9965 results found

1. File and Folder report include number of file versions

   File and Folder report should include the number of versions associated with a file.

   We routinely receive questions from Box users about which files have version history associated with them and how much storage that version history is consuming.

   Today we need to open a case with Box Support to get this information but it would make this more self-service if the number of versions was included in the Admin File and Folder report.

   Even better would be if users could pull a File and Folder report for their own account and have that report include the # of file versions.

   File and Folder report should include the number of versions associated with a file.

   We routinely receive questions from Box users about which files have version history associated with them and how much storage that version history is consuming.

   Today we need to open a case with Box Support to get this information but it would make this more self-service if the number of versions was included in the Admin File and Folder report.

   Even better would be if users could pull a File and Folder report for their own account and have that report include the # of file… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Admin Reports  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. Add User Groups as viewer to an Admin report

   When generating a report (such as collaborations report), I'd like to be able to add a user group as viewer in addition to being able to add a user account. We have decentralized content management, and doing so would allow be to schedule a monthly collaborations report shared to a user group with the content admins. I can't do so for a user, as there is a risk the users changes role and would not anymore be authorized to access the report.

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Admin Reports  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. Feature Request: Flexible External Sharing Controls with Combined Allow/Block Logic (Box Shield)

   Current Situation (As-Is)

   Box Shield does not support applying multiple external collaboration restrictions on the same content.
   As a result:

   When a folder is classified with an allow-list policy, sharing externally is restricted only to explicitly approved email addresses managed in shield list.
   This overrides the broader domain-based sharing rules, preventing sharing with otherwise permitted external domain.

   Example impact:

   A folder with classification cannot be shared with regular external users from allowed domains, unless they are explicitly included in the allow list.

   Current workaround:

   Admins must manually maintain allow-lists (emails) for the classified folder.

   Problem

   Lack of flexibility in combining policies creates over-restrictive behavior.
   Organizations cannot implement common governance patterns such as:

   “Allow sharing with non-public domains + specific exceptions from those domains" - using integration to manage the list on exception.

   Leads to:

   Increased admin overhead
   Poor user experience
   Inconsistent enforcement across classified vs non-classified content

   Requested Enhancement
   Enable combined/conditional policy logic for external sharing, allowing:

   Coexistence of rules, such as:

   Allow sharing with non-blocked external domains

   Allow specific email exceptions (from otherwise restricted/public domains) - using shield lists o

   Policy evaluation that supports:

   “Allow domain-based sharing AND allow specific users from blocked domains”

   More flexible classification behavior where:

   Applying a classification extends permissions (adds exceptions) rather than replacing them entirely

   thanks.
   Tal

   Current Situation (As-Is)

   Box Shield does not support applying multiple external collaboration restrictions on the same content.
   As a result:

   When a folder is classified with an allow-list policy, sharing externally is restricted only to explicitly approved email addresses managed in shield list.
   This overrides the broader domain-based sharing rules, preventing sharing with otherwise permitted external domain.

   Example impact:

   A folder with classification cannot be shared with regular external users from allowed domains, unless they are explicitly included in the allow list.

   Current workaround:

   Admins must manually maintain allow-lists (emails) for the classified folder.

   Problem

   Lack of flexibility in combining… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Shield  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. Font selection for canvas text

   Box Canvas already provides a solid text formatting toolbar - bold, italic, underline, colour, highlight, alignment, and lists are all supported. However, there is no way to change the font, leaving users locked into a single default typeface across the entire canvas.

   For teams using Box Canvas for presentations, client-facing outputs, or brand-aligned workshops, this is a significant limitation. Font choice is a basic expression of brand identity and visual hierarchy - two things that matter the moment a canvas leaves an internal team and faces an external audience.

   Every comparable tool - Miro, Figma, FigJam, Lucidspark - offers font selection as standard alongside the formatting controls Box Canvas already has.

   The ask:
   Add a font selector to the existing text formatting toolbar so users can apply different typefaces to canvas text, bringing Box Canvas in line with the formatting capabilities users expect from a modern canvas tool.

   Box Canvas already provides a solid text formatting toolbar - bold, italic, underline, colour, highlight, alignment, and lists are all supported. However, there is no way to change the font, leaving users locked into a single default typeface across the entire canvas.

   For teams using Box Canvas for presentations, client-facing outputs, or brand-aligned workshops, this is a significant limitation. Font choice is a basic expression of brand identity and visual hierarchy - two things that matter the moment a canvas leaves an internal team and faces an external audience.

