I know that I can check IP addresses and domains against blacklists like Spamhaus and co, but is there a way that I can prevent iamaspammer#gmail.com from signing up at my website?
most form spam is created with fake/invalid email adresses which are only used once, so creating a blacklist is pretty useless.
it's way more effective to block known bot IPs and malicious URLs in the form body.
I also suggest securing your form with a good captcha.
If you don't want to bother your users with captchas, there is a less obtrusive, but also less effective trick:
create a additional form field and hide it via css. only accept the form if this field was submitted empty. many bots usually fill out all fields, so you can reject the form if this hidden field has any content.
Related
I need to create a reference in an email template. for that I need to reffer a standard Contact objecect. For that I have a Custom Object Email Info, that has a lokup to standard Accounts.
So in the email I have to have value of the custom field Email_info__c from the custom object Email_info__c(the object and it's field have the same API names) while entering the Contact.
In the end both Contacts and my custom object have the lookups to Account, but not to each other, and there is no lookup from Acount, for now.
My first guess was to refer to the first child object Email info in the header of the VF template
relatedToType="Email_Info__c"
and then refer to it in the body as
{!RelatedTo.Account_r}
but then I would need a lookup from Accounts to Email Info to be able to refer deeper
{!RelatedTo.Account_r.Email_Info__r.Email_Info__c}
but, I don't think that it'll work that way or that it meets the needed criteria. Can someone share if there is an option at all to get the Email Info to Contacts through Accounts without creating a lookup on Accounts?
The task is to have a middle referred object, not a direct lookup:
It depends a bit how you are going to use this email template. What will the send be triggered from. Account? Contact? Email Info record? Will it be fired from a workflow or user will be instructed to navigate to account record and start composing the message?
If your relatedTo is really Email_Info__c then you don't have to do anything, you have all the data hidden in {!relatedTo.Id}, {!relatedTo.Name}, {!relatedTo.Email_Info__c} (you said the field name is same as object's name)
If your email starts from "Account" and you can guarantee accounts will have 1 email info record on related list - something like this might work:
<messaging:emailTemplate subject="hi stack" recipientType="Contact" relatedToType="Account">
<messaging:plainTextEmailBody >
{!relatedTo.Opportunities[0].Id} {!relatedTo.Opportunities[0].Name} {!relatedTo.Opportunities[0].StageName} {!relatedTo.Opportunities[0].CloseDate}
</messaging:plainTextEmailBody>
</messaging:emailTemplate>
from Account (relatedTo) I'm going down to the related list of Opportunities, I'm picking 1st one (at random... but if you have just 1 record it'll be fine) and display whatever I want.
If your relatedTo and recipient both have to be Contact it starts to get bit messier, normal visualforce syntax will not allow you to go "up" (from Contact to Account) and then "down" (from Account to related list of email infos)
You'd need to start with something like https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.pages.meta/pages/pages_email_templates_with_apex.htm and then figure out how to pass the Id of account to it and run a query for email infos related to this account. https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/245930/pass-id-from-visualforce-email-template-to-controller might be a good start, poke me if you're stuck.
I'm need to create email in Sales Force with the recipient as a custom object rather than a User, Contact or Person. Unfortunately, it appears my client has created a custom object for the entity we need to contact.
I tried several methods in the UI and they have all ended up needing a User or Contact record to succeed.
I'm now using APEX code in a trigger, it also requires a User, but I have managed to get past that using this work around: Sending Emails in Salesforce to Non-Contacts Using Apex
Now I need to pass my custom object into the Email Template to get the merge fields from it.
I believe setWhatId is the correct approach, but it returns "Invalid entity type for whatId".
Not sure where to turn now....
In short, I have a custom object that is not a user or a contact, but it does have a related custom object with an email address field (also not user or contact).
I need to send an email to the email address recorded on the related custom object passing the custom object to the template to gain its merge fields.
Any help or guidance would be much appreciated. Can I even do this?
Best Regards,
Rod
From your comment and without knowing much more, the relationship traversal should look like this:
Contact c = [select id, Email from Contact where id=q.Client__r.Participant_Portal_Contact__r.id limit 1];
Assuming that the email address field is on a parent object you dont need to do this with code you can probably do this using a Visualforce Email template and the relatedTo set to the object with the details you want to use as merge fields. That way you can use it in workflow or process builder or flows without the need for code
Is there an easy way to save a recordset, i mean multiple records, but only the "new ones"?
