Help shape the future of Box
Welcome to Box Pulse, our product feedback tool powered by UserVoice. Got an idea for how to improve Box? Share it with us and gather support or vote on other people's ideas. Your feedback is essential to informing roadmap decisions and shaping the future of our products. Thanks for joining our community!
See user guide here.
179 results found
-
Change Co-Admin Permission to Only Require 'View & Edit Policies'
Right now, in order for a co-admin to be able to view and edit Legal Hold policies (matters), they need a weird mix of unintuitive co-admin permissions (including 'view users content').
2 votesThank you for the suggestion! At the moment there is no plan for this feature. We may look into this in the future.
-
Policies: Add Ability to Apply Them Only to Selected Users/Groups
For some use cases, we would like to enable a Policy (Upload, Download, or Sharing) in Box, but have that Policy scoped to only apply to certain users/groups.
0 votesThank you for this note!
This is a feature we’ve considered in the past but do not plan to build in the short term. This may become a higher priority with more customer demand.
-
Add Content Classification as a 'Then take this action' Option for Sharing / Upload / Download Policies
Right now, the Upload, Sharing, and Download policies have various options in the 'Then take this action(s)' section of the Policy.
REQUEST: Add ability to use Content Classification as part of the 'Then take this action(s)' section.
1 voteWill need to understand the use case more, as now classification / metadata can be set at the folder level to cascade down.
-
0 votes
Thank you for this feedback! This is not currently planned. We will reconsider this with additional demand.
-
Add flexibility to edit an existing legal hold
We would like to be able to adjust the date of the legal hold or be able to only extract a subset of content within the time period established.
0 votes -
Track Legal Hold events and notify certain users when these events occur
A Legal Hold report would help with this too. In looking at legal holds there's reporting for each hold but not a comprehensive report listing all hold activity
0 votesThis is unlikely to be something we build. Admins could accomplish this through the events stream or a tool like Splunk.
-
Folder Owner to have the ability to place their own folders or files on legal hold
It would be really beneficial for the Folder Owner to have the ability to place their own folders or files on legal hold (without making them an admin)
0 votesMost legal holds happen at the admin/legal team level, but I understand the request and will reconsider with additional customer use cases.
-
Legal holds based on keywords
Use Case: General Counsel gets subpoenaed to turn over all content related to specific words or phrases
7 votesThank you for the suggestion! At the moment there is no plan for this feature. We may look into this in the future.
-
Upload policies catching too many false positives
137 files flagged so far today for Social Security Violation. Here is the warning information: File attached.
I am getting so many false positives that I would need a team to look at every single file that gets flagged. The scanning engine is terrible. Please escalate to your internal dev group so it can get fixed.
2 votesThank you for the suggestion! At the moment there is no plan for this feature. We may look into this in the future.
-
More information regarding policy violation in notification email
We would like to see more information (or have a link to more information within console) for violated policies
0 votesThank you for the suggestion! At the moment there is no plan for this feature. We may look into this in the future.
-
BCC Email Archive to be set at the user / group level to avoid having to capture a ton of emails for people that don't need to be monitored
Allows for greater granularity
0 votesWould need to understand the use case more.
-
Not to allow content to be deleted from FOLDERS instead of trash when a retention policy is applied.
0 votesThe intention behind the design of Retention is that users can change their folder structure in a way that is relevant to them while preserving the enforcement of Retention rules. We do not plan to change users’ ability to move things to trash at this time.
-
Prohibit that an external collaborator deletes files
When some user invites an external collaborator as "Editor" to some folder, the external user can delete any files in the folder. The deleted file is sent to the external collaborator's trash. It's not good for some security-centric customer, so they need the function to prohibit that an external collaborator deletes files to protect their assets.
5 votesThis should be managed through our existing permissions framework rather than a specific policy. If an external user deletes a file, it also lives in the owner’s trash folder who is a managed user in this instance.
-
0 votes
This is a resource-intensive request. We will reconsider with additional demand.
-
Reports: Add Matter Name to Title of Report Export (Excel File)
Example name of the current report:
"legalholdsrunon7-28-16__2-24-23-PM"?That doesn't tell me which matter it's related to.
A unique identifier - likely the name - for the matter/hold should also be added to the file name.
0 votes -
Reports: Replace User ID in the Legal Hold Report with User's Email
In the current Legal Hold report export (Excel file), users are referred to by their User ID (e.g., 123233124) which isn't really helpful for an admin to identify 'who' that is.
Using email address would be a much better field to include, either replacing the User ID field OR adding in Email as an additional column.
3 votes -
Manage Quarantine Programmatically (via API)
There is no way to manage the quarantine process programmatically. As a result, we must individually release / delete quarantined files via the UI.
Given that the policies have a tendency to generate false positives, this process becomes very time consuming and difficult to manage and requires valuable IT time to click buttons (often for hours).
At our scale, and since we opt to use DLP policies, it's impossible to manage.
10 votesThank you for the suggestion! At the moment there is no plan for this feature. We may look into this in the future.
-
0 votes
Unclear on what the specific request and use-case are for this feature request. Please provide more detail!
-
BCC E-mail to Archive is Insufficient as an eDiscovery feature
The BCC E-mail to Archive feature cannot be used for eDiscovery if users disable their e-mail notifications, as the feature only works if an email is sent to users.
As a result, this control cannot be relied upon by organizations and introduces a gap in control.
We require this functionality for our compliance/legal requirements.
0 votes -
9 votes
- Don't see your idea?