Re: smartfactory modules are ADWARES
  • 2008/4/13 22:41

  • Mikhail

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 412

  • Since: 2003/1/19


Mamba wrote:
so all smartfactory modules are ADWARES (not opensource):

You're raising an interesting point. While they are definitely not a "malware" as we know from many Websites, their aggressive "in your face" marketing is definitely not in the spirit of "Open Source".

not just a adware, but a spyware: smartfactory modules have "WEB BUGS", objects that are embedded in a web page to allows checking (tracking) the users, and get informations like IP address of the requesting computer; the time the content was requested; the type of web browser that made the request; and the existence of cookies previously set by that server. The SmartFactory server can store all of this information, and associate it with a unique tracking token attached to the content request.

The most common tracker of imboxsolution/smartfactory is this "external image":

Please, check this link:

and look this piece of code of smartpartner module (just a example):

if (!defined('_AM_SPARTNER_XOOPS_PRO')) {
define("_AM_SPARTNER_XOOPS_PRO""Do you need help with this module ?<br />Do you need new features not yet availale ?");

"<div style='padding-top: 8px; padding-bottom: 10px; text-align: center;'><a href='" $versioninfo->getInfo('support_site_url') . "' target='_blank'><img src='" XOOPS_URL "/modules/smartpartner/images/spcssbutton.gif' title='" $modfootertxt "' alt='" $modfootertxt "'/></a></div>";
'<div style="border: 2px solid #C2CDD6">';
'<div style="font-weight:bold; padding-top: 5px; text-align: center;">' _AM_SPARTNER_XOOPS_PRO '<br /><a href="http://inboxinternational.com/modules/smartcontent/page.php?pageid=10"><img src="http://inboxinternational.com/images/INBOXsign150_noslogan.gif" alt="Need XOOPS Professional Services?" title="Need XOOPS Professional Services?"></a>
<a href="http://inboxinternational.com/modules/smartcontent/page.php?pageid=10"><img src="http://inboxinternational.com/images/xoops_services_pro_english.gif" alt="Need XOOPS Professional Services?" title="Need XOOPS Professional Services?"></a>


They deserve credit for what they developed, and nobody would question that, but a link to their Open Source Website would be sufficient, without the "in your face" advertisement for their commercial division.

well,... to my knowledge, the wfdownload module was created by catzwolf, using mydownloads as base. And the wfdownload by smartfactory is just an upgrade.

Can someone confirm it?

Re: smartfactory modules are ADWARES
  • 2008/4/13 23:24

  • Peekay

  • XOOPS is my life!

  • Posts: 2335

  • Since: 2004/11/20

Well, for those that just want to get rid of the pesky ads, these are my notes on the issue. Note that these are not the latest versions, but I suspect the methods will be similar.

SmartFactory Remove Inbox ads

SmartSection 2.13

Two stage process:



Rem the following 
(near foot of each page):

// smartsection_modFooter();

to be thoroughyou could also hack:



Rem the following

SmartSection 2.13

<!-- <div style="display: none;"><{$ref_smartfactory}></div> -->

SmartPartner 1.02

<!-- <div style="display: none;"><{$ref_smartpartner}></div> -->  


Remove the inbox solutions meta description

WF Downloads 3.2

<!-- <div style="display: none;"><{$ref_smartfactory}></div> -->

I would never normally have gone to that amount of trouble, but as Mamba quite rightly says, the ads really are "in your face".

Whether they are used for gathering stats on module usage as Angra suggests, I really don't know.
A thread is for life. Not just for Christmas.

Re: smartfactory modules are ADWARES
  • 2008/4/14 0:17

  • tcnet

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 297

  • Since: 2006/5/12

<!-- <div style="display: none;"><{$ref_smartfactory}></div> -->

From Google Webmaster Help Center: Hidden text and links
URL: http://www.google.com/support/webmast ... in/answer.py?answer=66353


Hiding text or links in your content can cause your site to be perceived as untrustworthy since it presents information to search engines differently than to visitors. Text (such as excessive keywords) can be hidden in several ways, including:

Using white text on a white background*
Including text behind an image
Using CSS to hide text*
Setting the font size to 0
Hidden links are links that are intended to be crawled by Googlebot, but are unreadable to humans because:
The link consists of hidden text (for example, the text color and background color are identical).
CSS has been used to make tiny hyperlinks, as little as one pixel high.
The link is hidden in a small character - for example, a hyphen in the middle of a paragraph.

If your site is perceived to contain hidden text and links that are deceptive in intent, your site may be removed from the Google index, and will not appear in search results pages. When evaluating your site to see if it includes hidden text or links, look for anything that's not easily viewable by visitors of your site. Are any text or links there solely for search engines rather than visitors?


If you do find hidden text or links on your site, either remove them or, if they are relevant for your site's visitors, make them easily viewable. If your site has been removed from our search results, review our webmaster guidelines for more information. Once you've made your changes and are confident that your site no longer violates our guidelines, submit your site for reconsideration.

* I have seen both of these used in some module templates and they may hurt your SE rankings.

Re: smartfactory modules are ADWARES
  • 2008/4/14 0:23

  • Runeher

  • Module Developer

  • Posts: 825

  • Since: 2008/1/24

Yeah, hiding text either by css or colored text is a very stupid idea... you're better off removing it...


Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?

I think it is a wonderful thing that SmartFactory makes free, high quality modules. If I may summarize the the reactions above: people agree that authors get sufficient credit on the right place, but the adds (especially on the user side) are simply too much.

