643 results found

1. Add a Folder Viewer role

   Along with the current 7 access levels, adding the “folder viewer”level which the user can see ancestral folders(with no access to those folders).

   If a collaborator is invited from 2 different sub-folders with the same name, the folder name on the invitee’s first level shows the same. This can confuse users and might cause uploading/editing contents at the wrong destination.

   Once this access level is deployed, the collaborator can clarify the root folder without having to confirm its contents.

   Viewing folder paths can be done with canviewpath in the API but we want this to be possible in the Web app as well.

   Along with the current 7 access levels, adding the “folder viewer”level which the user can see ancestral folders(with no access to those folders).

   If a collaborator is invited from 2 different sub-folders with the same name, the folder name on the invitee’s first level shows the same. This can confuse users and might cause uploading/editing contents at the wrong destination.

   Once this access level is deployed, the collaborator can clarify the root folder without having to confirm its contents.

   Viewing folder paths can be done with canviewpath in the API but we want this to be possible in… more

   5 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

   1 comment  ·  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

2. NetSuite - More information on 'Box Record Folder' custom record

   In the NetSuite-Box integration (v2) there is a custom record type (Box Record Folder). A record is created for each folder created in Box for each NetSuite record. This record currently contains the following information: NetSuite Record ID, Box Record Folder ID, and NetSuite Record Type. I would like to see more information on this record that would allow useful searches of Box information (via this custom record) without having to create additional Box integrations or scripting inside NetSuite. Specifically, I'd like to see:
   -A direct link to the specified NetSuite Record (Custom Field of Type List/Record)
   -A checkbox or other field denoting whether there are any files in that particular folder (or better yet, the number of files in that folder)

   I'm sure there's even more information that others would like to see that could also be included on this record.

   In the NetSuite-Box integration (v2) there is a custom record type (Box Record Folder). A record is created for each folder created in Box for each NetSuite record. This record currently contains the following information: NetSuite Record ID, Box Record Folder ID, and NetSuite Record Type. I would like to see more information on this record that would allow useful searches of Box information (via this custom record) without having to create additional Box integrations or scripting inside NetSuite. Specifically, I'd like to see:
   -A direct link to the specified NetSuite Record (Custom Field of Type List/Record)
   -A checkbox or… more

   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  ·  Partner Integrations  ·  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. install and syncronize box in a chosen folder

   1. I am windows user. I wanted to install box and syncronize my box files in my local D: drive, because my C: drive is full. Surprisingly, the installation process of Box app does not provide such an option (of selecting which drive to install Box to). It by default is installed on C: drive . This is very insane. Windows Users can choose to install which drive to install any app.

   2. My C: drive is full, and I want to syncronise everything both in cloud and in local computer, but i cannot do so because C: drive is full, and Box does not have an option (at least I cannot find it) to choose D: drive to syncronize. Because of this, I cannot use Box on my local computer, I have to unstall Box. Because of this, I have told my frields NOT to use Box. It is so inconvenient to use Box.

   3. in both Dropbox and Google drive, users have option to select which folder to syncronize from a LOCAL computer. but on Box, one has to do such selection only on cloud. This is also very inconvenient.

   1. I am windows user. I wanted to install box and syncronize my box files in my local D: drive, because my C: drive is full. Surprisingly, the installation process of Box app does not provide such an option (of selecting which drive to install Box to). It by default is installed on C: drive . This is very insane. Windows Users can choose to install which drive to install any app.

   2. My C: drive is full, and I want to syncronise everything both in cloud and in local computer, but i cannot do so because C: drive is full, and… more

   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

   1 comment  ·  Box Drive  ·  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. BoxDrive-like UI for web apps

   I want you to change the UI of the web application like Windows Explorer or BoxDrive.
   Specifically, I would like the content list screen to be split into two, with the folder list displayed on the left and the contents of the folder displayed on the right.
   If you use this UI, you won't have to switch screens every time you want to display another folder, so I think it will improve work efficiency.

