Build better products with our product team
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Request to add an option to set a password when generating a Share Link in Content Hub, similar to the existing functionality in LG DAM (AEM Asset) environment. This will enhance security and prevent unauthorized access to brand assets. Use-case: When users generate a Share Link in Content Hub, the link is currently public and can be accessed by anyone with the URL. Adding a password requirement would allow secure distribution of brand assets, ensuring only intended recipients can access the files. Current/Experienced Behavior: Share Links generated in Content Hub are public by default and have no password protection, making them accessible to anyone who obtains the link—intentionally or unintentionally. Improved/Expected Behavior: Provide an optional password protection feature when creating a Share Link. Recipients would be required to enter the password before accessing shared files, similar to the current LG DAM environment. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Content Hub Customer-name/Organization name: LG Electronics Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Request for enhanced Share Link features in Content Hub to improve security, tracking, and management capabilities for enterprise use. Use-case: Enterprise users, such as brand managers or asset owners, need to securely share assets with internal and external stakeholders while maintaining control and visibility. This includes tracking link usage, invalidating links when needed, and enforcing authentication for recipients. Current/Experienced Behavior: There is no built-in feature to: Track who accessed or downloaded the shared assets (IP, download count). View or manage all Share Links created by the user. Invalidate an existing Share Link. Require authentication/OTP for specific recipients. Improved/Expected Behavior: Usage Tracking via Dashboard – Ability to see who accessed a specific Share Link, IP address, and download count. Share Link Management – Ability for the creator to view all their Share Links and manually invalidate them. Enhanced Access Control – Ability to require OTP authentication for email addresses registered to receive the Share Link. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Asset Cloud - Content Hub Customer-name/Organization name: LG Electronics Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Use-case: We have built a taxonomy in our AEM DAM based on custom fields for search, filtering and reporting. We are using a namespace to bucket all of these tags as a top level bucket. Under that we have built out the tag structure for the rest of our taxonomy. The first level of those tags is a category which pairs up to a custom field used for search. These tags are technically "buckets" as well. We would like to set these up as namespaces as well but have them be children of the overarching namespace for our organization? So the structure would look like this:organization-namespace:category:tag-level-1/tag-level-2 Current/Experienced Behavior: We have a namespace to bucket all of our custom tags as a top level bucket. Under that we have built out the tag structure for the rest of our taxonomy. However, the first level of those tags is a category which pairs up to a custom field used for search. Improved/Expected Behavior: We would like to set these up the second level "buckets" as namespaces as well but have them be children of the overarching namespace for our organization? It'll be so much cleaner if we can have all of our tags in one place at the top instead of spread out among 20 or 30 separate namespaces at the root level. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud most recent version Customer-name/Organization name: Enterprise Mobility Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Sonar ruleset significantly influence BMW's development workflows. To ensure smooth integration and minimal disruption, it is essential that any changes to these rules—including minor adjustments—are communicated in advance. Developer teams require early access to updated rule definitions so they can validate their code against them before the changes are enforced in Cloud Manager pipelines. Use-case: BMW experienced a situation where a previously successful pipeline began failing overnight due to newly detected Sonar vulnerabilities, despite being based on the same commit. This indicates that the Sonar ruleset had changed unexpectedly from one day to the next. Given BMW’s multi-project setup—comprising around 10 interdependent projects managed by different development teams—each project is built through its own pipeline. As a result, a Sonar scan failure in any one pipeline can have a significant ripple effect across the entire development landscape. Current/Experienced Behavior: A Sonar scan failure in any one pipeline can have a significant ripple effect across the entire development landscape. Improved/Expected Behavior: To ensure smooth integration and minimal disruption, it is essential that any changes to these rules—including minor adjustments—are communicated in advance. