910 results found

1. Enhancements to Box Search Results – both END-USERS & BOX ADMIN

   Export of Box Search Results to csv – END-USERS & BOX ADMIN
   Background:
   • There are two methods of searching content in Box, for end-users
   o Box Drive – limited information
   o Box Web – more detailed

   • Box end-user’s Web Search results, have two views
   o List view
   o Grid view

   • Box Admins have Content Manager to search for content

   Enhancements:
   o Both end-users and Box Admins search results should both be enhanced

   END-USERS Search Results:
   • Box search results should CONTINUE to:
   o exclude content in Personal user folders
   o offer existing filters, but include NEW filters on other columns in the results

   • Box search results ‘Sort by’ would offer ADDITIONAL sorts by:
   o Document/folder name
   o Date modified (ascending/descending)
   o Document file-extension
   o Last modified date
   o Last modified by (name)
   o Files
   o Size

   • Additional button on right to identify additional results-view to toggle through
   • Additional ‘page selection (including specific page selection, < and > )
   • Additional button ‘Download’ to enable output to be downloaded to csv format
   • Box Web Search enhancement – new third ‘columnar’ view, showing raw document details in columnar format:
   o Item name (document or folder)
   o Path (including document name)
   o Document text (when search finds content inside a document)
   o Last modified date
   o Last modified by (name)
   o Number of files in folder (if result is a folder)
   o Size (KB) (if result is a document)
   o Document file-extension

   • Output downloaded to csv format, would include the following additional columns:
   o Item ID
   o Path ID
   o Owner login
   o Owner name
   o Uploaded date
   o Item type (file/folder/bookmark)

   • All columns should be SIZEABLE (adjust column widths), and text too long should wrap onto new line

   BOX ADMINs Search Results
   • In Box Admin, Content Manager SEARCH results should have similar export functionality to the END-USER version described above
   • BOX ADMINs SEARCH results should CONTINUE to search across ALL data owners

   Export of Box Search Results to csv – END-USERS & BOX ADMIN
   Background:
   • There are two methods of searching content in Box, for end-users
   o Box Drive – limited information
   o Box Web – more detailed

   • Box end-user’s Web Search results, have two views
   o List view
   o Grid view

   • Box Admins have Content Manager to search for content

   Enhancements:
   o Both end-users and Box Admins search results should both be enhanced

   END-USERS Search Results:
   • Box search results should CONTINUE to:
   o exclude content in Personal user folders
   o offer existing filters, but include NEW filters… 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  ·  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

2. Lucidchart Enhanced Two-Way Integration

   The current Box + Lucidchart integration is based on the 'More Actions' menu in the Box webapp.

   REQUEST: Work with Lucidchart to extend this integration to a true two-way integration (similar/exactly the same as what Lucidchart already has with Google Drive - https://www.lucidchart.com/pages/google-apps), allowing the user to save to Box from Lucidchart and more.

   0 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
   not planned  ·  Admindmorkovine (Product Manager, Box) responded

   Please reach out to Lucidchart directly to get this integration request prioritized.

3. Dedicated File Shortcuts without using Bookmarks

   Currently if I want to create a link from one folder to a file or folder stored elsewhere in the system, the recommendation is to use Bookmarks. This method has several disadvantages.

   • First, it requires creating the link on the target file or folder, meaning you need to navigate away from the folder where the bookmark needs to exist.
   • Second, shared links can be removed, disabled, or expired, which would break the bookmark.
   • Third, bookmarks do not work in Box Drive.

   I would suggest a dedicated mechanism within the Box system for creating and maintaining shortcuts, which is independent of the Bookmark system. Such a system would avoid the disadvantages above and provide some extra benefit. For example, if a file is the target of such a shortcut, that relationship could be viewable through an option in the file’s “More Options” menu allowing file owners to see and manage those shortcuts. Additional auditing would also be possible, with information showing who accessed the file from the shortcut.

   The implementation I envision includes a new option in the “New +” menu of the web interface. Selecting this option would open a search dialog where a user could search through their box content directly.

   Upon selecting a file, the user would then be prompted to select “Shortcut Permissions” that determine how other users can interact with the target file.

