10098 results found

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

   Current Situation (As-Is)

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

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

   Example impact:

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

   Current workaround:

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

   Problem

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

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

   Leads to:

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

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

   Coexistence of rules, such as:

   Allow sharing with non-blocked external domains

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

   Policy evaluation that supports:

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

   More flexible classification behavior where:

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

   thanks.
   Tal

   Current Situation (As-Is)

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

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

   Example impact:

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

   Current workaround:

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

   Problem

   Lack of flexibility in combining… more

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

2. Font selection for canvas text

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

3. Middle-click pan in mouse navigation mode

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

4. Object-level comments on Canvas items

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

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

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

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

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

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

   •  

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

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

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

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

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

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

6. New Box Drive for Windows (Cloud Files): Improve Explorer UX during startup/connecting to avoid unstable/incorrect folder state

   Problem (What problem could Box solve for you?)
   When Windows starts, the new Box Drive (Cloud Files architecture) auto-connects. During this “connecting/initializing” period, the Box Drive folder becomes visible in File Explorer even though Box Drive is not fully running/ready. The folder view is unstable: some items show missing icons/status, and opening folders can result in errors. This happens consistently across multiple users in our pilot.
   This behavior may be aligned with the feature “Box Drive folders remain accessible even when the Box Drive application is not running,” but exposing a partially-initialized state causes confusion and support tickets (users think Drive is broken or content is missing).

   Proposed improvement
   Please improve the File Explorer experience while Box Drive is starting/connecting/initializing so users do not see an unstable or misleading folder state. For example:
   Show a clear “Box Drive is connecting/initializing” placeholder and block navigation until ready; and/or
   Provide an admin/user option to delay/hide the Box Drive mount until Drive is connected; and/or
   Ensure cached vs. not-yet-available content is clearly indicated without throwing generic Windows errors.

   Steps to reproduce
   1.Install new Box Drive for Windows (Cloud Files architecture), version 2.48 (pilot).
   2.Ensure Box Drive is configured to auto-start on Windows login.
   3.Reboot the PC and open File Explorer immediately after login.
   4.Observe Box folder becomes visible before Drive is fully ready; icons may be missing/blank; opening folders may show errors.

   Impact
   ・End-user confusion (“Drive is broken”, “files disappeared”)
   ・Increased helpdesk tickets and delays in rollout/adoption of the new Box Drive

   The following is written in Japanese

   Windows 向け新しい Box Drive（Cloud Files）：起動／接続時にエクスプローラーの UX を改善し、不安定または誤ったフォルダー状態を回避する

   問題（Box はどのような課題を解決できるか？）
   Windows の起動時に、新しい Box Drive（Cloud Files アーキテクチャ）が自動接続します。この「接続／初期化」中、Box Drive がまだ完全に起動・準備完了していないにもかかわらず、File Explorer に Box Drive フォルダーが表示されます。フォルダー表示が不安定で、一部の項目でアイコン／ステータスが表示されないことがあり、フォルダーを開くとエラーになる場合があります。この現象はパイロットに参加している複数ユーザーで一貫して発生しています。この挙動は「Box Drive アプリケーションが起動していない場合でも Box Drive フォルダーにアクセス可能」という機能仕様に沿っている可能性がありますが、部分的に初期化された状態が見えてしまうことで混乱を招き、サポートチケットの増加につながっています（ユーザーが「Drive が壊れている」「コンテンツが消えた」と誤解する）。

   改善案
   Box Drive の起動／接続／初期化中に、File Explorer 上で不安定または誤解を招く状態が見えないよう、エクスペリエンスを改善してください。例：
   ・「Box Drive は接続／初期化中です」という明確なプレースホルダーを表示し、準備完了までナビゲーションをブロックする
   ・Drive が接続されるまで Box Drive のマウントを遅延／非表示にする管理者／ユーザー向けオプションを提供する
   ・キャッシュ済みコンテンツと、まだ利用できないコンテンツを明確に区別して表示し、一般的な Windows エラーを出さないようにする

   再現手順
   1.新しい Box Drive for Windows（Cloud Files アーキテクチャ）v2.48（パイロット）をインストールする
   2.Windows ログイン時に Box Drive が自動起動するよう設定する
   3.PC を再起動し、ログイン直後に File Explorer を開く
   4.Drive が完全に準備完了する前に Box フォルダーが表示されることを確認する（アイコンが欠落／空白になる場合がある）。接続中の状態でフォルダーを開くとエラーが出る場合がある

   影響
   ・エンドユーザーの混乱（「Drive が壊れている」「ファイルが消えた」）
   ・ヘルプデスク問い合わせの増加、および新しい Box Drive の展開／定着の遅延

   Problem (What problem could Box solve for you?)
   When Windows starts, the new Box Drive (Cloud Files architecture) auto-connects. During this “connecting/initializing” period, the Box Drive folder becomes visible in File Explorer even though Box Drive is not fully running/ready. The folder view is unstable: some items show missing icons/status, and opening folders can result in errors. This happens consistently across multiple users in our pilot.
   This behavior may be aligned with the feature “Box Drive folders remain accessible even when the Box Drive application is not running,” but exposing a partially-initialized state causes confusion and support tickets (users think… more

   •  

   4 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

7. Using public Beta for Folder Insights with Editor permissions

   Most users who need Folder Insights are editors.
   Also, invitations are often restricted for security reasons.
   I would like to see Folder Insights and reports downloadable even for invite-restricted editors.

   -in Japanese-
   フォルダインサイトを必要としているユーザーの多くは編集者権限であり、
   またセキュリティ上の理由から招待を制限されていることが多い。
   招待制限されている編集者権限でもフォルダインサイトの閲覧とレポートのダウンロードができるようにしてほしい。

   35 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

   under consideration  ·  1 comment  ·  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. AI Units Usage Reporting

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

   1 vote

   Vote Vote Vote Vote

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Vote

   We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

   We're glad you're here

   Please sign in to leave feedback

   Signed in as (Sign out)

   Close

   Close

   Submit Rating

9. When will radio button or checkbox capabilities come out?

   Radio button or checkbox capabilities on Forms to DocGen creation. E.g. forms that only allow for checks or X's.

   10 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 Doc Gen  ·  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. Large Folder Operation proactive notification and approval request

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

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

11. Default agent for hub

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

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

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

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

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

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

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

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

    その他の管理者側の選択肢は、本ユースケースには不十分です：

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

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

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

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

13. Increased Character Limit - Box Forms

    Please increase character limit to 1000 for Box Forms long text. We have questions in surveys that we are looking to send out via Box Forms that exceed the current, 100-character limit.

    •  

    13 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

    researching  ·  1 comment  ·  Box Forms & Doc Gen  ·  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. Delete User App Authorization

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

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

    •  

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

15. Report on file insights for all files

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

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

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

16. Restrict Hub Shared Link Creation to Admins Only

    Many users can access a Hub via its shared link.

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

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

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

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

    Many users can access a Hub via its shared link.

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

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

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

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

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Batch Send Bulk Actions in Box Sign

    After sending documents to multiple recipients using Batch Send, we’ve noticed that we are unable to perform actions such as editing, canceling, or sending reminders for the entire batch at once. Instead, these actions must be carried out individually for each recipient, which is quite time-consuming and inefficient.

    Could you please add below features in batch send?

    1. Edit or cancel the entire batch in one go
    2. Send reminders to all recipients included in the batch simultaneously?
    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 Sign  ·  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. Delete or hide Source Systems without having to delete all associated jobs

    The process to delete a Shuttle Windows source is to first manually locate and delete all completed Shuttle jobs that ran under that source, then delete the source server via the trash can button when selecting a source system via the new job wizard. Box Support have confirmed this experience.

    Box Shuttle admins should be able to delete, or at least hide a source system, as part of clean-up activities, without having to manually export (if needed) and delete all previously configured jobs which is a frustrating user experience that introduces a lot of extra, hard-to-justify work on the admin side.

    The process to delete a Shuttle Windows source is to first manually locate and delete all completed Shuttle jobs that ran under that source, then delete the source server via the trash can button when selecting a source system via the new job wizard. Box Support have confirmed this experience.

    Box Shuttle admins should be able to delete, or at least hide a source system, as part of clean-up activities, without having to manually export (if needed) and delete all previously configured jobs which is a frustrating user experience that introduces a lot of extra, hard-to-justify work on the admin… 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  ·  Shuttle  ·  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. Improve Box Shuttle Filter to search by Source System

    I'd like to be able to filter the Shuttle job list on the name of a source system.

    This requirement is derived as a result of a product limitation where source systems cannot be deleted unless all completed jobs are deleted. Without this filter option, finding and deleting all jobs associated with a single source system is extremely laborious.

    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  ·  Shuttle  ·  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 for improvement of the event where the cell date is different when previewing an Excel file

    In Excel, if you enter a date in a cell with a custom format, a different date will be displayed when viewed with previewer permissions.
    For example, if you enter "2026/1/1", if you check it with the previewer permission, it will be displayed as "2026/10/12".
    This event is described below.

    Introducing Box Preview – Box Support
    https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044195013-Introducing-Box-Preview

    “Date values with the custom format "yyyy/m/d (aaa)" may show incorrect dates. This is due to a bug in the library that Box Content Preview has a dependency on. The workaround is to use a different format such as "yyyy/m/d (ddd)" or "yyyy/m/d".”

    Editor and viewer permissions are displayed as they were entered, but previewer permissions are not the date entered.
    It seems to be caused by a bug in the library that Box Content Preview depends on, but there is no way to check the correct date because the previewer permission does not allow downloading the file.
    Therefore, we strongly request improvements.

    【In Japanese】
    ＜タイトル＞
    Excelファイルをプレビューした際にセルの日付が異なる事象の改善要望
    ＜本文＞
    Excelにおいて、表示形式がユーザー定義となっているセルに日付を入力すると、プレビューアー権限で表示した際に異なった日付が表示されます。
    例えば、『2026/1/1』と入力したセルはプレビューアー権限で確認すると『2026/10/12』と表示されます。
    この事象は下記に記載があります。

    Boxプレビューの概要 – Box Support
    https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/360044195013-Box%E3%83%97%E3%83%AC%E3%83%93%E3%83%A5%E3%83%BC%E3%81%AE%E6%A6%82%E8%A6%81

    カスタム形式「yyyy/m/d (aaa)」を使用した日付の値は、誤った日付を示す場合があります。 これは、Box Content Previewが依存しているライブラリのバグが原因です。 回避策として、「yyyy/m/d (ddd)」、「yyyy/m/d」のような別の形式を使用します。

    編集者権限やビューアー権限は入力時と同じものが表示されますが、プレビューアー権限では入力されている日付ではありません。
    Box Content Previewが依存しているライブラリのバグが原因のようですが、プレビューアー権限はファイルのダウンロードができないため正しい日付を確認する方法がありません。
    そのため、改善を強く要望いたします。

    In Excel, if you enter a date in a cell with a custom format, a different date will be displayed when viewed with previewer permissions.
    For example, if you enter "2026/1/1", if you check it with the previewer permission, it will be displayed as "2026/10/12".
    This event is described below.

    Introducing Box Preview – Box Support
    https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044195013-Introducing-Box-Preview

    “Date values with the custom format "yyyy/m/d (aaa)" may show incorrect dates. This is due to a bug in the library that Box Content Preview has a dependency on. The workaround is to use a different format such as "yyyy/m/d (ddd)" or "yyyy/m/d".”

    … 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

    0 comments  ·  Preview  ·  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