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: BMW AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like to see more of a separation in how assets and folders are managed in AEM. They are both managed the same way in 2 separate spaces, the assets pane and teh content tree. I would like to see the content tree be the space for managing folders and the assets pane be the space to manage assets. Use-case: Admin users managing assets are creating a folder structure with multiple nested folders to keep things organized. In this use case we'll use brands and lines of business. We have assets that are are for a specific brand Current/Experienced Behavior: Admin users managing assets are creating a folder structure with multiple nested folders to keep things organized. There are folder based profiles added to those folders including tags that are applied to any assets added to those. We also created a workflow that will copy tags down from parent to child so those tags aren't overridden by subfolder tagging. In this use case we'll use brands and lines of business. We have assets that are are for a specific brand. They are placed in the folder for that brand and the metadata from the folder based profile is applied. There are multiple lines of business that fall under that brand and there is a folder for each one of those in there as well with a folder based profile added and specific tags for those. Assets are added to those and the tags are automatically applied. This workflow is working fine, however, it leaves us with folders living among a sea of assets. When navigating the DAM via folder structure it becomes very difficult to sift through when there are hundreds (sometimes thousands) of assets surrounding the folders. If I have to update permissions or profiles for specific folders its either confusing (scrolling) or clunky (filtering on folders) to find the folder. Improved/Expected Behavior: I would like to be able to manage all of my folders in the content tree space. Create folders, select and get info, add folder based metadata, etc. And I'd like to be able to manage my assets in the asset pane.Create assets, select and get info, add asset based metadata, etc. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): We are on the most current Assets as a Cloud Service environment. Customer-name/Organization name: Enterprise Mobility Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Add option to sort by page navigation sorting for path/link chooser components. additionally to sort by alphabet.Page structure should follow the site's navigation hierarchy consistently — both in the Sites panel and when selecting internal links within components. The current alphabetical sorting in link dialogs should be replaced with the same hierarchical order used for page editing.Acceptance CriteriaPage structure follows navigation hierarchy across all AEM interfacesApplies to all linkable components (e.g., teaser, button)Same page order as in the Sites panel Use-case: Selecting a path to a Page Current/Experienced Behavior: pathlist is sorted by alphabet Improved/Expected Behavior: sorting can be selected. sorting by sitestructure, maybee sorting by any other criteria Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM cloud Customer-name/Organization name: Sanitas Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: When working in smaller or half-screen viewports in AEM, key page actions such as Delete and Move become hidden within the “more actions” (three dots) menu, often requiring scrolling to the very bottom to locate them. Maybee show only Icons and remove the text. Save some space. Show the text with hover effect. Use-case: ContentManager want to work fast Current/Experienced Behavior: Button is hidden Improved/Expected Behavior: Button should be visible Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM cloud Customer-name/Organization name: Sanitas Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Currently, unpublishing a page requires using Manage Publication, which is useful for scheduling but slow for immediate removals. Adding a Quick Unpublish button, similar to Quick Publish, would allow fast unpublishing while keeping Manage Publication for advanced options. Use-case: ContentManagers want to work fast. Current/Experienced Behavior: Unpublish a page needs multiple navigation steps Improved/Expected Behavior: Unpublish should be faster by having a button for it in reach. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM cloud Customer-name/Organization name: Sanitas Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The inability to tag a group (e.g. “user group”) in the new CF editor comments appears to be a known limitation based on the current design of the tagging functionality. Use-case: Our business uses the comments feature to review and approve. we have use case where we have a lot of user working at the same time. Current/Experienced Behavior: We can tag a user, or user's not a group Improved/Expected Behavior: we need ability to tag a IMS group or AEM group Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Cloud New Editor Customer-name/Organization name: JNJ Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The CF picker that was in the old CF editor is not available in the new CF editor, so I would like it to be added. Use-case: A modal can be launched to allow category and product selection. Current/Experienced Behavior: The new CF editor does not have a CF picker. Improved/Expected Behavior: The new CF editor has a CF picker. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 2025.7.21772.20250730T182007Z Customer-name/Organization name: IBM Digital Service Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like the new CF editor to be able to specify the full path when specifying the link destination, just like the old CF editor. Use-case: Specify an external site in the link path. Current/Experienced Behavior: Cannot specify anything other than the content path within AEM. Improved/Expected Behavior: Full path specification possible, including external sites. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 2025.7.21772.20250730T182007Z Customer-name/Organization name: IBM Digital Service Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: In Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), when promoting a Launch back to the source page, certain page properties—such as title, description, alias, and tags—are not being promoted as expected. This behavior appears to be a limitation (or bug) in the default roll out configuration and affects both customized and fresh AEM instances (e.g., 6.5.22 with We.Retail content). Use-case: A content author creates a Launch to prepare updates for a press release page. They modify several page properties in the Launch version, including metadata and visibility settings. Upon promoting the Launch, the content updates are applied, but many of the page properties revert or are lost—leading to inconsistencies and manual rework. Current/Experienced Behavior: Current Behavior Launch promotion excludes certain page properties due to default rollout configuration. The configuration at /libs/msm/launches/rolloutconfigs/launch/contentUpdate includes an exclusion rule: cq.wcm.msm.action.excludedprops = jcr:.* This rule prevents properties like jcr:title, jcr:description, cq:tags, and sling:alias from being promoted. Steps to Reproduce Create a new page (e.g., press-release-may.html). Create a Launch for the page using default settings. Modify page properties in the Launch version: Basic Tab: Title, Navigation Title, Description, Tag, Hide from Navigation. Advanced Tab: Alias, Article Date. Add basic content to the page. Promote the Launch using standard promotion steps. Observe the result: Navigation Title is promoted. Title, Description, Tag, and Alias are not promoted. Content updates are correctly applied. Improved/Expected Behavior: Page properties modified in the Launch should be fully promoted to the source page, including: Title Description Tags Alias Any other relevant metadata Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.22 Adobe team a workaround to directly make changes in "libs," and be cautious about doing so and keeping track of the impact during service pack upgrades. After discussing with our internal technical team, /libs path must remain unchanged. Since Adobe proposed a solution that involves modifying the rollout configuration, we will look forward to enhancement fix for this issue. It will likely involve updating the location where the rollout config is applied to use the resolver (which prioritizes /apps over /libs) instead of relying on a hardcoded /libs path. Other references - E-001650598 / E-001772942 Customer-name/Organization name: Shell Screenshot (if applicable): attached for reference Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Provide a way for the "Asset Compute microservice extensibility"/Asset Compute workers to access the default renditions for an Asset so the custom worker can use those as a baseline for further conversions. Either: Pass a default rendition to the worker (instead of, or in addition to, the original). Or: Defer worker invocation until default renditions are generated (opt-in), so the worker can fetch them reliably. Or: Allow non ARM64 containers and installation of custom binaries like imagemagick for the Asset Compute microservice Use-case: We need to generate custom renditions (e.g., square JPEGs with white borders) from assets like .ai (Adobe Illustrator), .psd (Adobe Photoshop), .svg, .eps, etc. These file types are already supported by AEM’s default rendition generation, but not by Asset Compute workers directly (see below for reasons). If workers could use AEM’s default renditions as inputs, they could reliably transform these assets without needing external tools. Current/Experienced Behavior: AEM Assets and the generation of (default) renditions already supports a wide range of file types. However, the "Asset Compute microservice extensibility" is fairly limited in the filetypes it can process. There currently is no way we and Adobe Support found to support mentioned filetypes (ai, psd, ...).There is no way of reliably accessing the generated (default) renditions which then could be used as a baseline for the actual conversion from within the microservice, as they are not generated at the time of invocation microservice Technical details/background: The "recommended" library "JIMP" which is referenced in the demo project is super limited in the filetypes it can support (currently only jpeg, png, bmp, tiff, gif) Using other image conversion libraries wasn't successful either, as they always rely on binaries (like imagemagick) which don't work on the ARM64 containers the microservice runs on As mentioned previously, trying to access the default renditions and using them as a baseline for the conversion doesn't work either, as they are not generated/available at the time of the invocation of the microservice In summary: Asset Compute microservice currently only works for a very limited set of filetypes. Improved/Expected Behavior: Three possible solutions (either would solve the problem): Allow default renditions or custom defined renditions to be passed into workers instead of only the original Asset binary Invoke custom workers only after default renditions exist (opt-in, via processing profile checkbox), so the worker can fetch and transform them. Allow non ARM64 containers and installation of custom binaries like imagemagick for the Asset Compute microservice Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service (2025.8) with Asset Compute microservice running on Adobe AppBuilder/Runtime) Customer-name/Organization name: (private), see support case E-001769596 for customer specific details Screenshot (if applicable): N/A Code package (if applicable): N/A
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Word doc re upload option not updating sub assets folder Use-case: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder.This is a priority issue and we need to resolve on urgent. Could you please check and let us know on this issue.1. Navigate to Assets console, files option2. Upload a document with some images. update metadata.3. Change the images/remove one or two images in the word document.4. Upload word document with Create Version option5. Check the sub assets folder , observe mismatch with source word document . Current/Experienced Behavior: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder. 6.5.22, 6.5.20, and 6.5.18, and the behavior is consistent across all of them. Improved/Expected Behavior: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder.Sub assets folder need to be updated even with create version option . Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 SP20 6.5.22, 6.5.20, and 6.5.18, and the behavior is consistent across all of them. Customer-name/Organization name: CISCO Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Use-case: ChatGPT and most AI crawlers do not support JavaScript. The Dynamic Media viewers are all built relying on JavaScript. Given the end user market is going to continue to grow and adopt the usage of AI tools as their primary source of information, Adobe should plan for the future and figure out some way to have some measure of support for AI. If you give ChatGPT this question for this Adobe URL, then it demonstrates the issue: I want you to evaluate one URL: https://s7d9.scene7.com/s7viewers/html5/FlyoutViewer.html?asset=Scene7SharedAssets/ImageSet-Views-Sample Is there an image on this URL? Current/Experienced Behavior: Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: RTE support for <strong> and <em> tags Use-case: We are running an accessibility improvements project right now and our 3rd party a11y consultants reported some issues with they way RTE work.Right now RTE has an option to bolden a part of a text or to make it italic style. For that purpose it is using <b> and <i> standard HTML elements and this is perfectly fine. We have learnt that in some cases instead of these tags it is advisable to use <strong> or <em> tags as they also bring more context for a screen readers so that they can emphasise how to read that section of text.The <strong> tag is read by screen readers as an indication that the text enclosed within it carries strong importance. When a screen reader encounters a <strong> tag, it typically emphasizes the text, often by changing the tone or pitch of the voice, or by adding a pause before and after reading the text. This helps users who rely on assistive technologies understand that the content is significant or has a higher priority in the context of the surrounding text.Using <strong> instead of <b> not only provides visual emphasis but also enhances the semantic meaning of the content, improving accessibility for users with disabilities.We would love to have na option to define which tag is used for particular place in text. It should sometimes be simply <b> and in other cases we would love to have a choice to pick <strong>.There is no such functionality right now in RTE and I would like to ask if there is any active feature request for such functionality and if this could be planned to be developed. Current/Experienced Behavior: We can only place <b> and <i> tags in RTE Improved/Expected Behavior: There should be a way to pick <b> or <strong> tag for selected text. There should be a way to pick <i> or <em> tag for selected text. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.23 Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - If you go to settings > interface and then try to edit a filter or a view, there is no responsiveness when you click "save filter." Though this is the tiniest thing, I get no confirmation visually that my changes have actually been applied and I have to close the window/open the filter or view back up to verify or just trust that it was applied. Why is this feature important to you - Would improve UX when editing views and filters. How would you like the feature to work - 1) Ideally when I hit "save filter" the window would close, and I'd get the little pop up confirming my changes have been applied, similar to when you save a custom form edit. 2) But I'd take anything really! A check mark to appear upon hitting save. A pop up confirming my changes have been applied. Anything! Current Behaviour - When you click "save filter" nothing happens- I therefore end up clicking it like 5 times thinking it isn't responding to me 😉
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Some users with a contributor license can more easily navigate by going directly to a specific Portfolio or Program to view relevant projects.How would you like the feature to work - Contributor access levels can navigate to Portfolios and Programs from the main menu.Current Behaviour - Contributor users can be given access to Portfolios and Programs and can navigate to them if the objects are pinned at the top of the page in their layout template. The layout template allows an administrator to add these icons to the main menu but they are not visible when logged in as that user or by the user themselves. This is a gap in access permissions that should be resolved.
