Asset under Content Site Structure



Hi all,

Our client has a specific requirement to secure some of the Assets till they can be made available for public. Currently we have a way already implemented through which contents are made secure. I will refrain to discuss that in details here, because that is not my query about.

One of the suggestion which came up is, to put assets under that secured site content folder which automatically help securing them by leveraging the security in place for site content, which will just be extended for those assets too. Again, I do not need to explain how here as that is not my query about.

I informed to stakeholders that it is not a good idea to put assets under site content folder. But they would like to know what are the issues one can face if assets are put under Site content structure than within DAM.

I have raised few like

1. Not able to use DAM Admin capabilities. Metadata cannot be applied, no searching, no thumbnail etc.

2. Not able to anything with the asset through site admin. Author cannot access crx-de and hence not much can be done by author.

3. DAM update workflow will not work unless heavily overwritten.

4. Rendition generation will be impacted.

5. Image references on pages will be ill-managed and may not work.

6. Many unknown OOTB feature will not work.

7. 3rd party integration like scene7 will not be easy.

8. AEM version upgrade will be a nightmare

9. It is a non-standard option and probable anti-pattern etc.

Can you help me with suggestions what else I can/should list down where things can go wrong if assets are stored under site content structure.

Quick answer will be appreciated since I need to present the reasons in front of the client group tomorrow. Thanks in advance!

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)




Hope you have already reviewed AEM Development - Guidelines and Best Practices and Best Practices for Assets Performance​. Also there is lot of logical dependencies in code on path which is OOTB and should not be modified and something like this has never come into our picture. I am assuming if customer has both Sites + Assets license then they should follow correct approach.