with the print option. You can do that just fine without the print option. I've even helped write tools for doing just this in the past.
If you do not want it harvested, don't make it available to logged out users.
in other words... your requests to be added to 2.0.x are not going to happen. DEFINITELY not in 2.0.16 and almost certainly not in 2.0.xx
Your comments on printing are completely wrong and the suggestion that you made would not have any effect.
Your second suggestion regarding restore... no. That would be a MAJOR code update and would require MAJOR testing... and even more especially since database backup from the admin panel has been completely removed in 2.1.x
Quote from: Kindred on November 22, 2019, 11:33:32 AM
Your second suggestion regarding restore... no. That would be a MAJOR code update and would require MAJOR testing... and even more especially since database backup from the admin panel has been completely removed in 2.1.x
most of the time when you need to restore the database your forum is not working at all, so the feature would not work either.
that too... :)
Wonderful opinions, lets agree then that SMF this is dead project not worth using.
Last week I was had to give a fight with my new host so him to upload the dead PHP5.6 as it causes risk to server security, I am now giving another fight so a solution to be found regarding Mod_security this blocking SMF.
Any reasonable web-host admin he will never disable a security protection so the SMF toy to function.. Therefore the offered advice was pointless and childish.
When I installed SMF for a first time, several years ago, I never thought that this is a stupid chatroom with a fancy appearance.
I have zero expectations from 2.0.16, basically it is impossible a bunch of poorly paid people to deliver something really worthy.
Thank you for the productive conversation. :laugh:
Given that SMF has supported 7.0 for multiple years now (since 2.0.14) I would suggest that you having to fight with your host is because you were doing something wrong.
Mod security is a major problem because most of the time it is actually misconfigured and this affects all platforms that run on the web host, not just SMF.
Also, no one has ever been paid to develop SMF, not in its entire history.
Mind you I won't be sorry to see you go. I won't have to read your inaccurate posts any more.
Our comments were neither pointless nor childish. You demanded something (based on incorrect asusmptions) and we told you no, but we also told you why you were incorrect in the first place.
As for your opinion on pay having any relation to a worthy product.... ROTFL... sure...
as Arantor says, no one has EVER been paid to develop or support SMF - despite people like you who we really should get paid to deal with...
2.0.16 has some much needed things - but probably nothing you care about (for mistaken reasons) -- so, to you it's not worth it, but to everyone else, it'll be a good update. :D
as for security... SMF still has the best security record of pretty much all of the free forum softwares out there. :P