Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 157 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    47 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Plesk (general)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  2. 11 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    open discussion  ·  3 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Migrations  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  3. 3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Mail  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  4. 524 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    142 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Mail  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
    Anonymous commented  · 

    @Plesk staff, please have a look at the recommended solution!

  5. 22 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    open discussion  ·  7 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Backup / Restore  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous commented  · 

    @Plesk Staff: The problem as we observe it quite frequently: The FTP upload fails for unknown reasons when run as a daily backup job. Thus, the backup is stored locally and consumes storage space on the server.

    In order to ensure that the FTP server has a backup of every day, the current situation means that you manually have to trigger the backup on the same day so that there is another backup on the FTP storage. Once this has been done successfully, you can then delete the local backup.

    If you had the opportunity to just move the local backup to the FTP storage, this would speed up the process and require less admin action. Ideally, you could even define how many times the server should try to upload the backup to the FTP storage. In addition, it could help if local backups would be stored as one single archive file (which I can easily move to the FTP storage), instead of having multiple files and directories for one backup task.

    Interestingly, the manually triggered backup so far always succeeded with uploading while the automated one fails on a regular basis. (Thus, it would be interesting to find out if there is some kind of bug in the automated backup scripts.)

    Anonymous commented  · 

    As explained for instance at https://talk.plesk.com/threads/personal-ftp-repository-backup-failing-on-upload.335299/#post-804534 sometimes full server backups fail. In this case, the backups are stored locally on the server even though the backup was meant to be stored on the FTP server. Now you have two issues:
    a) The backup is stored locally, but not as a single file (compared to the FTP backup files). Thus you cannot simply move the file from local storage to the remote FTP server. In addition, it is unclear whether Backup Manager will recognize that the backup has been moved.
    b) The (broken) part of the uploaded file is still there and shown in the Backup Manager.

  6. 158 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    22 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Web / SSL  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous commented  · 

    I agree with H. Dolderer, this is a must for current systems - also given that in certain combinations of using SSL for Plesk and the corresponding website, it is otherwise impossible to access the admin interface right now!
    Also, looking at the implementation effort, this should almost be zero since the same has been done for the webmail system already. Thus, it is disappointing to read a statement like "we might eventually implement this at some point (> 10 years...?) in the future"...

    Anonymous commented  · 

    You're right, it is currently not supported: https://support.plesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002810634

    However, given the comment from darkdragen, I agree that the service should be secured the same way as it has been done already for the webmail subdomains.

    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  7. 9 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous shared this idea  · 
  8. 217 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    open discussion  ·  23 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Plesk (general)  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  9. 338 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    open discussion  ·  13 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Panel/Mail  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  10. 164 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    13 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Mail  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  11. 367 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    44 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We have serious doubts this function can really increase server security:
    1) Plesk has built-in protection against brute-force on login – it will lock the login form. So no one can try multiple attempts
    2) Arbitrary login name adds very little guess-complexity to a proper password. If you have concerns for your login brute-forced – add another 5-7 characters into your password and feel safe.

    As changed login name is still very likely to be some sort of vocabulary word or derived from your other account name – this function would only give a false sense of better security. Your security strength is in complex password, not in a complex login name. If you have one good password, you don’t need to treat login as your “second password” – one good password is enough.

    As for concerns that default password requirement is set in “weak”, that fail2ban module is not…

    Anonymous supported this idea  · 
  12. 788 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    open discussion  ·  148 comments  ·  Feature Suggestions » Mail  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base