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.
- or
9778 results found
-
I want to be able to change access permissions when inviting someone to a Box folder via Teams
As per the current Box specifications, when you invite someone to a Box folder via Teams, they will be granted editor permissions and cannot be changed in advance.
After inviting via Teams, it is possible to change the access permissions on the Box side, but it is very inconvenient to have to change the access permissions every time.
By making it possible to set access permissions in advance, unnecessary permissions will not be granted, reducing the risk of incidents occurring.(日本語)
件名：Teams経由でBoxフォルダへ招待する時、アクセス権限を変更できるようにしたい
内容：
現在のBoxの仕様として、Teams経由でBoxフォルダへ招待を行う場合、編集者として権限が付与され事前に変更する事はできません。
Teams経由で招待後、Box側でアクセス権限の変更は可能ですが、都度アクセス権限の変更をする事とても不便です。
事前に付与されるアクセス権限の設定が可能になる事により、必要のない権限を付与する事がなくなる為、インシデントが発生するリスクが減ります。14 votes -
Controlling Public Link Creation and Scope on a Per-Folder Basis
In the folder settings for the top-level folder, shared link access is set to: "Only collaborators can access this folder via shared link" + "Folder only."
While keeping this restriction on the top-level folder, we would like to be able to configure the following settings for its subfolders and the files within those subfolders:・For each folder, configure whether public links can be created for the files in that folder
・For each folder, define which users are allowed to create public links for the files in that folder (e.g., managed users allowed, external users not allowed)Reason: As part of our security measures (to prevent information leaks), we want to finely control, on a per‑folder basis, any unnecessary creation of public links.
＜フォルダ単位での公開リンク作成可否・対象範囲の制御＞
最上位フォルダのフォルダ設定で、共有リンクへのアクセス：「このフォルダに共有リンクからアクセスできるのはコラボレータのみに制限する」＋「フォルダのみ」としています。
このような最上位フォルダの制限を維持したまま、配下フォルダやそのフォルダ内ファイルについて、以下の設定が行えるようにしたいです。・フォルダ毎に、フォルダ内ファイルに対する公開リンク作成の可否を設定
・フォルダ毎に、フォルダ内ファイルに対して公開リンクを作成できるユーザー範囲を設定（例：管理対象ユーザーは可、外部ユーザーは不可）理由：セキュリティ対策（情報漏えい防止）の一環として、不用意な公開リンク作成をフォルダ単位で細かく制御したいため。
In the folder settings for the top-level folder, shared link access is set to: "Only collaborators can access this folder via shared link" + "Folder only."
While keeping this restriction on the top-level folder, we would like to be able to configure the following settings for its subfolders and the files within those subfolders:・For each folder, configure whether public links can be created for the files in that folder
・For each folder, define which users are allowed to create public links for the files in that folder (e.g., managed users allowed, external users not allowed)Reason: As part of…
2 votes -
Box for Office and co-authoring
Co-authoring and Box for Office each create "places" in Office applications, which is confusing to the end user. Per Box Support, files opened via the Box For Office integration cannot be co-authored.
The Box for Office integration includes Office ribbon icons, more intuitive file open/save workflows, and has been part of the Box integration environment for years. Consider either improving the UI of the "Place" created by the co-authoring integration or allowing co-authoring on content opened via the Box for Office integration.
3 votes -
1 vote
-
Filter unmanaged users who have not been collaborated in the user detail report.
Content:
Currently, the user detail report cannot filter unmanaged users who have not been collaborated,
and it is necessary to check while cross-referencing with the user list on the Users and Groups screen.
Additionally, the unmanaged user list on the Users and Groups screen can take up to 24 hours to reflect changes,
which may cause discrepancies with the information at the time of report output, reducing operational efficiency.
I request the implementation of a feature that can filter unmanaged users who have not been collaborated.(日本語)
タイトル： ユーザー詳細レポートで、コラボレーションされていない管理されていないユーザーをフィルタリングする。
内容：
現在のユーザーの詳細レポートでは、コラボレーションされていない管理対象ユーザーをフィルタできず、
ユーザーとグループ画面のユーザー一覧と照らし合わせながら確認する必要があります。
また、ユーザーとグループ画面の管理対象外ユーザー一覧は反映までに最大24時間かかるため、
レポート出力時の情報と差異が発生する可能性があり、業務効率が低下します。
コラボレーションされていない管理対象外ユーザーをフィルタできる機能実装を希望します。3 votes -
The X in the top right for closing out of previewing a file is gone
The X in the top right for closing out of previewing a file is gone. This is so painful to click the back button. Probably not the biggest thing in the world long term but short term soooo painful. I don't see why that couldn't just be kept, it wasn't bothering any feature or getting in the way.