   Every comparable tool - Miro, Figma, FigJam, Lucidspark - offers font… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Canvas  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

5. Middle-click pan in mouse navigation mode

   Box Canvas already handles this correctly for trackpad users - in trackpad mode ("Swipe two fingers to pan"), a two-finger swipe pans the canvas regardless of which tool is active. Mouse users don't have the same experience.

   In mouse navigation mode, middle-click is a duplicate of left-click across all tools and scenarios. There is no way to pan while the Select tool is active without first switching to the Hand tool, breaking the editing flow on large canvases.

   This has been raised in a related request (Explain navigation mode https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/46235944-explain-navigation-mode), but the core behaviour gap deserves its own focused fix: extend the same "pan in any tool" logic that trackpad mode already applies to middle-click in mouse navigation mode.

   The ask:
   In mouse navigation mode, reserve middle-click for panning regardless of the active tool, bringing mouse users to parity with the trackpad experience that already exists.

   Box Canvas already handles this correctly for trackpad users - in trackpad mode ("Swipe two fingers to pan"), a two-finger swipe pans the canvas regardless of which tool is active. Mouse users don't have the same experience.

   In mouse navigation mode, middle-click is a duplicate of left-click across all tools and scenarios. There is no way to pan while the Select tool is active without first switching to the Hand tool, breaking the editing flow on large canvases.

   This has been raised in a related request (Explain navigation mode https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/46235944-explain-navigation-mode), but the core behaviour gap deserves its own focused… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Canvas  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. Object-level comments on Canvas items

   Box Canvas doesn't support commenting directly on individual objects - sticky notes, shapes, frames, etc. Every other major canvas tool (Miro, FigJoy, Lucidspark) offers this as standard.

   Without it, collaborators are forced to describe where something is rather than what they mean - "the green sticky in the top-right frame" instead of just tagging the object and leaving the instruction. This adds ambiguity, slows async collaboration, and creates unnecessary back-and-forth.

   The ask:
   Allow users to anchor comments directly to canvas objects, so feedback and instructions are always tied to the right context - regardless of who's viewing the canvas or when.

   Box Canvas doesn't support commenting directly on individual objects - sticky notes, shapes, frames, etc. Every other major canvas tool (Miro, FigJoy, Lucidspark) offers this as standard.

   Without it, collaborators are forced to describe where something is rather than what they mean - "the green sticky in the top-right frame" instead of just tagging the object and leaving the instruction. This adds ambiguity, slows async collaboration, and creates unnecessary back-and-forth.

   The ask:
   Allow users to anchor comments directly to canvas objects, so feedback and instructions are always tied to the right context - regardless of who's viewing the canvas or… more

   •  

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Box Canvas  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

7. When selecting multiple files to move or copy, the delete icon is too close to the move/copy icon.

   When users select multiple files to move or copy, the delete icon is positioned too close to the move/copy icon, which may lead to accidental clicks. Please consider moving the delete button to a more appropriate location or making it visually distinct, such as changing only the delete button to red.

   複数のファイルを選択して移動/コピーをする際、削除アイコンが移動/コピーアイコンに近すぎます。

   複数のファイルを選択して移動/コピーする場合、削除アイコンが移動/コピーに近すぎるため、誤ってクリックしてしまう可能性があります。削除ボタンを他の適切な場所に移すか、削除ボタンだけ赤にするなど違いを明確にしてほしいです。

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Web App  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

8. Box MCP Connector: Add Binary File Upload Support (.xlsx, .pptx, .docx)

   The Problem
   The Box MCP (Model Context Protocol) connector, used to integrate Box with AI platforms like Claude (Anthropic), currently supports only plain-text file uploads. The uploadfile and uploadfileversion tools accept text-only content and support a limited set of extensions: txt, md, csv, html, json, and a few others.
   Binary file formats — specifically .xlsx, .pptx, and .docx — cannot be uploaded through the MCP connector. The connector's own documentation references a getupload_url path for binary uploads, but that method is not exposed as a callable tool in the current implementation.

   Why This Matters
   AI-assisted workflows are increasingly the norm for SMB and enterprise teams. When an AI tool generates a finished Excel model, PowerPoint deck, or Word document, users expect it to land directly in Box, just as it would if they saved it manually. Instead, they're forced to download the file from the AI interface and drag it into Box Drive by hand. That's friction that breaks the workflow and defeats the purpose of the integration.
   For comparison, major document-sharing platforms work without problems.