   <WebアプリのBoxDriveのようなUI>
   WebアプリのUIをWindowsエクスプローラやBoxDriveのように変更してほしい。
   具体的には、コンテンツ一覧画面を２分割して、左側にフォルダ一覧、右側にフォルダ内コンテンツが表示されるようにしてほしい。
   このUIにすれば、別のフォルダ内を表示するときにいちいち画面遷移しなくて済むので業務効率があがると思います。

   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  ·  New UI  ·  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. Push the recommended Hub

   In Box Hubs, we would like to have the ability to push high priority Hubs from the admin side.

   Currently, users have to click on the "Box Hubs" tab from the left side of the screen to get to each Hub.
   The name "Box Hubs" is not intuitive to the average user, so they almost never access it.
   This is the same as the "feeds" that were discontinued in beta.

   On the other hand, we would like to have the ability to push Hub recommendations to all managed users or specified gruop.
   Specifically, we have the following suggestions
   (1) Display the Hubs specified by the administrator in the menu on the left side of the screen. (Please avoid the specification that you have to click "▽", as in the case of collections.)
   (2) Thumbnail display of recommended Hubs in the place where "Recently accessed files" is currently displayed as thumbnails.

   If the names or thumbnails of specific Hubs, such as "Box Operation Manual" or "Company Regulations," are displayed in such a manner, the possibility of access will increase dramatically, and the value of using Hubs will be maximized.

   In Box Hubs, we would like to have the ability to push high priority Hubs from the admin side.

   Currently, users have to click on the "Box Hubs" tab from the left side of the screen to get to each Hub.
   The name "Box Hubs" is not intuitive to the average user, so they almost never access it.
   This is the same as the "feeds" that were discontinued in beta.

   On the other hand, we would like to have the ability to push Hub recommendations to all managed users or specified gruop.
   Specifically, we have the following suggestions
   (1) Display… more

   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  ·  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

6. Box for Teams Content Card Support for Group Invites

   We have confirmed that when collaborating as a group rather than as a direct collaborator, the content card behaves differently than described in the article.
   After investigating with your company (Box), we were told that content card behavior for group invitations is not currently supported.
   Therefore, to avoid confusion for users, we would like you to take the following action.

   　【Requests】：
   　　1.The article should clearly state that the operation of content cards for group invitations is not currently supported.
   　　2.In the future, we would like to see content cards for group invitations also be supported.

   　【Target article】：
   　　Using Box for Teams：https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044681474

   　【Checked behavior】：
   　　1.Content card not updating even after granting access permissions

   　　　Article Contents：
   　　　　To Post a shared link from Box in a Teams Channel or Chat:
   　　　　5.Once you grant the access, the card refreshes to show the content card with file details.

   　　　Actual behavior：
   　　　　When attempting to grant access, the message "Response sent to app" is displayed, but the card is not updated and the card for granting permissions remains displayed.
   　　　　*It has been confirmed that the posted Box shared link itself can be sent to the other party and that the other party has received it.。

   　　2.Even if the same operation is performed, the number of inaccessible chat members displayed on the content card may differ.

   　　　Article Contents：
   　　　　Difference between Channels and Chats
   　　　　・When sharing a file in a chat message, Box indicates the specific number of chat members who lack access (it does not indicate this in a channel message).
   　　　　 By granting members access to the file, you are making them collaborators (as compared to channel members, to whom you’re simply granting file access).
   　　
   　　　Premise：
   　　　　・The sender, recipient A, and recipient B belong to the same group.
   　　　　・All three were invited to the shared link folder as part of a group, and were not direct collaborators.
   　　　　・The group has editor privileges

   　　　Actual behavior：
   　　　　・When the sender sends a chat to recipient A: The content card displays the message "You cannot view this file shared by two users."
   　　　　・When the sender sends a chat to recipient B: The content card displays the message "You can't view this file shared by a user."

