@BKBK Your assumptions are correct.  Each instance CF Admin console is accessed on a different port.  The CF Admin page shows the different instance Server name in the corner after login.   Check the contents of /Prime/bin/jvm.config, /Dev1/bin/jvm.config and /Dev2/bin/jvm.config. Ensure that none of them contains an unexpected setting or refers to an incorrect path;   Nothing in jvm.config references anything in the source code path.  Most paths reference {application.home}   Check the settings Server Settings > Mappings in the Administrators of Prime, Dev1 and Dev2. Ensure that, in each case, the paths pertain to the relevant instance.    Yes, the mapping in each instance points to the source path for that specific instance.     I'm going back through the instance config/app isolation to make sure I didn't miss anything, but nothing so far.  Any other suggestions will be appreciated.  Thanks! ... View more

An update to the above.  If I add a leading slash to the mapping in CreateObject, the error goes away, but debug info for the page still shows that all the components are being created out of Prime source tree not Dev1 source tree. ... View more

Do you really mean this is one machine--running one install of cf2023, under which you've created these multiple instances?   Yes, one installation of CF 2023 on a Linux server.  I've created multiple instances following the guidelines from Adobe here  https://helpx.adobe.com/coldfusion/configuring-administering/using-multiple-server-instances.html#UsingMultipleServerInstances-Webserverconfigurationforapplicationisolation  We use different URLs for each instance and Apache web server configured for multihoming.   And as for the "Server Settings for that instance", do you mean the mappings page in the cf admin for each instance?   Yes, each server instance has it's own CF Admin site, and I've configured the Server Settings> Mappings page on each instance's CF Admin site to point to the instance-specific source code repository on the filesystem.  The logical name for the mapping is the same across all instances, but the target location is different.  The intent is to be able to use the same source code on each instance.   The code throwing the error does the following.  We have a page /dev1/sub/folders/CallingFile.cfm which creates a component as follows: <cfset variables.SomeComponentCFC = CreateObject("component", "component_root.SomeComponent") /> Note that all components live in /dev1/component/.   SomeComponentCFC now tries to create another component as follows: <cfset variables.OtherComponentCFC = CreateObject("component", "component_root.OtherComponent") />   This throws an error.  Looking at the stack trace first:   The error occurred in /prime/component/SomeComponent.cfc: line XX Called from /dev1/sub/folders/CallingFile.cfm: line XX This is where I question what's happening, because the stack trace makes it appear that the original component was created (successfully) by referencing the source on Prime, not Dev1.  Then the attempt to create another component from the (Prime) component is denied.   Security: The requested template has been denied access to /dev1/sub/folders/component_root/OtherComponent.cfc. The following is the internal exception message: access denied ("java.io.FilePermission" "/dev1/sub/folders/component_root/OtherComponent.cfc" "read") A couple things of note here.  First off we have the apparently successfully created Prime component denied access to create a component from Dev1 path, which I supposed is correct because of the sandboxes, although how the first component was created in Prime sandbox, I don't know.   Secondly, the above path noted in the error doesn't exist.  The actual component lives at /dev1/component/OtherComponent.cfc which reflects the instance mapping of component_root = /dev1/component.  So the mapping isn't being recognized, the logical name is being assumed to be the physical folder, which I suppose is secondary to the point of why is the original component apparently being created from the Prime source tree??? ... View more

Thank you for the information.  On a separate topic, we also recently experienced sporadic DB connectivity issues after July patching (Oracle 19.24).  Adobe issued a hotfix.  Don't know whether it's related to your error, but here's the tracker link CF-4222965. ... View more

Could you please add which version ColdFusion, which version Oracle, and confirm Oracle is configured as multitenant?  Thanks! ... View more

Please say more about what you mean by the question, "when/if Adobe will support newer versions of Oracle than 19c?" . According to the ColdFusion 2023 Support Matrix, ColdFusion 2023 does in fact support Oracle 19c.   There are at least two versions newer than Oracle 19c - 21c and 23c/23ai.  As explained in my original post, we are currently on 19c but looking at upgrading to 23c/23ai.  My question was when will Adobe ColdFusion support newer versions of Oracle, i.e., 21c and 23c/23ai?   Regarding multitenant, we have not yet switched to using multitenant architecture in Oracle, so I don't know what, if anything, needs to change in the JDBC connection string or datasource config from ColdFusion.  The only posting I found on Adobe Community indicated the standard JDBC string might not work.  I was looking for responses from people who had successfully connected ColdFusion 2021/2023 to an Oracle multitenant database, and whether they had to make any adjustments on the ColdFusion side to connect. ... View more

@Charlie Arehart Thanks, I was finally able to get the download.  ... View more

@Vikram_Kumar_M I tried going to the link indicated in the CF tracker, but it just comes up with a blank page and no download.  I suspect security may be blocking?  I sent email to the support team for the hotfix, but have not had a response.  Is there anything else I can do to get this fix? ... View more

Quick question - I noticed the CF bug tracker ticket had the problem identified in version 2023, but I'm also finding the errors in CF 2021.  Do you know whether there is a separate ticket for 2021?  Or will Adobe be creating a fix for CF 2021 and 2023?   Unfortunately, disabling NNE is not currently an option.  I tried ojdbc10.jar, but we still experienced intermittent errors.     Thanks! ... View more

@BKBK  Thanks so much for your insight.  It is very helpful.   Your explanation is good and clear. Audit requirements, as explained here, are not the responsibility of an application server or service such as ColdFusion. They are the responsibility of the user of the service. In this case, of the developer.   I wear two hats as both the CF administrator and the app administrator, so these lines get a little blurred sometimes, but that's a valid point.      Monitor ColdFusion's failure to write to any logfiles for any reason: The developer could do so in the onError event-handler in Application.cfc.   We already send out emails from onError for certain events, so yes, I could expand that for logging issues.    Monitor failures not caused by ColdFusion: for example, monitor when disk space is full or close to full, even though ColdFusion is still capable of logging to file.   We do already have disk space monitoring in place.  I think along with your above suggestion, I should be pretty good as far as mitigating the risk on this requirement.  Thanks for your help! ... View more

Please provide more information.. What do you mean by "audit (logging) failure"? A failure of ColdFusion to write to the audit.log file? A failure of ColdFusion to write to any specific log file or files? If so, which? Failure of ColdFusion to write to ANY logfiles for any reason.  From the requirement discussion: "Audit processing failures include: software/hardware errors; failures in the audit capturing mechanisms; and audit storage capacity being reached or exceeded. Responses to audit failure depend upon the nature of the failure mode."   The loggers are in-built and logging occurs automatically. Therefore, if logging were to fail, it would mean that a critical fault has occurred in the ColdFusion. engine.   If the failure were caused by a critical fault in the ColdFusion engine, would that cause CF to crash/shutdown?  In your response, you indicated this was unlikely and anything that would have been logged would likely be lost.   For failures not caused by ColdFusion, i.e., ColdFusion is still capable of logging to files, but disk space is full: "If the failure was caused by the lack of audit record storage capacity, the application must continue generating audit records if possible (automatically restarting the audit service if necessary), overwriting the oldest audit records in a first-in-first-out manner."   This is where the question "Would ColdFusion overwrite older logfiles in the rotation?" comes into play.  Or would disk space also cause a crash/shutdown event?   Ironically, a crash/shutdown would be preferred behavior here in order to meet the security requirement.  Go figure.   Thanks for your response! ... View more

I have heard (unofficially) that Adobe is currently working on updating ColdFusion STIG and are targeting Q4 2024 for release.  No info on which version this will cover, but presumably 2021 and/or 2023. ... View more