Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1
CentOS 9 Problems / Request for Flexible Account Naming and Domain Changes in CWP (> than 8 Chars)
« on: May 14, 2026, 04:49:55 AM »
Hello,
One major limitation with multi-tenant web setups is the CWP 8-character account name restriction. When managing multiple subdomains and tenant environments, it quickly becomes very difficult to create meaningful and distinguishable account names within such a small limit. We are using domains that have three or four or more sub levels which is perfectly normal for enterprise solutions.
What makes this even more frustrating is that Linux systems have supported longer account names for years, so this restriction feels unnecessarily outdated in modern hosting environments. There are historic forum requests to increase this limit however it has never been implemented.
It would be extremely useful to have the ability to rename account names after creation, as well as change the associated account domain. While it is technically possible to create a new account and migrate everything over, that process feels unnecessarily time-consuming and wasteful for what should be a simple administrative task. And it involves website downtime and engineer resources.
I’ve also read in the forum that CWP UI is getting a major redesign. If that is the case, it would be great to know whether improvements like longer account names, account renaming, and domain reassignment are being considered as part of that update. These kinds of changes would make a significant difference for anyone managing multi-tenant or multi-subdomain environments at scale.
Greater flexibility around account naming and domain management would significantly improve usability for agencies, developers, and hosting providers alike. And for those that are security conscious I'm not talking about making the account name the same as the domain name which is usually considered a security risk.
Thanks
One major limitation with multi-tenant web setups is the CWP 8-character account name restriction. When managing multiple subdomains and tenant environments, it quickly becomes very difficult to create meaningful and distinguishable account names within such a small limit. We are using domains that have three or four or more sub levels which is perfectly normal for enterprise solutions.
What makes this even more frustrating is that Linux systems have supported longer account names for years, so this restriction feels unnecessarily outdated in modern hosting environments. There are historic forum requests to increase this limit however it has never been implemented.
It would be extremely useful to have the ability to rename account names after creation, as well as change the associated account domain. While it is technically possible to create a new account and migrate everything over, that process feels unnecessarily time-consuming and wasteful for what should be a simple administrative task. And it involves website downtime and engineer resources.
I’ve also read in the forum that CWP UI is getting a major redesign. If that is the case, it would be great to know whether improvements like longer account names, account renaming, and domain reassignment are being considered as part of that update. These kinds of changes would make a significant difference for anyone managing multi-tenant or multi-subdomain environments at scale.
Greater flexibility around account naming and domain management would significantly improve usability for agencies, developers, and hosting providers alike. And for those that are security conscious I'm not talking about making the account name the same as the domain name which is usually considered a security risk.
Thanks
2
DNS / Re: How to change CWP DNS Resolvers ?
« on: May 06, 2026, 03:52:09 PM »
Hello,
Thanks for your reply.
I initially assumed that `/etc/resolv.conf` was the correct file to configure manual DNS resolver IP addresses. However, after making changes there, the system does not behave as expected.
When monitoring outgoing DNS requests from the CWP server’s network interface, I can see queries being sent to multiple IP addresses in a round-robin pattern. Notably, the IP address specified in `/etc/resolv.conf` is not among them.
This suggests that some component within CWP may be managing its own list of DNS servers, rather than relying on the configuration in `/etc/resolv.conf`.
DNS resolution itself is working, but I’m unclear which DNS servers are actually being used. If you have insight into how CWP handles DNS resolution, I’d appreciate your guidance before I proceed with further testing.
On a standard AlmaLinux 9 setup, DNS servers defined during installation are typically used by default. It seems CWP may handle this differently, and I’m trying to better understand that behavior.
Thanks.
Thanks for your reply.
I initially assumed that `/etc/resolv.conf` was the correct file to configure manual DNS resolver IP addresses. However, after making changes there, the system does not behave as expected.
When monitoring outgoing DNS requests from the CWP server’s network interface, I can see queries being sent to multiple IP addresses in a round-robin pattern. Notably, the IP address specified in `/etc/resolv.conf` is not among them.
This suggests that some component within CWP may be managing its own list of DNS servers, rather than relying on the configuration in `/etc/resolv.conf`.
DNS resolution itself is working, but I’m unclear which DNS servers are actually being used. If you have insight into how CWP handles DNS resolution, I’d appreciate your guidance before I proceed with further testing.
On a standard AlmaLinux 9 setup, DNS servers defined during installation are typically used by default. It seems CWP may handle this differently, and I’m trying to better understand that behavior.
Thanks.
3
DNS / How to change CWP DNS Resolvers ?
« on: April 29, 2026, 02:02:34 PM »
Hello,
In Almalinux you can define the IP address of a DNS resolver the server should use. That works fine.
However CWP does not use this server defined DNS IP resolver. Instead CWP make DNS (port 53) requests to a number of internet DNS resolvers. Were in CWP can I redefine what DNS resolvers CWP will use.
