In what format to release CMS for html-sites?

Question

CMS

Hello!
I ask you to express your opinion and advise in what format it is better to release the CMS.
I am the developer of CMS Anderseno - of. site, CMS demo-version CMS
is installed on html sites by simply copying files to a directory. Nothing else needs to be changed or edited.
However, there is a problem. For copy protection purposes, the source code is encrypted with ZEND. But everything is not so simple here, this ZEND may not work on certain hostings, even if the library is installed. Therefore, 80% of customers simply cannot install this CMS on their site. The price of the license is only 1000 rubles.
I see 3 ways to solve the problem, advise which is better.
1. Make editing and all the logic on your server, and keep only executable files with the key on the client.
2. Make it open source and hope no one steals anything.
3. Make this CMS free, thereby promoting your brand and making a profit from the sale of other products, for example this one: demo-last.anderseno.ru/admin , but here the question of protecting the code also arises.
What to choose?
PS Also, I think that hiding the code increases the security of the script, because no one knows what's inside.

Answer 1

Paid CMS in PHP?
After Joomla, WP, Drupal?
Yes, you are kidding!

Answer 2

Any of the three proposed methods looks valid if I understand method 1 correctly.
But there are nuances:
1 Most likely it will not take off due to the fact that it is paid. Who needs it?
2 Potyryat immediately. Income will be == 0. But it will not take off yet, because it remains paid.
3 It will not take off, because there is already a lot of free junk on the market;) And even if it does take off, it will bring more crap, and income == 0. Of
course, I pump it up;)
I would do option 3 and try to sell technical support. This approach has at least some chance of success.
But to assume that hidden code increases reliability and security is a very big mistake. It's like believing that the encryption algorithm unknown to the attacker increases the strength of the cipher. It always ends very badly for the defender.

Answer 3

Zend is great.
But IMHO, it should be like this:
Your server has a control panel, the user's host hosts an engine that receives a unique key, then the user makes changes to the panels and all that, with a preview on the generated demo, then clicks "Save", the changes are sent with the key to the engine on the host, where when successful authorization of the key, all changes are applied, otherwise the user receives an alert with an error and possible causes and solutions. At the same time, in order for the user not to panic once again due to problems with the fact that nothing happens on f5 on his site (in the case when there are a lot of changes), it is necessary that by "Save" a modal appears that cannot be closed, in which the progress bar (gif) with the word "Saving", the engine after making changes should return the answer 1 (changes were successful) or 0 (an error occurred),
Something like that, but in general, what prevents us from providing cms entirely on zend? Or if paranoia eats into porridge, do not provide hosting for it on your server?
I honestly do not believe that your "revolutionary" cms is somehow different from those that are now presented on the net.
There are other ideas, but I won’t write about them, paranoia gnaws ...

Answer 4

It is better to remove such protection because of which 80% of potential customers will not be able to install it. In this case, you can slightly change the cost of the license.
Yes, spelling mistakes are a shame.

Answer 5

Make cms free, and modules and support - paid.

Answer 6

I would release this CMS as PC application software

Answer 7

I would make it free for non-commercial use if I were you. Shkolota, fighting warezniks, will not pay anyway. And those who make websites to order will not put a broken line on their clients.
Seriously work with a system whose administrator can leave for Honduras at any time, and no one will irrevocably fall the server. Only for dandings and only if there is an autobackup of the database to client hosting.
It’s better to make a landing page builder with a pseudo-admin panel so that the template, content, scripts that collect pages (or already assembled HTML) and media files for it are stored on the client’s hosting. The admin panel was loaded from your server. And in it it was possible to forbid the client to change the design. For this it is not a sin to pay a small subscriber.
It will just be possible to make a free version, the admin panel of which will be on your URL and with your constructor's advertisement, and a paid one, the admin panel of which will be clean and on the client's URL.
A logical structure will turn out - as a developer, I am independent of your service and at any time I can change the site in the source files or even pull it on the CMS. If I want to give access to a client, to edit content or to work in your constructor myself, I pay you for a license. If I gave access to the client and did not pay you, the client in the admin panel will see your ad. What is there to offer the client: payment, transfer of the site to you, support or something else - it's up to you ...