   ＜Box for Teamsのグループ招待時のコンテンツカードのサポートについて＞
   直接的なコラボレータではなく、グループとしてコラボレートされている場合、コンテンツカードで記事と異なる動作を確認しております。
   貴社（Box社）に調査いただいたところ、グループ招待のコンテンツカードの動作は、現状サポートされていない旨回答いただきました。
   そこでユーザーの混乱を招かないよう、以下ご対応いただきたく存じます。

   　【依頼事項】：
   　　1.グループ招待のコンテンツカードの動作は、現状サポートされていないことを記事に明記
   　　2.将来的にグループ招待のコンテンツカードもサポート対象とする

   　【対象記事】：
   　　Box for Teamsの使用：https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/360044681474

   　【確認している動作】：
   　　1.アクセス権限を付与してもコンテンツカードが更新されない

   　　　記事の内容：
   　　　　TeamsチャネルまたはチャットでBoxから共有リンクを投稿するには:
   　　　　5.アクセス権限を付与すると、カードは更新され、ファイルの詳細を含むコンテンツカードが表示されます。

   　　　実際の動作：
   　　　　アクセス権限を付与しようとすると「応答がアプリに送信されました」と表示されるものの、
   　　　　カードは更新されず、権限付与するためのカードが表示され続けたままの状態となる。
   　　　　※投稿したBoxの共有リンク自体は、相手方に送信でき、相手方も受信できていることを確認済み。

   　　2.同じ操作にもかかわらず、コンテンツカードに表示されるアクセスできないチャットメンバー数に差異が生じる場合がある

   　　　記事の内容：
   　　　　チャネルとチャットの相違点
   　　　　・チャットメッセージでファイルを共有すると、アクセスできないチャットメンバーの具体的な数が表示されます (これは、チャネルメッセージでは表示されません)。
   　　　 　ファイルへのアクセスをメンバーに許可すると、そのメンバーはコラボレータになります (チャネルメンバーの場合は、ファイルへのアクセスを許可するだけです)。
   　　
   　　　前提：
   　　　　・送信者、送信先A、送信先Bは、同一グループに所属している
   　　　　・3名とも共有リンクのフォルダにはグループとして招待されており、直接的なコラボレータではない
   　　　　・グループとして編集者権限はある

   　　　実際の動作：
   　　　　・送信者⇒送信先Aにチャットを送信した場合：コンテンツカードに「2人のユーザーが共有したこのファイルを表示できません」と表示される。
   　　　　・送信者⇒送信先Bにチャットを送信した場合：コンテンツカードに「1人のユーザーが共有したこのファイルを表示できません」と表示される。

   We have confirmed that when collaborating as a group rather than as a direct collaborator, the content card behaves differently than described in the article.
   After investigating with your company (Box), we were told that content card behavior for group invitations is not currently supported.
   Therefore, to avoid confusion for users, we would like you to take the following action.

   　【Requests】：
   　　1.The article should clearly state that the operation of content cards for group invitations is not currently supported.
   　　2.In the future, we would like to see content cards for group invitations also be supported.

   　【Target article】：
   　　Using Box for… more

   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  ·  Partner Integrations  ·  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. Geographic activity report needs some serious geolocation / ISP attention

   For organizations that actually care about their security, they probably find value in the reports Box can generate related to user activity, which includes the useful geographic activity report among others. I had high hopes the geographic activity report would make for a very easy way to screen out a ton of valid activity, leaving just things to investigate. Unfortunately there's several issues I've run into that make it difficult to impossible to easily screen out what is actually valid activity:

   1) geolocation doesn't seem to be accurate when it comes to certain internet providers, including mobile, satellite, and airplane. For example, if flying on Southwest, activity is going to be reported as coming from Westlake Village, CA, because that's where the whois info for Row44 points. It is obviously impossible to determine a real location for Row44-based internet access, so it would be preferable for Box to identify this as actual "Airplane ISP" or something along those lines, a special category that does not have a geographic location, because then it would be easy to screen users who were known to be traveling on specific dates.

   2) Unfortunately integration activity reports as coming from the service provider's IP space instead of the user who initiated the activity. This becomes a huge problem if you're using the Box to Microsoft Office 365 integration, because every single file your staff edit with an Office Online tool is going to create activity logged to a Microsoft IP, and in many cases, Azure-space, which can include both Microsoft corporate services as well as end user services. This means you really have little to no chance of determining if a given access was malicious from a compromised end user server in Microsoft land, or one of your real staff simply using Excel Online.