   What We're Asking For
   Enable binary file upload support in the Box MCP connector for common formats, including .xlsx, .pptx, and .docx.

   Who This Affects
   Any team using Box alongside an AI platform (Claude, Copilot, custom GPTs, or any MCP-compatible tool) that generates Office-format files. This is a growing segment — and right now, Box is the bottleneck in every one of those workflows.
   Please upvote if your team runs into this. The fix is well-defined, and the precedent already exists in competing connectors.

   The Problem
   The Box MCP (Model Context Protocol) connector, used to integrate Box with AI platforms like Claude (Anthropic), currently supports only plain-text file uploads. The uploadfile and uploadfileversion tools accept text-only content and support a limited set of extensions: txt, md, csv, html, json, and a few others.
   Binary file formats — specifically .xlsx, .pptx, and .docx — cannot be uploaded through the MCP connector. The connector's own documentation references a getupload_url path for binary uploads, but that method is not exposed as a callable tool in the current implementation.

   Why This Matters
   AI-assisted workflows… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Developer Platform  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. AI Units Usage Reporting

   When AI activity is included in a User Activity report, the number of AI units consumed should also be included. Another idea is to add an AI Units report that lists all activity that consumes AL Units.

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

   0 comments  ·  Admin Reports  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   How important is this to you?

   Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

10. Enable Metadata Cascading when using the Add Metadata outcome

    Description

    Allow users to enable metadata cascading when applying the Add Metadata outcome to a folder. This should be a user-selectable option in the workflow builder (for example, a simple "Enable metadata cascading" checkbox for this outcome).

    Business Value

    Many document-centric processes follow the same pattern:

    • A user submits a request through a form.
    • A workflow automatically creates a dedicated folder for that request.
    • Documents related to the request are uploaded into that folder over time by multiple users.

    While workflows can already create the folder and assign metadata to it, there is currently no way to enable metadata cascading as part of the Add Metadata outcome. As a result, newly uploaded files do not inherit the folder metadata automatically.

    This creates additional manual work and prevents organizations from leveraging metadata-driven experiences, like Box Apps.

    When configuring the Add Metadata outcome for a folder, users should have the option to enable metadata cascadin (and set the overwrite policy).

    If selected, in addition to adding the metadatas to the folder, the metadata cascade option should also be set (https://developer.box.com/reference/post-metadata-cascade-policies) :

    The metadata template and values applied to the folder will automatically cascade to files within that folder according to the metadata cascading behavior.
    Newly added content should inherit the appropriate metadata without requiring additional workflows or manual intervention.

    Description

    Allow users to enable metadata cascading when applying the Add Metadata outcome to a folder. This should be a user-selectable option in the workflow builder (for example, a simple "Enable metadata cascading" checkbox for this outcome).

    Business Value

    Many document-centric processes follow the same pattern:

    • A user submits a request through a form.
    • A workflow automatically creates a dedicated folder for that request.
    • Documents related to the request are uploaded into that folder over time by multiple users.

    While workflows can already create the folder and assign metadata to it, there is currently no way to enable metadata cascading… more

    7 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Automate  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

11. Add file and folder move operations to the Box integration for ChatGPT/OpenAI

    Subject: Add file and folder move operations to the Box integration for ChatGPT/OpenAI

    Hello Box Support,

    I am using the official Box integration within ChatGPT. The integration can currently list my files, create folders, upload files, rename items, and inspect permissions. However, it does not provide an action for moving an existing file or folder to another Box folder.

    For example, I asked ChatGPT to:

    1. Create a folder named !
    2. Move the files and folders in my Box root directory into that folder

    ChatGPT successfully created the folder, but it could not move the existing items because the Box integration did not expose a file or folder move operation.

    I confirmed that this is not an account-permission issue. I own the files, and my Box permissions allow deleting, downloading, renaming, uploading, and sharing them.

    Could you please clarify:

    1. Is the absence of file and folder move operations an intentional security restriction?
    2. Is this limitation controlled by Box, OpenAI, or the configuration of the Box connector/MCP integration?
    3. Could Box add supported actions for:

    • Moving a file to another folder
    • Moving a folder to another folder
    • Moving multiple selected items in one operation
      1. Could the integration use Box’s normal item-update API while respecting the user’s existing Box permissions and requesting confirmation before moving multiple items?

