Adobe Experience Manager

My organization manages dozens of SSL certificates across multiple AEM as a Cloud Service (AEMaaCS) websites and environments. Adobe notifications regarding certificate renewals do not identify the specific certificate that requires action, forcing administrators to manually search through the certificate list.I would like the SSL Certificates overview in Cloud Manager to support both ascending and descending sorting on the column headers, particularly the "Valid Until" column. This would enable administrators to quickly identify certificates that are nearing expiration and significantly improve operational efficiency when managing large numbers of certificates.The ability to sort certificates by expiration date would reduce the time spent searching for the affected certificate after receiving a renewal notification and help prevent overlooked renewals.

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: AEMAACS Enhancement Request to automate reports sending to other AEM Users Use-case: In other Adobe Products (ACS,etc.) there is the ability to send reports to other users with a login. Would like this automated functionality in AEMAACS. When you  Current/Experienced Behavior: Under Tools -> Assets -> Reports -> Create -> Upload (Report of uploaded assets) Unable to automate report to send to other AEM users. I realize this is currently not a feature that I would like included a future feature request. Improved/Expected Behavior: automate reports sending Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMAACS Customer-name/Organization name: Epsilon Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Problem StatementCurrently, AEM Sites only supports tenant-level distribution lists for proactive notifications and communications. This creates operational challenges for global organizations managing multiple regional instances, as there is no capability to:- Configure separate distribution lists per AEM instance/program- Differentiate notification recipients based on regional responsibility- Manage admin-level notifications independently for different instancesThis limitation forces organizations to either:1. Include all regional users in a single tenant-level list (resulting in irrelevant notifications)2. Remove regional users entirely and rely on global admins to manually redistribute communicationsProposed EnhancementImplement granular distribution list management at the program/instance level within AEM Sites, allowing:1. Instance-specific distribution lists: Configure separate recipient lists for each AEM instance (e.g., Instance X recipients ≠ Instance Y recipients)2. Role-bas

Today: In the web UI, to create a new version of an existing asset, the uploaded file must have the same filename in the same folder. If the filename is different, AEM treats it as a new, separate asset, not as a version.Desired behaviour:New versions of an asset can be added regardless of the file name, e.g. by selecting the asset and clicking “add new version”.Reasoning:Updated files often come with new names but should still be stored as versions of existing assets. E.g. if a legacy asset was uploaded (or migrated from our old DAM) with the file name: coporate-presentation-2022-v1.ppt, I want to be able to upload a new version that is called hbk-coporate-presentation-2026.ppt We are not starting a DAM from scratch or renaming 30,000 files. That means that even though we can update to newer versions in AEM Assets, any errors, bad naming or typos in old file names get carried over into the new version. When users download the updated file, it has the file name of the first version, e.

Background:Currently if you start a translation for an existing page, a launch page of the target page will be created (under /content/launches). If editor recognizes that he picked up the wrong page, he will delete the project. An info box pops up and provides different options for clean up connected data related to the project.The created launches for update case is not included, so with deletion it will remain as orphaned ones (garbage) in the database as nobody will probably manually clean it up.Feature request:Just add a checkbox (default enable) which deletes connected launches pages. Benefit:No orphaned launches, no garbage in database, no manual todo for editors (which even do not know about the utilization of launches behind the scenes)   

Meta data creation is THE key step when feeding new assets into a DAM. Especially when uploading multiple assets, the creation of meaningful titles, descriptions and tags takes a long time or needs to be done with an excel sheet. An AI agent/tool that helps creates this data by reading/viewing the file and it’s content or what an image shows, would be extremely helpful.The agent should ideally also be able to do other things as well, e.g. translate the description and enter it into a specified field (e.g. translating the EN description to FR and adding it into the “French description” field).The Bulk Rename feature in Assets View already works pretty good, but it’s only for the actual file names, not for titles. This is like a mini version of what I’m imagining. Other DAMs already have this, if required, I can provide an example.The AI generated titles and descriptions are well noted, alas, there is no easy way to copy them to the actual title field with just a click or to see a sugges

Right now, we can only export meta data on a folder level. This is impractical if you need to edit only meta data for 30 assets, but then wait hours for a folder meta data report because there are 5k assets in a folder. And no, smaller folder is not an option here. So what would be preferrable is that you simply select any assets you want and click “export metadata”. The upload of meta data should support this, so that you can add the meta data e.g. for the top folder and it will be applied to all assets in the csv, regardless of their sub folder location (not tested in current environment - maybe this works already?).

Currently, the meta data export csv does not contain the asset ID. This is a real problem because the asset ID (“urn:aaid:aem:”) is the unique identifier and with this ID, you can easily compare, consolidate or edit meta data import sheets or locate a specific asset in the csv, even if some assets have identical titles etc.. This is a feature that I would expect of ANY DAM, not a nice to have, but a must-have. Support asked me to send in an idea, but I feel the product is lacking a standard feature here.