   I assume there's some session tracking / data exchange allowing Box to determine the access is being authorized / performed by a legit user, from a specific IP; I'd prefer the activity be attributed to that user's IP, or at least have it as an option.

   3) Some of the geolocation data seems to simply be wrong, while also not based on whois / IRR data, so I have no idea where it came from. This seems to be mostly associated with large internet providers, wireless, CenturyLink, Comcast, etc. That would suggest the source of the data is not particularly good. MaxMind seems to do a much better job at this; perhaps Box can consider using them to supply the data instead of whomever is supplying it currently.

   For organizations that actually care about their security, they probably find value in the reports Box can generate related to user activity, which includes the useful geographic activity report among others. I had high hopes the geographic activity report would make for a very easy way to screen out a ton of valid activity, leaving just things to investigate. Unfortunately there's several issues I've run into that make it difficult to impossible to easily screen out what is actually valid activity:

   1) geolocation doesn't seem to be accurate when it comes to certain internet providers, including mobile, satellite, and airplane.… more

   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  ·  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

8. Make the Web App WCAG2 Level AA Compliant (eliminate need for a.box separate site)

   The current Box Web is not WCAG 2.0 Level AAA compliant currently, meaning users who require accessibility support need to use a.box. This is a subpar solution given that a.box is based on m.box which is missing large amounts of functionality that the full Web App provides.

   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 →
   delivered  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Box) responded

   Box Web App conforms to WCAG 2.0 Level AA.

9. Rollup secret for OAuth2 with client credentials.

   Please provide a way to update client_secret without any custom app service impact.
   With the current interface, issuing a new secret invalidates the previous one.
   Periodic updating of secret is a security best practice, but this is not possible with client credentials.

   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

10. box for office use several accounts

    I have 2 Box accounts and one instance of Outlook. It'd be very convenient to be able to download / upload using several accounts from Box for office (save attachments in Outlook, attach links, etc.).
    As an example, I have this ability with Adobe Acrobat in which my 2 accounts are linked.

    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 for Office  ·  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. Google Doc "share" from google.

    When using V2 of the box integration with google docs, apparently the ability to "share" the document from google itself, was apparently removed (it shows as available at 1:05 of this box video https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043696854-Inviting-Collaborators )

    Removing this functionality is not only cumbersome, it creates HUGE potential security issues.

    I would like users in our organization to be able to store these google documents in box, to avoid having to manage multiple file storage systems. For one thing, it is cumbersome and unintuitive to have to go to box to invite a person to collaborate with my google doc. And then for the user to have to go through box and then know to click to edit the file to get to the google doc. That's like having to go through your neighbor's house to get to your own refrigerator.

    But even worse, it creates HUGE potential security issues. In the real world, people often mistakenly invite "collaborators" to the wrong file. EASY to do when busily viewing a list of nearly identical documents in a box folder. OR worse, they invite collaborators to the entire folder and all its subfolders. Potentially CATASTROPHIC depending on the contents of those folders. This kind of thing happens in the real world, no matter how much you train them. Like I was saying above, I don't want users to go through the neighbor's house AT ALL. I just want to give them the soda or whatever I want them to have. which is not related to the neighbor's house at all. They have no business in the neighbor's house at all.

    When a user shares a google document from within the google interface, there is no mistaking which document is being shared. And there is no potential for sharing any other document or a whole directory of documents.
    
    Basically this new version of this integration REMOVES the very collaborative features of google docs, and adds a layer of complexity, along with a potential for massive mistakes ranging from problematic to disastrous.
    This integration as it is now, with regular google "sharing" removed, basically guarantees that we won't use it. There is virtually no upside and HUGE potential downsides.
    
    Honestly, I can't believe google even allowed their own "share" button to be removed from their premium suite of apps.
    
    It's a HUGE security and workflow oversite, done I can only imagine, to force people to go through and see box, even if that causes the previously listed gymnastics and potential debacles. Thus it seems it was done with marketing in mind, rather than a benefit to the users. This was incredibly shortsighted.
    