1 vote -
1 vote
-
Flexible Billing Practices for Government Contracts
I would like to provide feedback regarding your current payment policies. The Maryland Department of Health and other government entities operate under very strict procurement regulations. The current inability to provide alternative payment methods or pre-generated invoices for these types of accounts creates significant administrative challenges. I recommend that Box consider revising these policies for government contracts to ensure continued business and alignment with public sector procurement practices.
1 vote -
Display Content Preview in Box Hubs Without Source File Access
If you want the preview of content displayed on the Box Hubs page, it currently does not appear unless the user has access permission to the original file. We would like the functionality to be modified so that the preview can be displayed even without access to the original data.
1 vote -
Enable Admins to Recover Deleted Users Without Submitting Support Tickets
Occasionally, Admins can delete a user (or large group of users) for one reason or another (license re-allocation, deleting users based off of perceived inactivity, etc.). Sometimes these users need to be recovered quickly to give users access to their Box account once again if this was done by mistake. The ultimate goal would be to enable Admins who have the ability to manage users to recover deleted accounts on their own (whether through somewhere in the admin console and/or via the CLI or API) so that product support doesn't need to do so through a support ticket as a manual service request
Occasionally, Admins can delete a user (or large group of users) for one reason or another (license re-allocation, deleting users based off of perceived inactivity, etc.). Sometimes these users need to be recovered quickly to give users access to their Box account once again if this was done by mistake. The ultimate goal would be to enable Admins who have the ability to manage users to recover deleted accounts on their own (whether through somewhere in the admin console and/or via the CLI or API) so that product support doesn't need to do so through a support ticket as a…
4 votes -
Add PKCE Support for OAuth2 Applications
Currently, Box requires developers to use a client secret for OAuth 2.0 apps, which in turn requires standing up and maintaining a backend service just to exchange authorization codes securely.
While this is secure, it creates a huge amount of friction for developers who want to build modern, client-side applications such as single-page apps (SPAs) or mobile apps. In many cases, the only reason a backend exists is to hold a secret, nothing else.
If Box supported PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange), developers could authenticate directly from the client without needing a backend at all, just as they can with platforms like Microsoft Entra, Google Identity, and Okta.
This would dramatically reduce time to market, lower costs for developers, and make Box much easier to integrate into modern front-end-first workflows.
Example Scenario
A developer wants to build a React-based file manager using Box APIs.
Under the current model, they must:- Deploy a backend to safely store the client secret.
- Manage hosting, scaling, and security for that backend.
- Build and maintain the OAuth exchange logic.
With PKCE, none of that is necessary. The developer could securely authenticate directly from the browser, accelerating development and reducing costs.
Currently, Box requires developers to use a client secret for OAuth 2.0 apps, which in turn requires standing up and maintaining a backend service just to exchange authorization codes securely.
While this is secure, it creates a huge amount of friction for developers who want to build modern, client-side applications such as single-page apps (SPAs) or mobile apps. In many cases, the only reason a backend exists is to hold a secret, nothing else.
If Box supported PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange), developers could authenticate directly from the client without needing a backend at all, just as they can…
4 votes -
search filter on Admin Console File Requests page
Add Creator to the Filter on the fileRequestDashboard on the Admin Console
1 vote -
Add "Open in New Tab" toggle for Link URL for "Help Instructions and Footer Text" and "Support Contact Information"
It would be helpful if there was a toggle that controlled the behavior when clicking on a Link URL for "Help Instructions and Footer Text" or "Support Contact Information" if you wanted to link to an Intranet Webpage. With this control, you could set these links to open in a new tab instead of the current tab.
Neither of the Link URL allow HTML code and I understand why, but it would certainly avoid some headaches for users who can never remember to hold CTRL when clicking on a link (as well as IT who receive complaints about the page navigating away from Box).
It would be helpful if there was a toggle that controlled the behavior when clicking on a Link URL for "Help Instructions and Footer Text" or "Support Contact Information" if you wanted to link to an Intranet Webpage. With this control, you could set these links to open in a new tab instead of the current tab.