   If the shortcut creator has Editor permissions on the target, they would be able to select from the following:
   • None – users who do not already have permission to view the target are unable to use the shortcut
   • Preview Only – users who do not already have permission to view the target are able to open the target in the web-viewer, but not download the file
   • View and Download – users who do not already have permission to view the target file are able to preview the target file or download a copy of the target file.
   o This is like creating a “can view and download” shared link and embedding it in a bookmark.
   • Edit – users who do not already have permission to view the target file are able to view, download, and Edit the target file
   o This is like creating a public “Can edit” shared link and embedding it in a bookmark

   If the shortcut creator has “Viewer” or “Viewer Uploader” permissions on the target, they would be able to select from the following:
   • None – users who do not already have permission to view the target are unable to use the shortcut
   • Preview Only – users who do not already have permission to view the target are able to open the target in the web-viewer, but not download the file
   • View and Download – users who do not already have permission to view the target file are able to preview the target file or download a copy of the target file.
   o This is like creating a “can view and download” shared link and embedding it in a bookmark.

   If the shortcut creator has “Previewer” or “Previewer Uploader” permissions on the target, they would be able to select from the following:
   • None – users who do not already have permission to view the target are unable to use the shortcut
   • Preview Only – users who do not already have permission to view the target are able to open the target in the web-viewer, but not download the file

   Similarly, other users’ interactions will be based on their permission in the folder containing the shortcut.

   If a user is has editor permissions in the folder containing the shortcut a shortcut with “Edit” Shortcut permissions, then they will be able to edit the file.

   If a user has Viewer permissions in the folder containing the shortcut, then they would only have “Viewer” permissions to the target file even if the shortcut creator gave the shortcut “Edit” permissions.

   Finally, if the user already has some level of permission to the target file, and it exceeds the permission of the Shortcut, then that permission level would apply.

   Currently if I want to create a link from one folder to a file or folder stored elsewhere in the system, the recommendation is to use Bookmarks. This method has several disadvantages.

   • First, it requires creating the link on the target file or folder, meaning you need to navigate away from the folder where the bookmark needs to exist.
   • Second, shared links can be removed, disabled, or expired, which would break the bookmark.
   • Third, bookmarks do not work in Box Drive.

   I would suggest a dedicated mechanism within the Box system for creating and maintaining shortcuts, which… 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  ·  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

4. BoxDrive behavior of files with the “Browser Use Only” classification label

   We are considering setting up a "Browser Only" classification label for collaborative editing of Office applications to enforce download restrictions so that collaborative editing is only possible in the browser.
   However, when a user tries to open a file with the "Browser Only" label, the viewer and previewer will not be able to open the file because of the download restriction.
   Also, when opening BoxNote from BoxDrive, you will be redirected to the browser, but Office files must be opened by right-clicking on Box.com and previewing them, and when editing, you must perform online editing.

   (1) The basic specification of BoxDrive is that the existence of the contents in the invited folder itself is visible, but when you try to open it, if you do not have download privileges, you cannot download the cached data and cannot open it (editing or even previewing is not possible), but if you do not have download privileges, you can open the cached data in the browser. If you have the preview authority, can you take action such as automatically transitioning to the browser to preview the data?

   If it is difficult to change (1), could you add a function to filter files that cannot be opened from Box Drive (according to conditions such as permissions, labels, etc.)? We are concerned that this will cause confusion among users, lower utilization rates, and unnecessary inquiries, which will lower the efficiency of the entire organization.

   Officeアプリを共同編集するために、「ブラウザーのみ利用」の分類ラベルを設定し、ダウンロード制限をかけブラウザでのみ共同編集できるように強制する運用を検討しております。
   しかし、「ブラウザーのみ利用」のラベルが対がファイルをで開こうとした場合、ダウンロード制限がかかっているためビューアやプレビューアが開くことができない挙動となってしまいます。
   また、BoxDriveからBoxNoteを開くときにはブラウザに遷移いたしますが、Officeファイルは右クリック＞Box.comで開き、プレビューを行い、編集時はOnline編集を実施する必要があります。

   ①BoxDriveの基本仕様として、招待されたフォルダ内のコンテンツの存在自体は見えるのに、いざ開こうとした際に、ダウンロード権限がないとキャッシュデータをダウンロードできず開けない(編集はおろかプレビューすら出来ない)状態ですが、ダウンロード権限がなくともプレビュー権限があるのであれば、ブラウザへ自動遷移してプレビューさせるなりの対応いただけないでしょうか。
   ②①の変更が難しい場合、Box Driveから開くことができないファイル(権限やラベル有無等の条件に応じて)はフィルタ表示させるような機能を追加いただけないでしょうか。BoxDrive上見えているのに、開くことができない運用はユーザの混乱を招き利用率が低下及び、無駄な問い合わせが生じ組織全体の効率が下がることを懸念しております。

   We are considering setting up a "Browser Only" classification label for collaborative editing of Office applications to enforce download restrictions so that collaborative editing is only possible in the browser.
   However, when a user tries to open a file with the "Browser Only" label, the viewer and previewer will not be able to open the file because of the download restriction.
   Also, when opening BoxNote from BoxDrive, you will be redirected to the browser, but Office files must be opened by right-clicking on Box.com and previewing them, and when editing, you must perform online editing.

   (1) The basic specification 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  ·  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

5. Enable AutoCAD Drawing History Comparison

   Our company is considering moving our AutoCAD files over to Box.com. We put some files on Box as a test run and AutoCAD's Drawing History feature allows us to see the version history of those files. However, there is a tool that is supposed to allow for you to click on that list of past versions and compare one to another but that feature isn't working currently, even though it works on other cloud services like one drive. AutoCAD said its on Box's end since it worked with other cloud services, but Box said they can't guarantee this feature would work and basically just put their hands in the air. Please consider reviewing this and seeing what can be done to address this missing functionality. There are so many benefits that could be had by us putting our CAD on Box, but we keep running into limitations from Box that is holding us back from making that transition.

   Our company is considering moving our AutoCAD files over to Box.com. We put some files on Box as a test run and AutoCAD's Drawing History feature allows us to see the version history of those files. However, there is a tool that is supposed to allow for you to click on that list of past versions and compare one to another but that feature isn't working currently, even though it works on other cloud services like one drive. AutoCAD said its on Box's end since it worked with other cloud services, but Box said they can't guarantee this feature would… 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  ·  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

6. I'm a sole proprietor and need your Business Plus features

   Hello, I'm coming back to our exchange on Twitter from earlier today.

   I was a Box user between 2013-18 when my business started to grow and my Box plan became too limited. Also the branding of my file exchange service became a must.

   Back then I wanted to switch to Business Plus but the minimum of 3 payed users made this way too expensive and also simply unreasonable for me as a one-man show. I exchanged various emails with your support and spoke with your office in Munich about whether it was possible to offer a One User Business Plus account before giving up at some point since the answer was no. I switched to WeTransfer where I soon became a beta user for their current Plus plan.

   I like WeTransfer and had a good relation with their beta team but unfortunately their platform is not always as reliable as it had to be and the features offered still leave a lot to be desired.

   Let me keep this brief for now, do you see a chance to offer a one user Business Plus account, ideally with a 'fair' monthly fee that suits a fairly small business like mine?

   I'm a audio mastering engineer and work with clients around the world around 15 per month, while 4 or 5 of them are regulars. Reliability, ease of use for my clients and speed are crucial for me, so is storage space and branding. I love the idea to offer my clients an app for communication and fast project updates, and in general I'd love to move all project related communication into their dedicated folders.

   I have plenty of colleagues who are 'so/so' happy with WT, Dropbox, G-Drive etc, none of them would hesitate to switch to a much better platform as long as the cost will stay in relation to our income.

   I look forward to hearing from you.

   Hello, I'm coming back to our exchange on Twitter from earlier today.

   I was a Box user between 2013-18 when my business started to grow and my Box plan became too limited. Also the branding of my file exchange service became a must.

   Back then I wanted to switch to Business Plus but the minimum of 3 payed users made this way too expensive and also simply unreasonable for me as a one-man show. I exchanged various emails with your support and spoke with your office in Munich about whether it was possible to offer a One User Business Plus… 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

   1 comment  ·  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

7. Allow One-Off Reissue of Custom Terms of Service in Box

   If a user ever rejects a custom terms of service, they are not able to access Box or attempt to connect via the collaboration link. It seems that they could try again in 30 days (we have not tested, this is way too long to wait for a time-out).

   The only resolution to allow the single external collaborator to "reset" the ToS and accept them to sign in is to disable and re-enable custom ToS for all users.

   This is a major problem - we should not have to revalidate all ToS for EVERY user to resolve an issue for one user. Resetting the ToS seems to have booted all users out of Box Drive until they re-accept the terms.

   This is a serious disruption for an error that's pretty easy to make. Please allow a way for users who have declined ToS to try again if they've erroneously declined WITHOUT requiring a system wide change for all users.

   If a user ever rejects a custom terms of service, they are not able to access Box or attempt to connect via the collaboration link. It seems that they could try again in 30 days (we have not tested, this is way too long to wait for a time-out).

   The only resolution to allow the single external collaborator to "reset" the ToS and accept them to sign in is to disable and re-enable custom ToS for all users.

   This is a major problem - we should not have to revalidate all ToS for EVERY user to resolve an issue for… 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  ·  Security  ·  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. not available offline

   As an admin, Id like to mark some folders as never available offline. We have several folders with several terabytes of data and inadvertently users have started downloading the entire folder.
   One found out when his hard drive was almost full, the other was caught by security looking at the massive downloads. The data is available to all but shouldn't be copied locally.

   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 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

9. Prevent modals (Box AI and New Collection) from closing when clicking outside

   We would like to request a change to the behavior of modal windows, specifically for Box AI and the "Create New Collection" screen. Currently, these modals close automatically if a user clicks anywhere outside the modal area. I request that they remain open unless the "Close" or "Cancel" button is explicitly clicked.

   Reasoning:
   We are using Pendo to provide in-app training and guidance to help our employees adopt Box AI and other Box features. However, the current "click-outside-to-close" behavior makes it impossible to run these guides effectively.

   When a user interacts with a Pendo guide or accidentally clicks the background, the Box modal disappears, interrupting the training flow. This prevents us from providing a seamless employee experience and hinders our ability to educate users on how to use Box AI and Collections effectively.

   Expected Outcome:
   By preventing the modals from closing on background clicks, we can successfully implement Pendo guides. This will allow us to properly train our employees and significantly drive the adoption of Box AI and organizational features within our company.

   We would like to request a change to the behavior of modal windows, specifically for Box AI and the "Create New Collection" screen. Currently, these modals close automatically if a user clicks anywhere outside the modal area. I request that they remain open unless the "Close" or "Cancel" button is explicitly clicked.

   Reasoning:
   We are using Pendo to provide in-app training and guidance to help our employees adopt Box AI and other Box features. However, the current "click-outside-to-close" behavior makes it impossible to run these guides effectively.

   When a user interacts with a Pendo guide or accidentally clicks the background,… 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 AI  ·  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. 列幅が狭く、変更を固定できない。The column width is abnormally narrow, and changes cannot be fixed.

    BOXドライブをエクスプローラ上で開いたときにファイル名の欄が異常に狭い状態で表示され、手動で直したり幅を再設定しても自動で狭い幅に戻されてしまいます。非常に使い勝手が悪いです。数年前からある不具合で多くの人が報告しているのに、いまだに修正されていないことにも驚きます。

    When opening BOX Drive in Explorer, the file name column displays abnormally narrow.
    Even if I manually adjust it or reset the width, it automatically reverts to the narrow width. This is extremely inconvenient.
    I'm also surprised that this bug has existed for years, has been reported by many people, and still hasn't been fixed.
    -Translated by DeepL

    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 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

11. Upload In The Order We Added Them + Reorder

    I don't understand why Box Drive decided to upload files in a completely random. Say that I add a number of files, then later add another bulk of files, it will start uploading them or a whole random different selection. Why doesn't it upload them in the order I added them (first come, first serve).

    A bonus would be to reorder your uploads, so if some become more of a priority.

    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 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

12. I am trying to see if I can lock down folders to prevent people from accidental moving or deletion.

    In Box Drive (File Explorer), sometimes our users accidentally move folders into other folders, not realizing what they did. Then people cannot find what they are looking for. Is there a way we can prevent this? Or is there a way we can prevent this for higher-level folders? Or is there a way a user can receive a prompt along the lines of "Are you sure you wish to move this folder?"

    See also

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/42428602-allow-marking-folders-as-move-locked-to-prevent

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/43142697-ability-to-lock-down-folders-to-prevent-accidental

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/35984521--lock-a-folder-taxonomy

    Suggestions from our IT Director:

    Ideally we license Box Shield and it could easily be a policy based on metadata or tagging for certain folders.

    This would probably make the most sense.

    Any folder tagged with #nomove just couldn’t be moved unless it was first untagged on the web interface by an owner, editor or admin.