    This capability is important because without move operations, ChatGPT can inspect and create Box content but cannot perform basic file organization workflows.

    Please forward this as a feature request to the team responsible for the Box integration with OpenAI/ChatGPT.

    Thank you.

    Subject: Add file and folder move operations to the Box integration for ChatGPT/OpenAI

    Hello Box Support,

    I am using the official Box integration within ChatGPT. The integration can currently list my files, create folders, upload files, rename items, and inspect permissions. However, it does not provide an action for moving an existing file or folder to another Box folder.

    For example, I asked ChatGPT to:

    1. Create a folder named !
    2. Move the files and folders in my Box root directory into that folder

    ChatGPT successfully created the folder, but it could not move the existing items because the Box integration… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Developer Platform  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

12. Large Folder Operation proactive notification and approval request

    Provide a notification to a user should they be attempting to perform a Large Folder Operation and request admin approval for the action for an audit trail

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Notifications  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Default agent for hub

    I want to be able to create a custom agent and set it as the default agent for a hub. The idea is that if I want a hub to return a consistent result every time someone searches it, I can build an agent that provides that experience and have that agent automatically selected as the hub’s default. I do not want users to have to choose which agent to use.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Hubs  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

14. Invite Box Groups from Another Tenant

    Currently, when inviting users who belong to a different tenant to our tenant, each user must be invited individually. This process is time-consuming and inefficient.
    We would like the ability to invite users from another tenant by group, rather than having to invite them one by one.

    （InJapanese）
    別テナントからBoxグループを招待したい

    現状別テナントに所属しているユーザを弊社テナントへ招待する場合、1ユーザずつ招待する必要があり、対応に時間がかかり非効率です。
    ユーザーを1人ずつ招待するのではなく、別テナントのユーザをグループ単位で招待できる機能を希望します。

    3 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Other  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. Real-time visibility of whether a user has external collaborations ユーザーが外部コラボレーションを行っているかをリアルタイムで確認する機能

    ・Problem Statement / 課題
    In the legacy Content Manager, an admin could see — in real time — that a managed user had a folder collaborated with an external party, along with the owner name. This was used as a pre-check before deleting/offboarding the user. The new Content Manager no longer surfaces external folders, so this real-time check is no longer possible through the UI.
    レガシーContent Managerでは、管理者は対象ユーザーが外部とコラボレーションしているフォルダの存在と所有者名を、リアルタイムで確認できました。これはユーザーの削除/オフボーディング前の事前チェックとして使われていました。新Content Managerでは外部フォルダが表示されなくなったため、このリアルタイム確認がUI上で行えなくなっています。
    Note: This request is not specifically about Content Manager. The legacy CM simply happened to be where this was possible. We are requesting the capability (real-time admin-side visibility of a user's external collaboration status), regardless of where in the product it is surfaced (Admin Console, a dedicated view, etc.).
    補足：本要望はContent Managerに限定したものではありません。 レガシーCMがたまたまそれを実現できる場所だっただけです。要望しているのは「管理者側でユーザーの外部コラボレーション状況をリアルタイムに把握できる機能そのもの」であり、提供場所（Admin Console、専用ビュー等）は問いません。

    ・Requirements (phased) / 要件（段階別）
    The top priority is real-time confirmation of a user's external-collaboration status. Reporting (with up to 24h delay) does not satisfy this.
    最優先事項は、ユーザーの外部コラボレーション状況をリアルタイムで確認できることです。レポート（最大24時間の遅延あり）ではこれを満たしません。

    Phase 1 (minimum acceptable): For a given managed user, show in real time whether they have any external-folder collaboration (yes/no, existence only).
    Phase 2 (desired enhancement): Additionally show which external tenant(s) the user is collaborating with.
    第一段階（最低限）： 対象ユーザーについて、外部フォルダコラボレーションの有無をリアルタイムに表示する（yes/no、存在のみ）。
    第二段階（追加で望ましい）： 加えて、そのユーザーがどの外部テナントとコラボレーションしているかを表示する。

    ・Current Workaround and Its Limitations / 現行のワークアラウンドとその限界
    Affected customers are currently using the API (List items in folder against folderid: 0 / root) as a temporary workaround, expected to last only a few months. This is not a sustainable solution.
    該当顧客は現在、API（List items in folder を folderid: 0／ルートに対して実行）を一時的なワークアラウンドとして使用していますが、これは数か月程度の暫定策と想定されています。持続可能な解決策ではありません。
    Other admin-side options are insufficient for this use case:

    Reports: Content reports reflect data only up to ~24 hours before report run time (per Box Support, "Running Reports"). Content added in the last 24h can be missing → fails the real-time requirement.
    Instant Login (Admin Console): Does not work for external folders, so it cannot be used to verify external collaboration.

