Hi @sai.pabbareddy , Those are both "packages" that contain the same kind of license (ProGet Enterprise). A single ProGet Enterprise license will allow you to configure a ProGet instance as a HA/cluster. "Enterprise Essentials" contains ONE license of ProGet Enterprise and no services "Enterprise Complete" contains TWO licenses of ProGet Enterprise plus services Organizations will often get two licenses of ProGet Enterprise to create two different environments (one Production, one DR/Testing/Training). Hope that helps clarify :) Thanks, Alana

Hi @sai.pabbareddy, My apologies. Looks like I typoed the date on that other post. I had the day of Friday correct, but the date should have been Sept 18, 2026. It will be releasing later today (normally in the evening in EST). I updated that response also to have the correct date. Thanks, Rich

Hi @sai.pabbareddy , A 500 is an system error and would be logged under Admin > Diagnostic Center. It's possible there was system overload, network issues, who knows. I wouldn't worry about it. A 403 is a permission error that would be caused by configuration. It sounds like you resolved it by changing/modifying configuration, waiting for a cache to clear, etc. Thanks, Alana

@atripp, Went back through your docs and our own notes trying to pin down a specific page, and honestly — we can't find one. The closest we got was a page showing how to create a Specified License Rule (e.g., setting GPL-3.0 to noncompliant), but every example there is clearly a user-configured policy, not a factory default. We think our original impression was a general one from early research rather than something we can point to a specific article for, so no need to go hunting on our end — sounds like it was just an assumption on our part rather than something your docs actually claimed. Good to have it confirmed either way: no default license rule ships out of the box, and creating one (GPL or otherwise) is expected as part of setting up a feed. We'll document it that way. Thanks, Sai

@rhessinger Thanks.

Hi @sai.pabbareddy, Glad to hear it all works as expected! Thanks, Rich

Hi @sai.pabbareddy, If you could pull a full LDAP trace/packate capture that would be great. I also setup a single-domain/single-dc. I can even share my setup as I used a VM and docker to set it up. My VM is a base alpine install with docker, docker-compose, and nano installed. Here is my the compose file I tested with. NOTE: my container uses the host network mode because that was the only way I could get it to bind the port in Samba. This is probably not needed if ProGet sat in the same Docker network as the Samba container. version: '3.8' services: samba-test-ad: image: diegogslomp/samba-ad-dc:latest container_name: samba_test_ad hostname: DC1 privileged: true network_mode: host environment: - REALM=PLANETEXPRESS.COM - DOMAIN=PLANETEXPRESS - ADMIN_PASS=GoodNewsEveryone123! - DNS_FORWARDER=8.8.8.8 # NOTE: "ports" was removed because network_mode: host opens the container ports on the host natively samba-provisioner: image: alpine:latest container_name: samba_provisioner depends_on: - samba-test-ad # Shares host network context to communicate with the main container smoothly network_mode: host volumes: - /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock entrypoint: - /bin/sh - -c - | apk add --no-cache docker-cli echo "🚀 Monitoring Active Directory operational readiness..." while true; do if docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool user list >/dev/null 2>&1; then break fi echo "⏳ Samba is compiling directory tree schema... checking back in 3s" sleep 3 done echo "🔌 Active Directory Engine Online and Accepting Modifications!" echo "--- Creating Test Groups ---" docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool group add ship_crew || true docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool group add admin_staff || true echo "--- Creating Pre-populated Test Users ---" docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool user create fry FryPassword123! --given-name='Philip' --surname='Fry' --mail-address='fry@planetexpress.com' || true docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool user create leela LeelaPassword123! --given-name='Turanga' --surname='Leela' --mail-address='leela@planetexpress.com' || true docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool user create professor ProfPassword123! --given-name='Hubert' --surname='Farnsworth' --mail-address='professor@planetexpress.com' || true echo "--- Assigning Group Members ---" docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool group addmembers ship_crew fry,leela || true docker exec samba_test_ad /usr/local/samba/bin/samba-tool group addmembers admin_staff professor || true echo "✅ Active Directory data successfully populated! Setup complete." Then for my ProGet configuration, I created a new V5: Active Directory and here were the settings: General Name: V5: Samba 4 Domain: planetexpress.com User name: Administrator Password: GoodNewsEveryone123! Connection Domain Controller Host: <IP Address of my VM> LDAP Connection: Use LDAP Then I tested using Load user by username for the user fry in the group ship_crew. For recursive groups I used the user Administrator and the Group Denied RODC Password Replication Group. Then I added ship_crew to the Administer task and I logged in using fry/FryPassword123!. Thanks, Rich

@atripp , Thanks for the info.

Hi @sai.pabbareddy, [1] Here is some more information on PVRS vs CVSS: https://guides.inedo.com/vulnerability-management/cvss-pvrs/ Long story short, PVRS is designed for OSS dependencies and analyzes risk differently, in particular taking into account the custom risk profile you enter in ProGet (under Policies). [2] The NU1902 advisory comes from a vulnerability.base.json file that is cached both on the client end and ProGet end; you need to clear the http caches on NuGet (which you did), and ProGet will invalidate it about once an hour. You can force invalidation by restarting the service (Admin > Service) or manually assessing vulnerabilities (Admin > Vulnerabilities > Reassess), but that should only appear for test purposes. In a normal workflow the client will aggressively cache this file, and there's no real harm in having outdated information when following our recommended workflows. On that note.... we do NOT recommend you block downloads. It will actually lower your organization's security posture, not improve it. Please review this to learn how to "contain" properly: https://guides.inedo.com/vulnerability-management/containment/ Thank you, Alana