    As mentioned. We will NOT use this feature as is, for the potential security vulnerabilities alone. Thus the current implementation is driving us AWAY from box. Since we have to use google docs for these use cases.
    
    PLEASE revert the feature to enable the regular "share" functionality in Google apps.

    UPDATE: Actually it's worse than I thought. Just tested between two of my accounts. Since the "sharing" apparently only works by inviting "collaborator" as an editor, the user actually has to CREATE a box account just to edit the google sheet. I mean SERIOUSLY. What a ridiculous marketing move. Definitely will NOT use this integration as it is now. It's pretty much all downside, virtually no upside.
    If you want happy Box users, PLEASE don't do stuff like this. We like it when you HELP us. Not when you use us to be mules to market your platform to our business associates. I'd brag about you MORE (and have) if you just make my life easier. NOT when you do stuff like this. Just put it back the way it was.

    When using V2 of the box integration with google docs, apparently the ability to "share" the document from google itself, was apparently removed (it shows as available at 1:05 of this box video https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043696854-Inviting-Collaborators )

    Removing this functionality is not only cumbersome, it creates HUGE potential security issues.

    I would like users in our organization to be able to store these google documents in box, to avoid having to manage multiple file storage systems. For one thing, it is cumbersome and unintuitive to have to go to box to invite a person to collaborate with my google doc. And then… more

    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  ·  Partner Integrations  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    delivered  ·  Adminkkung (Admin, Box) responded

    When using the integration, users can now share a Google file directly within the editor, using Box’s sharing modal permissions and settings.

12. ability to upload thumb for folders and links

    need to add capability to upload low res thumb jpgs for:
    1) Folders
    2) Bookmarks

    This need to work across all devices:
    1) Desktop browser
    2) Mobile
    3) App

    This needs to work on all platforms:
    1) Mac
    2) Windows
    3) apple and android

    THIS IS CRUCIAL EASY TO IMPLEMENT FEATURE THAT WILL DRAMATICALLY ENHANCE USER EXPERIENCE. IM A UX / UI CREATIVE DIRECTOR AND I KNOW IT WILL HELP ACROSS THE BOARD FOR MANY USE CASES AND MANY VARIOUS TARGET AUDIENCES.

    Thank you,
    Daria D.

    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 Drive  ·  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. Web Clipper

    As a user, I would like to bookmark or clip webpage into box. There are two issues on the current "Box Bookmark" as following.

    1. Box Bookmark needs 2 copy&paste motions (URL and Name) when trying to save a page
    2. Box Bookmark may be unaccessible when webpage is not available so it should give an option as a screenshot
    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  ·  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

14. When I number files in BOX, could box use the number to follow sequence instead of the name? Examlpe 1. January 2024, 2. February 2024,?

    When I number files in BOX, could box use the number to follow sequence instead of the name? Examlpe 1. January 2024, 2. February 2024,?

    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  ·  Uploads  ·  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. When going through pdf files. I don't want to have to always close the fact that the pdf is on two or more pages.

    When going through PDF files. I do not want to always have to minimize the 2 page PDF's.

    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 Skills  ·  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. Add root level file path + end file path to search results (Root > 1 > 2 > 3....x+3 > x+2 > x+1 > x)

    Currently, when you search for an item in Box, the list of returns displays the last x amount of folders in the file path that fit in the screen. Understanding that showing the entire file path (though desired) would not be possible, it would be more helpful to show the first 3 folders starting from the root folder, and the last 3 folders from the bottom, to get a better idea of where this item lives. Due to large enterprises with multiple PB of content, only seeing the last 3 folders of the file path is not helpful enough.

    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  ·  Search  ·  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. Co-Admin actions in admin console should appear as part of the event stream

    1. When a Co-Admin kicks off a report in the admin console
    2. Anything related to impersonating a user (logging in as a user, emptying a users trash via content manager
    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

    not planned  ·  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. Limits for simultaneous file uploads and Batch processing capability

    I usually upload folders. Each folder could have 1 or 2 files, or 6 or 7 files, or more. When it's just 1 or 2, everything is fine, but when there are 4 or more, they seem to eat up my bandwidth. It would help if there was a limit within Box to control how many files upload simultaneously. Additionally, having a true batch process would be very helpful. That would allow me to line up several folders to upload and each one would upload in turn.