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Content Hub Display  Use-case:   Current/Experienced Behavior: Content Hub Display Labels on Filters Improved/Expected Behavior: The filter list in Content Hub currently shows technical values instead of display labels. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable):   Customer-name/Organization name:   Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

We use Apache CXF for SOAP and REST clients on AEM 6.5.2 LTS and install the necessary bundles in AEM. Currently we are forced to use Apache CXF 3.3.13, which was released in March 2022, because AEM still ships with org.apache.servicemix.specs.saaj-api-1.3, and newer versions of Apache CXF require saaj-api-1.4. There are a number of security vulnerabilities in Apache CXF that have since been patched since 2022 that we would like to remediate, see https://cxf.apache.org/security-advisories.html. Our goal would be to install Apache CXF 3.6.x, currently 3.6.10, as that is still actively supported, but the old SAAJ API is preventing us from doing that, see javax.xml.soap,version=[1.4,2) -- Cannot be resolved: Our ask is for AEM to upgrade to saaj-api-1.4, which would unblock us from upgrading Apache CXF.I can provide a full list of bundle JARs that we install related to Apache CXF if needed.

What is Context7?It's an open-source MCP server from Upstash that pulls current, version-specific docs and real code examples for a library straight into your AI assistant's context - instead of the model relying on whatever it memorized at training time.Where I use it:Inside Cursor and Claude Code, whenever I'm generating code against a fast-moving SDK — so the assistant reasons against today's API surface, not the one that existed at its training cutoff.Here's the real example:Asked Cursor to implement session caching with Upstash Redis — it generated hmset, which looked correct but was already deprecated.Added Context7 via MCP, and Cursor pulled the latest SDK docs and switched to the correct hset API.AI can write code. MCP helps it write code with current context.Key takeaways:AI assistants hallucinate silently on deprecated APIs — that's the dangerous kind Training-data cutoff is the biggest hidden risk in AI-assisted development MCP turns "probably right" into "verified against c

We are currently using Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) as a core platform for managing and publishing imagery to our website. However, there are significant limitations around auditing and activity tracking, as there is no comprehensive audit trail available for us to utilise. This creates challenges for operational processes, including complaint investigation, troubleshooting issues and understanding when and how changes have been made within the system. Currently, key activities such as asset uploads, metadata updates and publishing to the live website cannot be tracked. Internally, we have identified multiple gaps where audit visibility is either limited or not available. Use Case / Problem:Without an audit trail, we are unable to:Identify when an image was changed or replaced on the website Trace who made specific metadata or asset updates Investigate discrepancies or bugs more efficiently, enabling us to respond to complaints with greater confidence and accuracy. Maintain a clear h

Currently, when publishing a page, AEM provides the capability to publish referenced content together with the selected page ("Publish with References"). This behavior is useful in many cases; however, it can also introduce a significant governance and security risk. Recently, this issue resulted in an actual information leakage incident in our production environment. Some of these referenced pages were not yet approved for public release, resulting in unintended exposure of information.To prevent similar incidents, we would like to request an enhancement that allows administrators to configure whether referenced pages should be included in the publish candidates.We believe this enhancement would help many AEM customers improve content governance and reduce operational risk.

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Versions must be created in AEM upon using Manage Publication. Use-case: Manage Publication is commonly used feature within AEM and versions not being created with Manage Publication can cause issues while restoring content. Current/Experienced Behavior: Versions are not created in AEM upon Manage Publication and versioning works only if Quick Publish option is used. Improved/Expected Behavior: Versions must be created in AEM upon using Manage Publication. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as Cloud Service latest release Customer-name/Organization name: Abbott Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Link is https://experience.adobe.com/#/experiencemanagerBut it returns a 404.  

Request for Feature Enhancement　(RFE) Summary:​ <Issue> An issue occurred where the publishing operation failed on the holding company's corporate website. <Cause> The cause was that a file uploaded to Assets did not comply with the naming conventions. However, the current version of AEM Assets allows files that do not adhere to naming conventions to be uploaded without displaying any error messages or warnings. <Request for Improvement> We would like a feature that checks file naming conventions during upload, displays an error or warning for non-compliant files, and controls the upload process. We believe this will help prevent issues upon publication and reduce the operational workload. Use-case:​ A specification that checks naming conventions during file upload, displays an error or warning for non-compliant files, and controls the upload process. Current/Experienced Behavior:​ With the current version of AEM Assets, it is possib

Indonesia is becoming a preferred destination for businesses focused on sustainability, renewable energy, and waste management. With increasing government support for green investments and environmental initiatives, entrepreneurs are exploring Indonesia company formation to establish circular economy ventures. Whether you plan to open a company in Indonesia for recycling, eco-friendly manufacturing, or renewable energy, understanding the registration process is essential for legal compliance and business growth.Why Choose Indonesia for Sustainable Business?When you choose company registration in Indonesia it's offers a large consumer market, abundant natural resources, and a strategic location in Southeast Asia. The government actively promotes investments in sustainable industries through supportive policies and incentives. Businesses engaged in recycling, green technology, ESG consulting, and renewable energy can benefit from a favorable investment climate and expanding market demand

