Adobe Experience Manager

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. 

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?).

Using Ai search, we would like to have search operators enabled to be able to search for exact terms. The search operators “ “ as known from Google etc. would be the highest priority, enabling us to search for an exact combination of search keywords. 

Summary A customer uploading 20 video files totaling 45GB (~1.8GB each) is experiencing Chrome out-of-memory crashes (Err Code 5). Potential root cause is that AEM browser-based asset upload functionality currently supports up to 7 concurrent uploads regardless of file size leading to browser memory exhaustion when uploading large files, particularly video assets.We are requesting an enhancement to dynamically adjust the concurrent upload count based on total active file size in memory.Fixed concurrency of 7 does not account for file size, leading to excessive browser memory consumption with large files Chrome does not gracefully handle memory exhaustion in this scenario — it crashes with Err 5 rather than exiting cleanlyProposed Solution Implement a dynamic concurrency model that uses total active upload file size as the throttling mechanism, rather than a fixed concurrent file count. The browser experience should be smart enough to do 7 for smaller files, or adjust down for larger on

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Cross Program Content Copy in AEM as a Cloud Service Use-case: We are looking to copy content between two environments across different programs, such as from Environment A in Program A to Environment B in Program B. Currently, the content copy tool only supports content transfer within the same program ID, which limits this capability. Current/Experienced Behavior: The AEM Content Copy Tool is designed for content movement within the same Cloud Manager program. Transferring content across different programs is not supported.- Adobe does not provide an out-of-the-box solution for cross-program content migration to maintain content integrity and security. Improved/Expected Behavior: We are looking to copy content between two environments across different programs, such as from Environment A in Program A to Environment B in Program B. Currently, the content copy tool only supports content transfer within the same program ID, which l

Hi Team,Last week, my team needed to deploy an urgent, time-sensitive hotfix. The fix itself was incredibly minor just a two-line null-check update inside a core OSGi service. We tested it locally against the latest SDK, the PR was approved, and we kicked off the Cloud Manager production pipeline.Twenty minutes later, the pipeline abruptly halted with a Hard Failure at the Code Quality step. I pulled the logs, expecting a missed unit test, but instead found this:[WARNING] [region-deprecated-api] ... Usage of deprecated package found: com.day.cq.commons.jcr.JcrConstants. For removal: 2026-06-11[ERROR] Rule region-deprecated-api failed. Build halted.Because of the strict API deprecation gates rolled out in the recent 2026 releases, what used to be a passive log warning had instantly become a deployment blocker.The frustrating part? The code that failed was not even part of our hotfix. It was an old legacy utility class deep in our core Java bundle that hadn't been modified in three years

Hello,Having contacted Adobe AEM support who confirmed that this does not currently exist, I am creating this idea to see whether there is support in the community for this feature. With the deprecation of the OpenTelemetry library (from the aem-commons project, I think), we no longer have log-forwarding to Datadog.We know that there is a self-service setup for log-forwarding to Datadog and other monitoring solutions [1]. However, what is missing there is the possibility to restrain logs by log level (such as DEBUG, INFO, WARN, ERROR, and FATAL). We understand that we could remove logs from Datadog after ingestion, but Datadog is paid for the ingested data (whether you use it or not), so this is not an option for us.Therefore I’ve opened a RFE to add this filter. Please let me know whether you are interested in having this feature. Thank you,Jakob.PS: Note that my request is similar but different from this existing one [2] which asked for filtering by log type (cdn, error, access, ...)

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.

DescriptionWe have identified UX inconsistencies in the Tag Selector component within the new Content Fragment Editor in AEM as a Cloud Service.These issues are causing confusion for authors and may lead to incorrect tagging of content.We have identified UX inconsistencies in the Tag Selector component within the new Content Fragment Editor in AEM as a Cloud Service.These issues are causing confusion for authors and may lead to incorrect tagging of content. Issue 1: Tag Selection and Expansion BehaviorCurrent BehaviorClicking on a tag label performs two actions simultaneously: Expands the tag hierarchy Automatically selects/adds the tag value Clicking specifically on the left arrow icon only expands the tag (expected behavior)Expected BehaviorClicking on a tag label should only expand/collapse the hierarchy Tag selection should be a separate explicit action (e.g., checkbox selection)ImpactAuthors may unintentionally select incorrect tags Leads to data inconsistency in content tagging

Currently [1] the option “Restore content” in the Cloud Manager gives you the opportunity to restore content of the whole environment. Here the problem is that you can only restore ALL content. If you are hosting just a small website, this would be not a problem. But if you imagine an enterprise setup for a company with several business groups who act independently, having multi-language and multi-sites, this option is not feasible. Imagine the following: you have a business group under the structure /content/business-a - here some content accident occurs which needs a content restore. Now, the content restore would effect everything under /content which means that you have to inform and coordinate ALL businesses about the restore as the work after the date where issue occurred and the point were you start restore will be gone and needs to be redone. Additionally, the editors a spread all over the world, so you can not really be sure that you reach everybody to inform them in time. So,

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Determining the content of zip files solely from their title or file name can be challenging. It would be beneficial if marketers could attach images to the zip files (for thumbnails), as this would enable quicker visual identification. Use-case: Visually identifying the content of a ZIP via a thumbnail Current/Experienced Behavior: All zip files has same generic thumbnail. Thus, marketers need to check read through Titles/names. Improved/Expected Behavior: Associate Image with a ZIP to identify contents by looking at the thumbnail Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5/Cloud Customer-name/Organization name: Mondelez Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

We are on AEMaaCS, we are working on introducing msm in our experience fragment hierarchy, we have created an xf in language masters in /content/experience-fragments/myProject/language-masters/en/header, now as it happens in site pages when we roll out a page from language masters, it automatically creates a live copy in /content/myProject/en/en_US, but in case of xf we have to manually create a live copy using create button, is there a way to automate this like it is there in sites pages.