    その他の管理者側の選択肢は、本ユースケースには不十分です：

    レポート： コンテンツレポートはレポート実行時点の約24時間前までのデータしか反映しません（Box Support「Running Reports」より）。直近24時間に追加されたコンテンツが欠落しうるため、リアルタイム要件を満たしません。
    Instant Login（Admin Console）： 外部フォルダには機能しないため、外部コラボレーションの確認には使えません。

    ・Business Impact / ビジネスインパクト
    In Japan, external-collaboration visibility directly affects user-offboarding and license-seat management for customers with record-retention obligations. Without a real-time check, IT cannot confidently delete users (compliance risk per customer), which ties up limited license seats and creates operational friction. This pattern is likely to recur across regulated/large enterprises in the Japanese market, so the capability has value beyond a single account.
    日本では、外部コラボレーションの可視性が、記録保存義務を持つ顧客のユーザーオフボーディングおよびライセンスシート管理に直接影響します。リアルタイムの確認手段がないと、IT部門は確信を持ってユーザーを削除できず（顧客視点ではコンプライアンスリスク）、限られたライセンスシートが拘束され、運用上のフリクションが生じます。このパターンは日本市場の規制業界/大企業で繰り返し発生する可能性が高く、単一アカウントを超えた価値を持つ機能です。

    ・Problem Statement / 課題
    In the legacy Content Manager, an admin could see — in real time — that a managed user had a folder collaborated with an external party, along with the owner name. This was used as a pre-check before deleting/offboarding the user. The new Content Manager no longer surfaces external folders, so this real-time check is no longer possible through the UI.
    レガシーContent Managerでは、管理者は対象ユーザーが外部とコラボレーションしているフォルダの存在と所有者名を、リアルタイムで確認できました。これはユーザーの削除/オフボーディング前の事前チェックとして使われていました。新Content Managerでは外部フォルダが表示されなくなったため、このリアルタイム確認がUI上で行えなくなっています。
    Note: This request is not specifically about Content Manager. The legacy CM simply happened to be where this was possible. We are requesting the capability (real-time admin-side visibility of a user's external… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Edit…  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Delete User App Authorization

    It would be nice to delete User App Authorization from the Admin Console. While Server App Authorization can be deleted by contacting support, User App Auth cannot.

    Disabling auth is a good temporary workaround, but when there are many user app auths it can get cluttered and difficult to manage.

    •  

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Report on file insights for all files

    Currently you can only view file insights on an individual file, from the file details. I need the ability to view file insights for all files, in a single report.
    Add a reporting feature in the admin console for file insights, where fields can be selected to be included in the report or not: People, Previews, Views, Downloads, Comments, Edits, Last Viewed Date, etc. And a File insights report is generated for ALL files in Box.
    Having insights on individual files only makes it unfeasible to measure file utilization across the repo, at scale. How can we measure which files have high views and which are not being viewed at all, across the file corpus, without a report. Manually navigating to file insights for each individual file, exporting, then merging all reports, for hundreds or thousands of files, is not feasible. Please provide a report to deliver this

    Currently you can only view file insights on an individual file, from the file details. I need the ability to view file insights for all files, in a single report.
    Add a reporting feature in the admin console for file insights, where fields can be selected to be included in the report or not: People, Previews, Views, Downloads, Comments, Edits, Last Viewed Date, etc. And a File insights report is generated for ALL files in Box.
    Having insights on individual files only makes it unfeasible to measure file utilization across the repo, at scale. How can we measure which files… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

18. Request to Make Service Accounts Created During Box Automate Use Easier to Identify

    When a workflow is created and saved in Box Automate, a service account is created (e.g., InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com).
    However, at present, it is difficult to determine whether this account was created as part of using Box Automate, making it hard to distinguish it from a suspicious user that may have been created maliciously.
    Therefore, we would like the service account (e.g., InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com) to be made more easily identifiable as an account created for the use of Box Automate.
    For example, after a workflow is created in Box Automate, we would like a pop-up to be displayed indicating that a service account for workflow execution (e.g., InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com) has been created.