You govern everything that moves through AEM. Every image has metadata. Every template has an owner. Every asset runs an approval before it ships. That's the whole point of managing your content and assets in one place instead of scattered drives. So here's an uncomfortable question: can you prove that every font rendering across your web properties, and sitting embedded in your asset library, is actually licensed for the way you're using it, and on-brand? For most enterprises, the honest answer is no. And that gap is quietly two problems at once: a legal exposure and a brand problem. The blind spot at scaleA DAM is built to govern assets. Fonts are a strange asset class, though, because they usually aren't a file in your library; they're a dependency living inside other files. They arrive embedded in PSDs and PDFs, baked into agency deliverables, uploaded inside templates, riding along in third-party creative. They slip governance precisely because nobody catalogs a dependency. Multip

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Support for Amazon Linux 2023(Linux kernel6.x). Use-case: Use as the OS for new servers. Since Amazon Linux2 is reaching EOL, I want to use a new standard OS. Current/Experienced Behavior: AEM 6.5 supports kernels up to 5.x.   https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/experience-manager-65/deploying/introduction/technical-requirements.html?lang=en#server-operating-systems Improved/Expected Behavior: AEM 6.5 supports kernel 6.x including Amazon Linux 2023. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name:   Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

  Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Query Preformance and QueryBuilder to be available to customers on AEM as a Cloud Service Publish tier Use-case:  Currently the Query performance tool  /libs/granite/operations/content/diagnosistools/queryPerformance.htmland Query debugger /libs/cq/search/content/querydebug.htmlare not available to customers on AEM as Cloud Service even from the Developer ConsoleThis is useful when customer wants to perform a query on publisher for troubleshooting purposes or if they want to validate something. This is useful for Assets Implementation Projects using Publish tier as well. Current/Experienced Behavior: Not available to customers on AEM as Cloud Service even from the Developer Console. Improved/Expected Behavior: Make it available to customers on AEM as Cloud Service even from the Developer Console. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as Cloud Service , AEM As

I've been experimenting with different ways to reduce repetitive operational work, and I'm curious about other people's experiences with AI agents.Our team still jumps between project tools, email, spreadsheets, and chat just to keep work moving. Even after trying a few automation tools (and recently looking at platforms like WorksBuddy), I keep wondering whether AI agents actually reduce the workload or simply create another layer to monitor.For those who've used AI agents for things like updating project status, managing follow-ups, summarizing meetings, or syncing information across different tools—has it genuinely saved time?Where have you seen the biggest impact? And where do AI agents still struggle enough that you'd rather handle the work yourself?I'm especially interested in real-world experiences rather than feature lists. Has anyone found a workflow where AI feels like a reliable teammate instead of another tool that needs constant supervision?

Currently, collections on Content Hub can only be shared with people who also have log-in credentials for the portal. This doesn’t cover all business cases in day to day work, though.You want to be able to make CH collections public for anyone with the link as well.Why? Here are some examples:Agencies with short-term contracts don’t need accounts to access a specific subset of assets for a project. Sales or Product Management can share a collection of product data assets with a customer who can download directly A link to a collection with corporate assets can be shared on the intranet for everyone to access, even people who don’t usually use CH A Marketing colleague can share a collection of campaign assets with Sales regardless of their ability to log into CH or notThere should be an option to make collections public, which is linked to admin rights. Not everyone should be able to make any collection public for everyone with the link, but admins at least should be able to do it. 

When using Tab or Accordion components in a page, an issue occurs where, after editing a component on the second or subsequent pages and then closing it, the view unintentionally returns to the first page.Expected behavior: When editing components on the second or subsequent pages, the user should remain on the edited page and be able to continue working without being redirected to the first page.

AEM as a Cloud Service "Copy Content" copies author-tier content only and intentionally strips replication-status metadata (cq:lastReplicated, cq:lastReplicationAction, cq:lastReplicatedBy, incl. the _publish/_preview variants). As a result, after a Prod→Stage copy the destination author has no record of what was published on the source, and nothing is published on the destination's publish tier.The only way teams can reproduce the source's published state today is to build external tooling that:1. queries the source (Prod) for the full activated set (e.g. via QueryBuilder), then2. re-replicates exactly that set on the target (Stage), chunk by chunk.This is inefficient by construction — it re-derives state the source environment already holds, it's bounded by QueryBuilder-over-HTTP result limits and request timeouts, and it doesn't scale to largerepositories (millions of nodes / multi-TB). We built and open-sourced such a tool to prove it works — https://github.com/rwunsch/aem-content-

This is a request to have the Emergency pipeline execution mode, currently available for AEM on-pem (Code Deployment | Adobe Experience Manager), added to AEM as a Cloud Service.