Does it matter which DNS resolver is used as long as its reliable ?
Thanks.
In Almalinux you can define the IP address of a DNS resolver the server should use. That works fine.
However CWP does not use this server defined DNS IP resolver. Instead CWP make DNS (port 53) requests to a number of internet DNS resolvers. Were in CWP can I redefine what DNS resolvers CWP will use.
Does it matter which DNS resolver is used as long as its reliable ?
Thanks.
4
Information / Root Cause of Fourm Crash
« on: March 31, 2026, 07:14:45 AM »
Hello,
I think everyone knows the forum keeps going down or becomes unresponsive.
I think I have determine the root cause.
On the right hand side of the forum under new posts you can see two links for a given post. The thread name and the user who submitted the thread. If you click on the username link by mistake the page does not work. Then forum website becomes unavailable for a time period and then recovers shortly after. If you click on the thread link the forum continues to work until you click a username link, Clicking the username link causes the problem, It seems to be 100% repeatable.
I hope the forum administrator can implement a solution to the problem soon.
Thanks.
I think everyone knows the forum keeps going down or becomes unresponsive.
I think I have determine the root cause.
On the right hand side of the forum under new posts you can see two links for a given post. The thread name and the user who submitted the thread. If you click on the username link by mistake the page does not work. Then forum website becomes unavailable for a time period and then recovers shortly after. If you click on the thread link the forum continues to work until you click a username link, Clicking the username link causes the problem, It seems to be 100% repeatable.
I hope the forum administrator can implement a solution to the problem soon.
Thanks.
5
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 31, 2026, 06:57:43 AM »
Hello cyberspace,
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to provide a step by step guide. I appreciate your assistance.
However if you read my second post on this subject which I published a few days ago I had already implemented remote access to Mariadb on the CWP platform and it works rather well for my purposes. In fact remote access to mariadb in works well in general.
Yes I am expert with mariadb and firewalls running on a stand alone servers and the security features they provide etc. However as mariadb is a core feature of CWP I asked the question "how to" before making an attempt as a good engineer does. There might have been some extra complexity that I was unaware off. Anyway I resolved it my self a while ago.
Thank you for your help anyway its appreciated.
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to provide a step by step guide. I appreciate your assistance.
However if you read my second post on this subject which I published a few days ago I had already implemented remote access to Mariadb on the CWP platform and it works rather well for my purposes. In fact remote access to mariadb in works well in general.
Yes I am expert with mariadb and firewalls running on a stand alone servers and the security features they provide etc. However as mariadb is a core feature of CWP I asked the question "how to" before making an attempt as a good engineer does. There might have been some extra complexity that I was unaware off. Anyway I resolved it my self a while ago.
Thank you for your help anyway its appreciated.
6
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 30, 2026, 02:49:01 PM »
Hello Starburst,
Yes it is common place to remote access servers and web hosts by professionals who know what they are doing. And no matter how many times you try to dismiss that fact I will correct you.
You need to turnoff the gas light and stop gas lighting people !
Thanks.
Yes it is common place to remote access servers and web hosts by professionals who know what they are doing. And no matter how many times you try to dismiss that fact I will correct you.
You need to turnoff the gas light and stop gas lighting people !
Thanks.
7
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 30, 2026, 06:23:40 AM »
Hello starburst,
Are you providing a CWP change log on the forum, that would be a huge benefit to the community ?
If you read my earlier post I did say allow access to specific IP addresses on the local network and not the internet.
If users wish to use CWP with its default security they can. However if users want to allow remote access to their CWP servers then they can also do that if they choose. You have no right to say which solution is right or wrong as you don't know the details of how its been implemented.
Thanks.
Are you providing a CWP change log on the forum, that would be a huge benefit to the community ?
If you read my earlier post I did say allow access to specific IP addresses on the local network and not the internet.
If users wish to use CWP with its default security they can. However if users want to allow remote access to their CWP servers then they can also do that if they choose. You have no right to say which solution is right or wrong as you don't know the details of how its been implemented.
Thanks.
8
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 27, 2026, 01:13:17 PM »
Hello Starburst,
Same old story - CWP maybe rolling out silent updates but the change logs are not being published at regular intervals to document any changes made. If you are spending the time analysing the changes made by CWP to your servers by updates then please share and publish the details in the forum. Go on, create a forum thread and publish each time CWP rolls out a new update and document the details, I would be very happy to see that information in real time from you or CWP I don't mind.
I have come from the commercial world were lots of devops and system admins and database administrator and software developers all sit together in a very big building and support remote web hosts and remote databases and remote servers in various different ways. You or your customers may not remote access your servers in that way but the commercial world does it everyday so it is common place. And to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
I think CWP is great and it does everything I need at the moment. I just wish it had proper documentation and it was updated or patched every month. No one wants to pay a few dollars for CWP and then spend twenty hours a month keeping it updated and running and checking what has changes. You see my point.
I think you an overseer live in your own bubble and you don't consider others wanting to do more advanced things with CWP. If you choose not to remote admin into your CWP servers thats fine with me. You can tell that to your customers if you choose but don't suggest your way is the only or right way for everyone which is just not true.
Thanks.
Same old story - CWP maybe rolling out silent updates but the change logs are not being published at regular intervals to document any changes made. If you are spending the time analysing the changes made by CWP to your servers by updates then please share and publish the details in the forum. Go on, create a forum thread and publish each time CWP rolls out a new update and document the details, I would be very happy to see that information in real time from you or CWP I don't mind.
I have come from the commercial world were lots of devops and system admins and database administrator and software developers all sit together in a very big building and support remote web hosts and remote databases and remote servers in various different ways. You or your customers may not remote access your servers in that way but the commercial world does it everyday so it is common place. And to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
I think CWP is great and it does everything I need at the moment. I just wish it had proper documentation and it was updated or patched every month. No one wants to pay a few dollars for CWP and then spend twenty hours a month keeping it updated and running and checking what has changes. You see my point.
I think you an overseer live in your own bubble and you don't consider others wanting to do more advanced things with CWP. If you choose not to remote admin into your CWP servers thats fine with me. You can tell that to your customers if you choose but don't suggest your way is the only or right way for everyone which is just not true.
Thanks.
9
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 26, 2026, 05:15:46 PM »
Hello overseer,
I completely agree with your summary in your last post — you said it perfectly.
Thanks.
I completely agree with your summary in your last post — you said it perfectly.
Thanks.
10
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 26, 2026, 07:05:12 AM »
Hello Starburst,
You need to read my post again.
In this thread only you have used the word "Public" not me. I have not suggested that mariadb should be made public by default. That is disingenuous for you to suggest that ! It undermines all the good work you have been doing helping others.
Yes I agree control panels do limit database access to localhost by default. However I have explained legitimate reasons for allowing restricted remote access to mariadb. If you don’t use advanced database tools or gui form builders or use database replication for backups etc that’s fine too. None of which can be achieved without restricted remote access to mariadb on CWP.
Yes I agree CWP and Mariadb are developed by too different entities. However they are packaged together in the same platform (CWP) so you have to consider them both when doing cyber security risk analysis.
CWP has not been rolling out security patches and fixes or rolling out new versions of those core application therefore putting CWP security at risk. Some of those apps are EOL and are not being patched by updates anymore. I am more concerned about this problem than allowing restricted remote access to mariadb.
However you and others have been helping user upgrade those apps on CWP and I thank you for providing that help.
CWP should be doing that work in their regular updates. So discussing both CWP and mariadb's security is perfectly reasonable and acceptable.
Thanks.
You need to read my post again.
In this thread only you have used the word "Public" not me. I have not suggested that mariadb should be made public by default. That is disingenuous for you to suggest that ! It undermines all the good work you have been doing helping others.
Yes I agree control panels do limit database access to localhost by default. However I have explained legitimate reasons for allowing restricted remote access to mariadb. If you don’t use advanced database tools or gui form builders or use database replication for backups etc that’s fine too. None of which can be achieved without restricted remote access to mariadb on CWP.
Yes I agree CWP and Mariadb are developed by too different entities. However they are packaged together in the same platform (CWP) so you have to consider them both when doing cyber security risk analysis.
CWP has not been rolling out security patches and fixes or rolling out new versions of those core application therefore putting CWP security at risk. Some of those apps are EOL and are not being patched by updates anymore. I am more concerned about this problem than allowing restricted remote access to mariadb.
However you and others have been helping user upgrade those apps on CWP and I thank you for providing that help.
CWP should be doing that work in their regular updates. So discussing both CWP and mariadb's security is perfectly reasonable and acceptable.
Thanks.
11
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 25, 2026, 12:42:56 PM »
Hello overseer,
I have to disagree that allowing remote database access is poor security practice. Maybe if you are just using CWP for hosting websites or possibly for the in experienced that might be true.
It is common practice to remote connect to MariaDB with advanced admin tools to manage the database. Myphpadmin is only a very basic tool.
Many distributed apps use GUI form builders which connect to the database . Not all applications are web based and some don’t run on CWP or even on the same box but remotely.
Again if you need database replication and or clustering you also need remote access. Just because Mariadb runs on CWP does not mean you cant' use these advanced technologies etc. CWP is very useful for running multi-tenant applications with backup replication.
I'm a cyber security expert and experienced database and software developer. I have properly configured the firewall rules and mariadb user logon restrictions to only accept connections from specific local IP addresses and port numbers. And I have verified such settings by testing using various security apps. And I don't rely on CWPs firewall but have multiple firewalls from different vendors.
However I'm more concerned with CWP not rolling out regular security patches and instead focuses on changing the UI as job priority number one. That concerns me more.
Thanks.
I have to disagree that allowing remote database access is poor security practice. Maybe if you are just using CWP for hosting websites or possibly for the in experienced that might be true.
It is common practice to remote connect to MariaDB with advanced admin tools to manage the database. Myphpadmin is only a very basic tool.
Many distributed apps use GUI form builders which connect to the database . Not all applications are web based and some don’t run on CWP or even on the same box but remotely.
Again if you need database replication and or clustering you also need remote access. Just because Mariadb runs on CWP does not mean you cant' use these advanced technologies etc. CWP is very useful for running multi-tenant applications with backup replication.
I'm a cyber security expert and experienced database and software developer. I have properly configured the firewall rules and mariadb user logon restrictions to only accept connections from specific local IP addresses and port numbers. And I have verified such settings by testing using various security apps. And I don't rely on CWPs firewall but have multiple firewalls from different vendors.
However I'm more concerned with CWP not rolling out regular security patches and instead focuses on changing the UI as job priority number one. That concerns me more.
Thanks.
12
MySQL / Re: Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 24, 2026, 03:52:26 PM »
Hello,
Today I managed to successfully connect to a specific MariaDB database on CWP and get the remote app working.
Thanks
Today I managed to successfully connect to a specific MariaDB database on CWP and get the remote app working.
Thanks
13
MySQL / Allow Remote Access to MariaDB Database
« on: March 24, 2026, 01:26:58 PM »
Hello,
I can't seem to find anything related to enabling MariaDB remote access in the CWP user logon under the database section. Is the option hidden away some where else?
For a given MariaDB database in a particular account how do you enable remote access so that you can connect to it from the local ip network not the internet IP. I wish to use some remote management tools on a specific database.
Thanks.
I can't seem to find anything related to enabling MariaDB remote access in the CWP user logon under the database section. Is the option hidden away some where else?
For a given MariaDB database in a particular account how do you enable remote access so that you can connect to it from the local ip network not the internet IP. I wish to use some remote management tools on a specific database.
Thanks.
14
Information / Re: Modernizing CWP: Drop EOL, Support AL9, AL10 & Rocky
« on: March 23, 2026, 09:40:20 AM »
Hello.
Yes I agree with you 100%.
I have revised my priority list as follow:
1. Security Fixes (Priority 0)
2. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 9.x support (Priority 1)
3. PHP updates (Priority 2)
4. Core application updates (e.g. MariaDB, Apache, Nginx etc ..) (Priority 3)
5. New modules and features (Priority 4)
6. Interface redesign (Priority 5)
7. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 10.x support (Priority 6)
Thanks
Yes I agree with you 100%.
I have revised my priority list as follow:
1. Security Fixes (Priority 0)
2. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 9.x support (Priority 1)
3. PHP updates (Priority 2)
4. Core application updates (e.g. MariaDB, Apache, Nginx etc ..) (Priority 3)
5. New modules and features (Priority 4)
6. Interface redesign (Priority 5)
7. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 10.x support (Priority 6)
Thanks
15
Information / Re: Modernizing CWP: Drop EOL, Support AL9, AL10 & Rocky
« on: March 20, 2026, 02:46:26 PM »
Hello cgauthey,
Thanks for sharing the developers’ plans—much appreciated.
If you have their ear, I’d be grateful if you could pass along the following feedback.
If I were managing the development roadmap, my priorities would be:
1. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 9.x support (Priority 1)
2. PHP updates (Priority 2)
3. Core application updates (e.g. MariaDB, Apache, Nginx etc ..) (Priority 3)
4. New modules and features (Priority 4)
5. Interface redesign (Priority 5)
6. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 10.x support (Priority 6)
While the current interface feels a bit dated, it’s still perfectly usable. A redesign would be a nice improvement, but not critical compared to the items above.
I’d also suggest releasing updates incrementally—ideally one at a time—so that users see consistent monthly improvements and ongoing value in using CWP.
Thanks again.
Thanks for sharing the developers’ plans—much appreciated.
If you have their ear, I’d be grateful if you could pass along the following feedback.
If I were managing the development roadmap, my priorities would be:
1. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 9.x support (Priority 1)
2. PHP updates (Priority 2)
3. Core application updates (e.g. MariaDB, Apache, Nginx etc ..) (Priority 3)
4. New modules and features (Priority 4)
5. Interface redesign (Priority 5)
6. AlmaLinux and Rocky Linux 10.x support (Priority 6)
While the current interface feels a bit dated, it’s still perfectly usable. A redesign would be a nice improvement, but not critical compared to the items above.
I’d also suggest releasing updates incrementally—ideally one at a time—so that users see consistent monthly improvements and ongoing value in using CWP.
Thanks again.