I have a table users and a users form in the view. First field you must enter is passport number, so if user already exists in database the rest of the form will be auto completed and disabled to prevent changes but if passport dont exist then you have to enter all data. As anyone can change those existing users data controls from the browser even if they are disabled, i want to make sure only new records are saved in database. First of all i thought i could find again in database and delete existing users from recordset before save, but i wonder if there is a more elegant approach.
Ty in advance.
I write this here, cause comments are too short:
Thank you for your answer, André. I'm sorry if i didnt explain perfectly, but the form is done by disabling all controls except passport and if passport dont exist (i check it on passport focusout) then the rest of controls are set to enabled. I mean, that is already done. The question was only about the saving.
The validation method you talk about, well i'm actually validating all the controls in the form and i must disable the 'unique' rule so a user can link an existing user to the current bill, otherwise it will fail validation on submit and it wont allow the user to proceed (i did this because it happened to me when testing). The actual setting is much more complicated: the form belongs to a model (bills) which is associated with 4 other models and 2 of those relationships are many to many, bills_users and bills_clients, where users are the persons who do the job and clients pay for it, but I was trying to make the question easier. Anyway, what I am looking for is, in fact, some kind of saving setting which I can't find. In documentation I found "When converting belongsToMany data, you can disable the new entity creation, by using the onlyIds option. When enabled, this option restricts belongsToMany marshalling to only use the _ids key and ignore all other data." The first half of the sentence was promising, but the explanation says different, and I actually tried it without success.
First:
Is there an easy way to save a recordset, i mean multiple records, but only the "new ones"?
Yes there is you can validate it in model, something like this:
public function buildRules(RulesChecker $rules)
{
$rules->add($rules->isUnique('passportNumber'));
return $rules;
}
This will prevent to save a duplicate passport number register, but you can different.
I have a table users and a users form in the view. First field you must enter is passport number, so if user already exists in database the rest of the form will be auto completed and disabled to prevent changes but if passport dont exist then you have to enter all data.
There is two different ways to do this:
First you have your form, you develop an ajax function when you fill the first field (passport number) this ajax function do a request to your controller to search for a passport with that number if find something get data and fill others fields and turn them just readable, else just nothing and let user fill the fields by himself
second add a step-by-step where you first do a form to try find by pass number, user fill this only field with a number then submit, on submit this search for a record, if find fill the entire next step fields, else the next step will be the rest of form with the fields to be filled.
This may help you too: https://book.cakephp.org/3.0/en/orm/validation.html
Tell me how you decided to do :)
We have been trying for a while to solve a Drupal Rules problem.
The situation is;
On every cron run we would like to check for Users who have a certain Role.
We will then send an email to those Users.
But we only want this email to go once.
We are thinking therefore that we will create a new custom/hidden User field called 'email sent'. Then the rule will;
EVENT: On every cron run
CONDITION: Check for Users who have the role AND have a null value in that field
ACTIONS: Send an email to the
users AND set the value of the user 'email sent field to 1.
We think this is possible but we can't see how you can set up a rule to do this.
Any help really appreciated
I think that you can resolve your problem via a custom module where create an action rule that set this fields. In situation like yours I follow this method. Search hook_rules_action_info().
Or if you use profile2 module you can see if there is a rule that can be set this value. I think that there is because Profile2 support Rules.
M.
I have a view that shows user profile fields in a tabular format. There is a "Country" field, which is not accessible to anonymous users. When viewed as anonymous user, the field is not shown by Views, which is correct. However, I also have the same field exposed, so that users can filter by "Country". The exposed filter shows up for anonymous user and an anonymous user can actually filter by the field, even though he does not see the field value. Am I missing something or it is normal behavior? Is there a way to force the filter to be hidden for anonymous users?
If you want to achieve this without having to do any custom coding, you can try to display the filter as a block and set the permissions on the block to display only to authenticated users.
This in fact is a known issue and detailed at http://drupal.org/node/1352654. As per the last comment in that issue this "wont fix". That's strange, and certainly not to my liking. Hopefully there will be some solution in a future version.