We would like to enter additional details for a given assignment. Currently, the available options, assignee, allocation, and role, do not provide enough information. Our employees support products in multiple languages and have different levels of expertise, so we’d like to enter this info and display it in a Power BI dashboard. We would require assignment custom form and a feature to add more columns as shown in my screenshot.
Description - Please add Revenue Type options for issues so we can distinguish between issues that are billable and not billable to our client. Why is this feature important to you - Some issues, such as risks or bugs, need to have hours logged toward them, but those hours may not always be billable to the client. In order to work around the current behavior, we have to convert issues to tasks and make the task not billable, which defeats the purpose of having them be an issue. Or we have to work the issue, but have the user log their hours onto a nonbillable task. This limits our ability to report on issues accurately and creates extra effort when logging time. How would you like the feature to work - Add the option to select Revenue Type on issues, just like it's available for tasks. Current Behaviour - Only tasks can have Revenue Type adjusted individually, making some billable and not billable. Issues are always billable if the project is billable. I
Description - Show Child task updates visible under Parent Task updatesWhy is this feature important to you - This would help in seeing all the updates of child task in one place against the parent TaskHow would you like the feature to work - Like how all the project updates are visible under updates at project level, all child task updates should be visible under Parent task updatesCurrent Behaviour - All child task updates are visible under Project level Updates fields
Description - We have WF set up so that all users are working off central time zone. When anyone in a different time zone enters a day off on the Time off Calendar in WF, their one day off spans two days. Why is this feature important to you - WF should go off the settings of the individual in Workfront (central) and our Workfront Instance (also central) instead of defaulting to the time zone that the individual is working from. How would you like the feature to work -I would like the time off calendar to show the one day off that they are taking, instead of appearing as two days off. Current Behaviour - WF currently shows two days off for anyone working outside of the central time zone.
Description - Right now, you are not able to move an approver in the loop when setting up a project. Instead you can only add an approver to the end of the loop or create a new loop. It would greatly enhance my experience if while in an approval task I can drag and drop or move up and down approvals rather than remaking an approval loop. For example, if the loop is "Proofreader > editorial > sponsor > owner" and I want to rearrange to "Proofreader > owner > sponsor > editorial" I should be able to just flip flop them in edit mode rather than delete the loop and add a new one or manually adjust by adding approvers to the end. Why is this feature important to you - This would make updating approvals while in a project faster saving time. How would you like the feature to work - While editing an approval loop be able to click and drag users from one step to another as well as reorder steps. Current Behaviour - You can only remove users from the approval and then add back in the order you want.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - instead of have 1 annotation for each of my 100 report / VRS, having this feature will allow 1 annotation. A specific annotation may be applicable to 100 out of my 200 RSID/VRSHow would you like the feature to work - Ability to select which report suites to be added to.Current Behaviour - Currently allowed to add to 1 or ALL
Currently, tokens are only permissible within the Flow Steps of Smart Campaigns (in some instances, even that's not possible - and you must hard-code the actual value). It would be a huge time-saver - especially as we templatize our programs - if tokens could also be used within the Smart Lists (triggers and filters) of Smart Campaigns.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