Neither of the Link URL allow HTML code and I understand why, but it would certainly avoid some headaches for users who can never remember to hold CTRL when clicking on a link (as well as IT who receive complaints about the page…
1 vote -
Admin Instant Login - Admins should be able to see the External Folder Names and collaborators
There was similar idea marked as not planned from 2018, but I am hoping that is long enough ago so this improvement can be reconsidered. This makes it difficult for administrators to monitor activities on outbound collaborations.
If you draw the line at being able to view file names/preview content, even just being able to see the folder name and collaborators would be helpful when trying to run down a reported issue or possible DLP concerns.
1 vote -
About the Box AI Agent in Copilot
When using the Box Admin Console, it is possible to identify which files the Box AI Agent accessed and when.
However, there is no way to determine how many prompts each user has submitted to the Box AI Agent via Copilot, nor the number of times they have done so.
Similarly, there is no method to understand, at a system-wide level, how many prompts are being submitted to the Box AI Agent overall.
Unlike general generative AI services, we understand that there is no cost incurred based on usage frequency (i.e., the number of prompts submitted).
Nevertheless, from an administrator’s perspective, it is important to understand usage frequency. By providing a way to track this information, organizations would gain value by being able to report how extensively generative AI is being utilized.
We strongly request that a mechanism be provided to monitor and understand the usage frequency of the Box AI Agent.<<<以下日本語訳>>>
CopilotのBox AI AgentについてBox管理コンソールでBox AI Agentがどのファイルへいつアクセスしたかを把握する方法はある。
が、どのユーザーがCopilotを介してBox AI Agentにどれだけプロンプトを投入したか、その回数を知る方法が無い。
同様にシステム全体としてどれだけBox AI Agentへプロンプトが投入されているかを把握する方法もない。
一般的な生成AIと異なり、使用回数(プロンプトを投入した回数)に対する費用は発生しないとの事。
だが、管理者としてはその頻度を把握しておきたく、知る方法を設置してもらうことで、生成AIがどれだけ利用されているか報告することが組織としてメリットとなる。
是非ともBox AI Agentの利用頻度を知る方法を設置してほしい。When using the Box Admin Console, it is possible to identify which files the Box AI Agent accessed and when.
However, there is no way to determine how many prompts each user has submitted to the Box AI Agent via Copilot, nor the number of times they have done so.
Similarly, there is no method to understand, at a system-wide level, how many prompts are being submitted to the Box AI Agent overall.
Unlike general generative AI services, we understand that there is no cost incurred based on usage frequency (i.e., the number of prompts submitted).
Nevertheless, from an administrator’s…1 vote -
We want to gain insights from images inserted in Notes using Box AI for Notes
Currently, Box AI for Notes cannot get answers from images that you paste into Box Notes.
It's great to have Box AI for Notes pull insights from both the text you write and the images you embed.Box AI for Notes でNotes内に挿入した画像からもインサイトを得たい
現在、Box AI for NotesではBox Notesに貼り付けた画像からは回答を得ることができません。
Box AI for Notesで、記載した文章と貼り付けた画像の両方からインサイトを取得できると便利です。18 votes -
Kanban metadata view in Box Apps
As a user, I'd like to be able to map a metadata field to metadata view columns so that I can clearly manage content as part of my daily process.
Instead of my 'Status' field being one column with multiple values, I'd like to each value to be its own column e.g. Not Started, In Progress, Pending, so that I get a status-driven view of my content.
4 votes -
add decision logic to workflows
Would be great to have decision logic added to relay/workflows. For example I could have a form with a dropdown field with two options - A or B.
The workflow would then have two distinct sets of actions based on Option A or B. Option A Generate a Doc using template A, Option B generate a Doc using Template B
4 votes -
Allow Sign Myself, Batch Send, and Ready Sign Links to be support configured signature settings
Allow Sign Myself, Batch Send, and Ready Sign Links to be support configured signature settings (e.g. signature frame, date & timestamp, etc. - current limitation seen here: https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/42440382181139-Configuring-Signature-Settings
1 vote -
combine more external and managed user reports
We need a way to combine managed user and external user reports into one to get the same information (where applicable) for each user type. It is ridiculous that we have to create multiple reports and then combine them to create composite reports for our whole enterprise.
1 vote
- Don't see your idea?