    ---

    It seems customers have been clamoring for this feature for years. It would bring tremendous value to your service.

    In Box Drive (File Explorer), sometimes our users accidentally move folders into other folders, not realizing what they did. Then people cannot find what they are looking for. Is there a way we can prevent this? Or is there a way we can prevent this for higher-level folders? Or is there a way a user can receive a prompt along the lines of "Are you sure you wish to move this folder?"

    See also

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/42428602-allow-marking-folders-as-move-locked-to-prevent

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/43142697-ability-to-lock-down-folders-to-prevent-accidental

    https://pulse.box.com/forums/909778-help-shape-the-future-of-box/suggestions/35984521--lock-a-folder-taxonomy

    Suggestions from our IT Director:

    Ideally we license Box Shield and it could easily be a policy based on metadata or tagging for… 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 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. Save-As limits

    Scenario:
    Using Save As to convert a .csv to excel file.

    When saving to my local drive (even though it is in a Box Sync folder) I maintain the programmatic capability to save the file as a different file type.

    When saving to Box (even though it is the same Box Operations folder) I lose the programmatic capability to save the file as a different file type.

    I do file conversion in excel multiple times a week.

    0 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  ·  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

14. Previewer Uploader Able to Download Files

    When a link is sent with the access level set to "Collaborators Only" a "Previewer Uploader" Collaborator can then open the link from their email and have the option to "Open in App" and the IOS app will give them the opportunity to Download the File. The file can then be uploaded to Google Drive and then viewed on a desktop or mobile device. This basically gives the Previewer Uploader the ability to download the file.

    0 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  ·  Mobile  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
    existing feature  ·  sammylee responded

    We prevent this already.

15. Update the web app to support up to 1 TB of content, at least 10,000 folders

    The Box Web App doesn't support large folder structures. I can successfully upload a folder with >100 GB of content (files are no larger than 4 GB each), and I can share the link. But the web interface only supports download of folders with up to 10 GB of content, even though Box supports files up to 32 GB! To download the folder, the user must use Box Drive or other client, which isn't an option for users without a Box account on the instance.

    0 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  ·  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. 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.

17. Option to Hide Last Update Information on content

    It is overwhelming when trying to find documents because not only are you looking for the name of the document but you have to visually sift through the "Updated on Nov. 16, 2016 by John Smith" under every single file.

    It would be great if Box could either make it an option to hide this (and maybe just hover over the document to see this information) or if it was moved to the right like it is in a regular Shared Drive.

    0 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  ·  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

18. I cannot use the box application the same way I use my macpro server or windows server drives.

    Would be nice on enterprise files that you allow me to use BOX in the same way I use MacPro or windows server application. Limiting my files and the speed they can use has pushed me to go to AWS and use it natively - ie not use your application because I cannot backup my VMWARE fusion files.

    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 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

19. Allow users the ability to make content (mostly video) available offline on the mobile app while also not allowing download permissions acro

    Allow users the ability to make content (mostly video) available offline on the mobile app while also not allowing download permissions across the browser, Drive, etc. Something similar to Netflix, which allows shows to be viewable offline on the app with no downloading on other devices.

    The reason for the use case is that executives will review confidential trailers on their phone/tablet. They need the ability to review the content even if the internet is spotty. But we need to restrict the ability to download a copy to prevent exfiltration of sensitive content.

    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

    existing feature  ·  0 comments  ·  Mobile  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →

20. Add more details in device trust logs

    If device trust is checking for a setting (for example OS version), then the logs should show the actual version detected. This should be for every setting Box enables you to validate. It should also have more detail about the login attempt (hostname (not just IP address), OS, Box Drive vs Box web vs etc).

    Further there should be a new event in the logs, DEVICETRUSTCHECKPASSED, with similar details so that we know the check happened and what values Box found when authorizing the device. Only having DEVICETRUSTCHECKFAILED provides no audit trail for showing the when the device trust check is being enforced.

    If device trust is checking for a setting (for example OS version), then the logs should show the actual version detected. This should be for every setting Box enables you to validate. It should also have more detail about the login attempt (hostname (not just IP address), OS, Box Drive vs Box web vs etc).

    Further there should be a new event in the logs, DEVICETRUSTCHECKPASSED, with similar details so that we know the check happened and what values Box found when authorizing the device. Only having DEVICETRUSTCHECKFAILED provides no audit trail for showing… 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  ·  Security  ·  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