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.
197 results found
-
Device Pinning as a condition for "Download Restriction"
Wondering if "device pinning" can register details of devices utilized by the user and allows/disallow the login from it. Why cant it be used as a condition under "Download Restriction". MDM solutions are not yet fully matured to cover all & frequently changing devices types .
1 voteDynamic Device Trust as a condition for Download restriction is on the roadmap.
-
Preventing Business file leak from Private folder.
Box in our tenant provides a "Private folder", to every user, which doesn't allow the user to add collaborators. User can, however, use box link to share files with others.
In a corporate setting, this folder is supposed to be accessible only by its respective owner( an employee), On an exit of the employee from the organisation, the private files in the folder may be allowed by the organisation to be copied/taken by the employee along. However, at the same time, it must be ensured that the business files are not stored in this folder to avoid leakage.
I suggest…
1 vote -
Threat Detection Reporting
My customer would like to get a report of the activities that detection rule is processing to ensure that is actually working. They have one rule (suspicious session) that has not generated any hits and thus they don’t know if it’s actually doing anything or not.
3 votes -
Return character in Classification Definition
Currently "Classification Definition" can be written with 'return character' in its input form. But when this "Classification Definition" is shown to the user, 'return character' is being ignored and is shown in one line.
Definition needs to be shown in the same way it was written / configured, and also needs to be shown in several lines when required (e.g. written in multiple languages where each language's definition needs to be shown in each line, instead of all in single line).
1 vote -
Shield reports suspicious IP location when opening files through O365. Adds lots of unnecesary noise
In Shield, when a user previews/opens a file to Office Online it tracks as a suspicious IP location. It would be great if it could be separated and designated a lower priority than a genuine account compromise. Just a suggestion to clean up the Shield alert queue
7 votes -
Box Shield
Can we have more granular on the detection rules, e,g, down to user groups, or individual account level - allowing customers to set priorities as high for some user groups, but low for others. For some users, a customer may expect high levels of downloads/activity in Box and this may be in peaks and troughs - therefore potentially a lower priority, whereas with execs this activity should be treated as a higher priority and greater risk.
1 vote -
Using Smart Access
When entering a List when creating a Shield Smart Access Policy, have drop down appear that shows all available lists with short descriptions so the user doesn't have to try to remember the names of the lists they created or what they generally contain.
1 voteNot planned in near term
-
Visibility and controls on externally owned content
Box admins should be able to restrict their users from uploading or moving sensitive content to folders that are owned by another Box instance. There should be controls around what defines sensitive content. Box admins should have visibility into what's uploaded or moved into the external folders in reports.
1 vote -
Localize the name of "Classification" metadata template to user's language
User cannot name of "Classification" metadata template which is automatically created when the user create Classification policy. At least it should localize to Box admin's language (ex "分類" in Japanese)
1 vote -
Increase the maximum number of Shield Classifications beyond 25 so that we can classify each clients content to prevent mis-sharing
I would like to see the ability to add Shield Classifications per client - with the appropriate access policy (restricting to client email domain) we could avoid any possibility to overshare when inviting the wrong clients into a folder or sharing a shared link - There is a maximum number of classifications of 25 so could this be extended to facilitate this use case/control.
25 votesWe will have a different solution to address the use case.
-
Classification definition
Currently when classifying a document it is only possible to see the top 2-3 lines and is not rich text therefore doesn't support returns, bold type, links, bulleted lists or colour.
While the full 300 characters are displayed in the details pane, Users need to see all the details prior to applying the classification.REQUEST: To make the dropdown either expandable (i.e. 'show more') or to show the full 300 character classification definition and to make the definition field 'Rich Text' so its possible to give more context to the classification e.g. provide a list of example documents or link…
4 votes -
4 votes
Not a priority. Will revisit in 6 months.
-
We want the ability for Download policies to also trigger on unusual download activity by external collaborators
We see external collaborators with high download activity using accounts outside of our enterprise (ie: gmail, yahoo?). The business is getting quite frustrated that they cannot report on these email addresses.
3 votesThis is quite complex to implement, we are researching to figure out how best to fix this.
-
Selectively disable syncing to mobile and desktop based on content classification and/or user group.
0 votes -
Granular permissions per user for sharing public links/classified documents
The administrator should be able to set the default classification for all new documents (e.g. For Official Use).
Each user should be able to set their own default classification (which will override the system setting (e.g. Classified).
Each user should be able to change the classification for any new or existing document where she has sufficient rights. For existing documents, she should also be able to select multiple documents, and then change the classification for all those documents in one go.
1 voteDefault classification label is not planned because it could be misleading to end users. However, to address the concern of content being leaked before it is classified, you can create an access policy applying to “All content without a classification label” in Box Shield.
-
Set default classification for all uploads with Box Classification
When every file is uploaded, set a default Classification value that can be updated manually or via a partner (Netskope, SkyHigh, Titus, etc.).
13 votesDefault classification label is not planned because it could be misleading to end users. However, to address the concern of content being leaked before it is classified, you can create an access policy applying to “All content without a classification label” in Box Shield.
-
Events API - Add Policy Name to CONTENT_WORKFLOW_UPLOAD_POLICY_VIOLATION
Currently, when an Upload Policy violation occurs, Box reports on that violation in 3 ways:
1. Email notification
2. Admin Console -> Reports tab
3. Events APIIn the email notification and admin console->reports, Box provides the policy name for which the violation is occurring. However, Box does NOT include the policy name in the Events API entry, which causes a problem when we are pulling logs (via the Events API) into external reporting/SIEM tools like ArcSight/Splunk.
Request: Add 'Policy Name' to the CONTENTWORKFLOWUPLOADPOLICYVIOLATION entry in the Events API (to reach parity with the native Admin…
1 vote
- Don't see your idea?