    内容：
    Box Automateでワークフローを作成・保存すると、サービスアカウント（例：InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com）が作成されます。
    しかし、現状ではこのアカウントがBox Automateの利用に伴って作成されたものか判別しづらく、悪意を持って作成された不審なユーザーとの見分けがつきません。
    そのため、サービスアカウント（例：InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com）がBox Automate利用のために作成されたアカウントであることを、より分かりやすくしてほしいです。
    例として、Box Automateでワークフローを作成した後に、ワークフロー実行用のサービスアカウント（例：InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com）が作成されたことを示すポップアップを表示するなどの対応を希望します。

    When a workflow is created and saved in Box Automate, a service account is created (e.g., InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com).
    However, at present, it is difficult to determine whether this account was created as part of using Box Automate, making it hard to distinguish it from a suspicious user that may have been created maliciously.
    Therefore, we would like the service account (e.g., InternalPlatformUser1234567ABCDEFGHIJ@boxdevedition.com) to be made more easily identifiable as an account created for the use of Box Automate.
    For example, after a workflow is created in Box Automate, we would like a pop-up to be… more

    2 votes

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Automate  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

19. Restrict Hub Shared Link Creation to Admins Only

    Many users can access a Hub via its shared link.

    However, because there is currently no way to identify or control users who access via shared links, we would like to only invite required users directly to the Hub and eliminate the risk of anyone else viewing it.

    Under the current behavior, even with the strictest settings, Hub co-owners can still create shared links.

    It would be very helpful to have a stronger restriction so that even Hub co-owners cannot create shared links for Hubs, and only admins (or a similarly restricted role) can do so.

    --
    Hubは共有リンク経由で多くのユーザーがアクセスできます。
    しかし、共有リンクからアクセスしたユーザーを確認し制御する方法が現状ないため、Hubには必要なユーザーを招待してそれ以外の人が見るリスクをなくしたいと考えています。
    現状の仕様では、どんなに強い制限にしてもHubの共同所有者は共有リンクを発行できてしまいます。
    Hubの共有リンクの発行は、Hubの共同所有者にもさせないように、さらに強い制限（管理者以外Hubの共有リンク発行不可）があると嬉しいです。

    Many users can access a Hub via its shared link.

    However, because there is currently no way to identify or control users who access via shared links, we would like to only invite required users directly to the Hub and eliminate the risk of anyone else viewing it.

    Under the current behavior, even with the strictest settings, Hub co-owners can still create shared links.

    It would be very helpful to have a stronger restriction so that even Hub co-owners cannot create shared links for Hubs, and only admins (or a similarly restricted role) can do so.

    --
    Hubは共有リンク経由で多くのユーザーがアクセスできます。
    しかし、共有リンクからアクセスしたユーザーを確認し制御する方法が現状ないため、Hubには必要なユーザーを招待してそれ以外の人が見るリスクをなくしたいと考えています。
    現状の仕様では、どんなに強い制限にしてもHubの共同所有者は共有リンクを発行できてしまいます。… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Hubs  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

20. Bring back "Open Containing Folder" to the top of the Box Note menu (or allow customization)

    Hi Box Team,

    I would like to share some feedback regarding the user interface of Box Notes.

    Previously, the option to open the folder containing the current Box Note was located right at the top of the hamburger menu. This was incredibly convenient. However, with recent updates, this option has been pushed further and further down the list.

    To be honest, actions like viewing comments or inserting images are rarely used in my daily workflow compared to navigating back to the source folder. Having to scroll down every single time just to open the folder has made the user experience quite frustrating.

    I would highly appreciate it if you could consider one of the following improvements:

    Restore the original layout: Move the "Open Containing Folder" option back to the top of the menu.

    Add customization: Allow users to reorder or customize the menu items based on their workflow.

    Add a shortcut: Implement a dedicated shortcut button (or hotkey) on the main interface to open the parent folder directly.

    Thank you for your time and for continuously improving Box!

    Hi Box Team,

    I would like to share some feedback regarding the user interface of Box Notes.

    Previously, the option to open the folder containing the current Box Note was located right at the top of the hamburger menu. This was incredibly convenient. However, with recent updates, this option has been pushed further and further down the list.

    To be honest, actions like viewing comments or inserting images are rarely used in my daily workflow compared to navigating back to the source folder. Having to scroll down every single time just to open the folder has made the user experience… more

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Box Notes  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    Not at all You must login first! Important You must login first! Critical You must login first!

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating