cstevensjr

I hope you just continue with the way you have done your first 4 videos. Each seems to build on from the previous others, which is very instructive and informative.

I read this today and I had to leave a comment that I was surprised that ProcessWire wasn't listed http://enews1.websitemagazine.com/q/GQHrt4sSbvpmSnbdz04dmYi1NrvF1N_P5r4tMHaRJ3-7-dKGhUTURRhbb

Thanks for providing additional information, which helps with the troubleshooting of your issue. Are the functional working PW versions the same as on the problem installation? Have you tried reloading the /wire folder to that troubled installation?

Are you sure this is not a Firefox-specific issue? Do you run into this same issue on any other browsers?

I believe that FormBuilder is not compatible with every Fieldtype and that may be the cause of your problem.

Thanks, Blake

Here are some Windows specific posts: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/268-processwire-on-windows72008-server-with-iis-webserver/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/8933-windows-iis/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/11530-windows-2008r2-iis-75/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/3558-microsoft-iis-and-processwire/

Can you please provide a little more information about your website environment, to help someone to adequately troubleshoot your problem: ProcessWire version Are you having this problem with any other ProcessWire installations? When you first noticed this problem (i.e updated from 2.7.2 to 2.73.......)? Any image modules you have installed other than what's available in the core.

A couple of posts: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/5762-how-do-we-use-pagestack/ https://processwire.com/talk/topic/3660-what-page-was-the-caller-of-render/

I actually think ProcessWire now has some the best and varied level of permissions that I have seen in years. Between ryan (updating ProcessWire) and adrian (creating his many permission modules) I have been very busy working on projects.

Maybe nothing at all, I wouldn't be using "http" as an user or group name in Linux/Unix or any Operating System.

One of the quickest troubleshooting techniques you can now do is to use MaindrillApp or Wire Mail SMTP (i.e. use what you know works first) and see if you still have these problems. If you don't have problems, it means you need to concentrate on your Mailgun interface or configuration processes.

Closing Github issues and solving the reported problems are two distinctly different things. I believe it's always hard (in any project) to be able to distinguish what's a feature request, a nice to have option, a genuine bug or a misconfiguration. From my personal view, the real issues get resolved/fixed. This project is very active and progress can be tracked by the almost weekly updates.

Same here with Dreamhost. I was a skeptic at first, however I'm starting to like the whole process. I've converted quite a few domains over to Let's Encrypt and plan to convert all others when possible.

I don't know if you are aware that you can use the Database Backup module created by @ryan, until @Pete gets back with you. https://github.com/ryancramerdesign/ProcessDatabaseBackups https://processwire.com/blog/posts/august-2014-core-updates-4/#database-backups-module

Good Day, Please follow the instructions, as listed, in the ProcessWire Release Notes for each version (see below link). It goes through earlier versions and tells you how to upgrade your site. You also may want to identify and keep an eye on any third party modules that do not show compatibility with the current version. https://github.com/ryancramerdesign/ProcessWire/tree/master

Sorry you are having problems. Please review and go through the informative Troubleshooting Guide tutorial. https://processwire.com/docs/tutorials/troubleshooting-guide/ Here is information for the ProcessWire 3.x Version https://github.com/ryancramerdesign/ProcessWire/blob/devns/README.md Hopefully these 2 links will provide some help to you.

No

Some possible useful links https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/08/17/windows-10-virtual-machines-now-available-on-microsoft-edge-dev/ https://vagrantcloud.com/boxes/search?order=desc&page=1&provider=&q=windows&sort=created&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://atlas.hashicorp.com/modernIE/boxes/w10-edge

There is the possibility that the website can still be hit with many requests, which would keep you from even accessing the site or admin (if known). The .htaccess is good to have, however it will not keep someone from flooding your site with many requests (bogus or otherwise).

A few modules by @adrian mat help you out: http://modules.processwire.com/modules/page-protector/ http://modules.processwire.com/modules/admin-restrict-branch/ http://modules.processwire.com/modules/protected-mode/

I ask that you please somehow keep the ability to order the panels.

Hopefully @horst code works. I'm sorry if I misunderstood your understanding of how the system should work.

I personally feel that this issue is best resolved by just letting the current system work as it should, challenge/verify credentials and then provide access to the linked page. The whole problem revolves around whether the email user has access privileges on the website wherever you are trying to take them. No matter what you do, you can't reliably guarantee that the email user is who you think they are. Even the authentication or cryptographic nonce cannot guarantee that an unsecured email hasn't been compromised over an unsecure Internet. Ignoring that, with just the email link if you had a process where you could store the link, have them login and then somehow recover the page url and take them there. Your problem again will be, do they have access permission to that linked page? I guess you can cheat the system by having a hidden page within the member's secured area that has a page with a special template that allows Guest access. That may get you to the page directly via an email link. It's basically, Access Security 101.

It's entirely possible that you can directly go to a page, but that link in the email or a hook/module must also provide the credential (an authentication or cryptographic nonce) that satisfies the security requirement.