Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


WHMCS - OWNED - END OF LIFE - NO MORE SUPPORT!! - Page 3
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

WHMCS - OWNED - END OF LIFE - NO MORE SUPPORT!!

13»

Comments

  • JamesFJamesF Member, Provider
    edited April 9

    @jh

    This is true.... nulled ones will be everywhere and money will dry up as others move to others.

    It will be interesting to see when the next release of WHMCS is??

  • alexvolkalexvolk Member
    edited April 9

    @jh said:
    Forums like this that ban anyone using a nulled WHMCS must have helped them a lot with piracy. I guess a lot of people aren't going to care that much anymore, because, well, f!ck WHMCS. An interesting side effect.

    Nulled WHMCS is a security risk for a host if it's taken somewhere untrustable. If a business doesn't have the money to purchase licenses for a software that they use - shame on them.

    Of course, any host can use my nulled scripts lol. It was me actually who nulled WHMCS for a long time and then some script-kiddies packed with shells and shared on Warez sites :cold_sweat:

    Thanked by 1ntlx
  • Actually, this could be a thing where a host buys whmcs lifetime, and then uses a pirated license. On the license verifier, you will see a verified badge, and the provider doesn't pay a cent.

  • defaultdefault Member

    @skorupion said:
    Actually, this could be a thing where a host buys whmcs lifetime, and then uses a pirated license. On the license verifier, you will see a verified badge, and the provider doesn't pay a cent.

    Because of this, the rule of nulled WHMCS (not allowed on LET) no longer has much value anymore. Maybe @FAT32 could rethink this rule to also include WHMCS support, but then this would mean promoting and protecting WHMCS current behavior with price increase.

  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Provider

    Are there any rules against modifying an old WHMCS install to patch known bugs/security exploits?

    We have owned licenses and were very happy to pay the annual update fee.

    In ~15 yrs and several licenses, I think we have fewer than 5 tickets with WHMCS. This situation is a real FU to owned license holders. I have no intention to switch to a monthly license.

    Long term, we'll look to developing an inhouse system. We're already dropping so many 3rd party made rip off monthly licenses software and services. You just cant trust other companies not to butt fuck you.

    But I digress. What's the rule on patching WHMCS yourself?

  • LTnigerLTniger Member

    @randvegeta said: Are there any rules against modifying an old WHMCS install to patch known bugs/security exploits?

    Yes, there is. WHMCS is obfuscated with IONcube, to circumvent (reverse engineering) that obfuscation is against their ToS.

    Just invest time into creating your own solution. WHMCS is already dead.

    Thanked by 1randvegeta
  • randvegetarandvegeta Member, Provider

    @LTniger said:

    @randvegeta said: Are there any rules against modifying an old WHMCS install to patch known bugs/security exploits?

    Yes, there is. WHMCS is obfuscated with IONcube, to circumvent (reverse engineering) that obfuscation is against their ToS.

    Just invest time into creating your own solution. WHMCS is already dead.

    Arseholes.

    Thanked by 1ddvu
  • WebProjectWebProject Member, Provider
    edited April 10

    Owned doesn’t mean lifetime, typical example of company - picked up the market share based on owned or cheap licenses and now wish to get all the profit from it. It does reminds me the cPanel, used to be cheap and now just greedy and nothing to do with being premium!

    You need to say thank you to WHMCS as they do charge you for license based on number of active clients and not percentage per transaction your customers made.

  • royal_oakroyal_oak Member
    edited April 10

    Some side note to investor driven price increasings at webpros. In the last annual report from oakley capital stands one sentence about cpanel revenue growth.

    "cPanel’s FY20 revenue is up 39% versus the prior year, driven by the new account-based pricing structure, and solid volume performance YTD despite price adjustments."

    I guess 39% is not that much considering the huge damage resulting from loss of loyality and trust in that brand. Wondering about the yearly organic growth rate before these price increasings. I think yearly two digit growth is not unrealistic for a strong brand like cpanels (before 2020).

  • LTnigerLTniger Member

    @royal_oak said: huge damage resulting from loss of loyality and trust in that brand

    0 f's given from their side as they only want to cash out quickly. As soon as revenue stream fall significantly, they just leave product to rot. WHMCS next in line.

  • defaultdefault Member

    @LTniger said:

    @royal_oak said: huge damage resulting from loss of loyality and trust in that brand

    0 f's given from their side as they only want to cash out quickly. As soon as revenue stream fall significantly, they just leave product to rot. WHMCS next in line.

  • LeeLee Member

    @LTniger said: WHMCS is already dead.

    It's really not.

    @default said: Because of this, the rule of nulled WHMCS (not allowed on LET) no longer has much value anymore. Maybe @FAT32 could rethink this rule to also include WHMCS support

    Let's not become the assholes everyone is calling WHMCS by supporting piracy just because of a pricing huff.

  • defaultdefault Member

    @Lee said:

    @LTniger said: WHMCS is already dead.

    It's really not.

    @default said: Because of this, the rule of nulled WHMCS (not allowed on LET) no longer has much value anymore. Maybe @FAT32 could rethink this rule to also include WHMCS support

    Let's not become the assholes everyone is calling WHMCS by supporting piracy just because of a pricing huff.

    Dude... calm down your PMS. I stated "rethink to also include WHMCS support", in order not to support piracy. Phew...

  • cheapdavecheapdave Member
    edited April 11

    I'm not a provider, just a cheap user, so you could disregard this post. I'd like to suggest moving off cPanel/WHM/etc and all products owned by the same group, to something else. Either some opensource panel has to be supported and improved, or go with one of the panels discussed in the recent thread here.
    Personally, I have tried Webuzo (free version) and it has worked non-stop without interruption on my 1GB VPS for 6 years now. (Not affiliated in any way.) It's from the makers of Softaculous.

    Thanked by 1default
  • Just use @Jord 's BillingServ

    Its homegrown and quality choice.

    Thanked by 1Jord
  • JordJord Moderator, Provider

    @stefeman said:
    Just use @Jord 's BillingServ

    Its homegrown and quality choice.

    Thank you for mentioning us :heart:

    Of course we are happy to work with any clients to build them a solution that works for them :)

  • @ddvu said: But I agree, Laravel + PHP will be the easiest way. They are already making use of some of the laravel components anyways (eloquent for example).

    No, I wrote my panel for UnderServer with just plain python and flask, however, there was one limitation: VPSes only. I am sort of working on modular support for it, but it's not intended for billing, etc., though, but if I wanted to turn it into a provider panel, then it is doable.

Sign In or Register to comment.