This is a huge issue and will be holding me back from upgrading. Any sort of work around would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Andy

In all of the previous versions you could disable script stripping if you wanted to, no matter what the editor.  Sometimes it involved making a change to a config file but it could be done .  Most of my more sophisticated users use scrpts extensively.  On my own site they are used to (for instance) embed widgetbox script for various specialized dashboards and controls, perform google analytics for landing page tracking and pipeline tracking, allow us to embed certain script-based players, embed advertising from Microsoft and other sources, etc.  How do you suggest we accomplish those tasks now that you've disabled the ability to do so inside html?  You already had the ability in Telerik to control which user roles could and could not embed script in their edits, you already defaulted that to strip scripts.  If Telerik has a serious security issue and you have a relationship with Telerik - does that not imply that it should be Telerik's responsibility to issue, test and support a fix here?  <br /> <br /> Injecting script is NOT a hack - it's a feature.  And one used extensively by your users.  Not that you bothered to ask your users.<br /> <br /> I guess my big concern here is that:<br /> <br /> A) This change wasn't discussed and users weren't surveyed ahead of time to determine the extent of legitimate script usage in common use today.  I'd say a full 80% of my clients sites have some sort of legitimate embedded code in their HTML.  Not that anyone asked.<br /> <br /> B) There were no warnings before performing this breaking change to the code, nor were there any warnings on the release of the code.  There is no way to roll back content and restore the scripts.  There is no way to disable the behavior. Short of rolling the entire site back to a previous version of DNN there is no way to recover the info once it's been edited.  There is no warning to the user "Saving this will strip important > tag content from the your system permanently - OK?"<br /> <br /> C) The "well we didn't like it much so we just got rid of it" attitude showing here.  I don't care what OTHER CMSs do.  If other CMSs jumped off a bridge would you jump off a bridge too?  THIS CMS provided those of us with the knowledge and ability to put useful and flexible jscript code into client's html panes.  That is part of why THIS CMS was chosen - it's a feature whether you like to think of it as such or not.  Consider this - without this ability the cost of an implementation of DNN just skyrocketed.  My client wants a widget box or microsoft ad embedded on their site? Sorry we have to write you a CUSTOM MODULE for JUST that specific purpose, and no you can't mix that with the rest of your HTML content.  Even retrofitting old sites to use this methodology would cost clients astronomically.  How well disposed to speak kindly of your CMS will they be after they get that bill?<br />