    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  ·  Workflow  ·  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. Extend Developer Token for Apps that Integrate with Box.com, the Current Toke has a Limit 2 Months

    Please add a new feature that allows us to change the expiration date of the Developer Token for apps that integrate with Box.com.

    We are currently using Splunk to collect logs from Box.com, but the token expires every 60 days, which is a ridicules short amount of time, and there is no option to extent it to a 365 days or 6 months, if we like.

    Please add this option, it is a pain to have to renew the token every 60 days. I have projects and other things that I need to work on, I should have to be renewing a token every 2 months.

    Thanks in advance.

    Please add a new feature that allows us to change the expiration date of the Developer Token for apps that integrate with Box.com.

    We are currently using Splunk to collect logs from Box.com, but the token expires every 60 days, which is a ridicules short amount of time, and there is no option to extent it to a 365 days or 6 months, if we like.

    Please add this option, it is a pain to have to renew the token every 60 days. I have projects and other things that I need to work on, I should have to be… 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

20. Request to improve metadata_query limitation

    Metadata queries Limitations
    https://developer.box.com/guides/metadata/queries/limitations/

    When sending a metadata query request for which the result set exceeds 2,000 items, the API can only guarantee that it returns all all matching results if both the following conditions are met.
    1.The requesting user has at least ​Previewer ​permission to all items in the result set
    2.The ancestor folder contains all of the files in the result set

    With the above limitation, it is not possible to narrow down the search to metadata for a specific folder when the range of metadata assigned is wide.
    Could it be improved so that the number of items in the result set is counted after taking into consideration the narrowing down of folders?
    *Request is to remove the limitation of "2. The ancestor folder ~".

    When sending a metadata query request for which the result set exceeds 2,000 items and for which these conditions are not true, the API might return error with a 4XX response code indicating that the query will need to be restricted to return fewer results.

    Alternatively, could it be possible to relax the limit of 2,000 items, which is the number of result set items that could return the above error?

    == in Japanese ==
    metadata_queryの制限改善依頼

    メタデータクエリー制限
    https://ja.developer.box.com/guides/metadata/queries/limitations/

    結果セットの項目数が2,000を超えるメタデータクエリリクエストを送信した場合、
    APIは、以下の条件が両方とも満たされる場合に一致する結果をすべて返すことのみを保証できます。
    1.リクエストするユーザーが、結果セットに含まれるすべての項目に対してプレビューアー以上の権限を持っていること。
    2.先祖フォルダに、結果セット内のすべてのファイルが含まれていること。

    上記制限では、メタデータの付与範囲が広い場合、特定フォルダのメタデータを絞り込んで検索を行うことが出来ません。
    結果セットの項目数はフォルダの絞り込みを考慮した上でカウントされるよう改善できないでしょうか。
    ※要望としては「2.先祖フォルダに~」の制限撤廃

    結果セットの項目数が2,000を超えており、上記の条件が当てはまらないメタデータクエリリクエストを送信すると、
    APIは、返される結果が少なくなるようクエリを制限する必要があることを示すレスポンスコード4XXとともにエラーを返す可能性があります。

    または、こちらのエラーを返す可能性のある結果セット項目数である2,000件の制限を緩和できないでしょうか。

    Metadata queries Limitations
    https://developer.box.com/guides/metadata/queries/limitations/

    When sending a metadata query request for which the result set exceeds 2,000 items, the API can only guarantee that it returns all all matching results if both the following conditions are met.
    1.The requesting user has at least ​Previewer ​permission to all items in the result set
    2.The ancestor folder contains all of the files in the result set

    With the above limitation, it is not possible to narrow down the search to metadata for a specific folder when the range of metadata assigned is wide.
    Could it be improved so that the number of… 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  ·  Metadata  ·  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