As people are hacking anyway: would it be possible to share an ad-free version? I believe the GNU Library General Public License allows this (correct me if I'm wrong). But please keep the credit to the authors in about.php

Coming back to the original question on the Xigg module. I think SmartSection is a lot more open as it has a licence that allows you to adapt it. In case of Xigg, you don't have this freedom (at least not at this moment). I would contact the maker before using it, Probably he has been busy with other things then "legal yada yada".
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: the information presented above is my personal opinion, not an advice. To the extent permissible by law, I disclaim all warranties, express or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The information presented above is provided 'as it is' and I accept no liability for any loss, injury or inconvenience sustained by any person as a result of the information provided in this posting. Always verify critical information with the relevant authorities before you use it.

Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?
  • 2008/4/14 8:19

  • Shine

  • Just can't stay away

  • Posts: 822

  • Since: 2002/7/22

But please keep the credit on about.php

I totally agree on this.
Hidden css/text within the core/templates is not done. But leave the about.php intact (if included) is a must considering to my opinion.

Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?

@ tcnet

You are right, it violates Google's guidelines. It also gives search engines like Google a wrong idea of the content of your site, leading to less relevant traffic. And it lowers your pagerank. This is why I removed this from the start.

Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?
  • 2008/4/14 9:26

  • tom

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 1359

  • Since: 2002/9/21

This is my reply to the post: Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?

My reply maybe removed, hence why I'm private messaging it to you also.

Coming back to the original question on the Xigg module. I think SmartSection is a lot more open as it has a licence that allows you to adapt it. In case of Xigg, you don't have this freedom (at least not at this moment). I would contact the maker before using it, Probably he has been busy with other things then "legal yada yada".

I think if you look into the GPL, if a piece of code relies on a product licensed under the GPL, then it too must be licensed the same way, however when making ports I believe there is an exception to the rule.

Other exceptions include images and themes (according to past conversions) as they can work without the XOOPS GPL code.

With regards to hiding text, it would be a silly thing to do, and rather pointless, but still we see many cases of this being done around the web.

No onto the stupidity 'smartfactory modules are ADWARES', I believe the original poster of that comment is not genuine, based on all the hacked XOOPS accounts we keep seeing.

WF-Downloads was originally developed by Catz upto 2.05. from version 3.0 the module was rewritten completely by mithrandir and smartfactory. so no. wfdownloads 3.x serious was not written by catz.

Marcan from the SmartFactory would reply and offer support himself here, however he was banned because he works with another CMS also.

The advertisements are in the back end, so they don't interfere with users of a site, I do agree though they are annoying and not good for people who perform installations for clients and also have businesses to run. But if your doing this a client, your making money from it and you should be able to support the module yourself and from that remove the advertisements yourself. If your unable to code the advertisements out, then what would your clients do when they have an intricate problem with their site they are paying you for.

It takes the whole of two minutes to remove those ad's.

Because Marcan can't see these posts I shall raise the issue with him again and reply here with his response.

I will say this it's unfair targeting someone who cannot reply because you banned them for supporting another system as well as XOOPS, I'm surprised they still support XOOPS with this conduct.

Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?
  • 2008/4/14 10:42

  • Mamba

  • Moderator

  • Posts: 11251

  • Since: 2004/4/23

Marcan from the SmartFactory would reply and offer support himself here, however he was banned because he works with another CMS also.

I will say this it's unfair targeting someone who cannot reply because you banned them for supporting another system as well as XOOPS

Tom, I would appreciate if you wouldn't twist the truth. If we would ban people for supporting another system, you would be banned as well, but you're not, right? And there are several people like you here. We ban people if they exhibit a malicious intent to damage XOOPS, and/or repeatedly violate our "Terms of Use".

Marcan was banned not because he supports another system, but because he violated his duties as a Director of XOOPS Foundation.

Thanks to Google, we find sometimes some very interesting things in the searches! Just check out this link to learn about beginning of ICMS.

The problem that we have with it is that this conversation took place on Dec. 7th and 8th, 2007. At that time, Herko Coomans (aka Herko), David Ledbury (aka davidl2), and Marc-André Lanciault (aka Marcan) are all Directors of the XOOPS Foundation Board. As such, they are legally, ethically and morally obligated to represent and protect the interests of the XOOPS! But instead, they are conspiring to damage XOOPS by starting a new fork. As stated by Herko: "Marcan gave me the mandate to start the process of creating the vision, mission and identity of the new project." So instead of protecting XOOPS' interests, he violated his fiduciary duties by pushing a fork of XOOPS.

Creating a fork is not a problem, after all XOOPS is an Open Source project. But if you do it while serving as Director of the XOOPS Foundation, then it's a clear breach of his fiduciary duties, and a reason to ban him from here.

So please don't come here and spin the truth trying to make Marcan look like a poor, innocent victim. It's just not fair to all of us!
Use 2.5.10 | Docs | Modules | Bugs

Re: Xigg - removing "powered by Xigg" ?
  • 2008/4/14 10:49

  • Anonymous

  • Posts: 0

  • Since:

Following the above diversions, please can we get this thread back on topic?

I really don't want to have to spend my day checking/moderating this thread. If anyone wants to discuss the off-topic stuff more fully then please take it to email or somewhere else other than these forums

Many thanks.


Who's Online

58 user(s) are online (29 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 58



Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Jul 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits