600 results found

1. Add 'Description' Field for Groups in Box

   Groups in AD have a custom 'descriptions' field; the Groups feature should have the same parity to give more context to Groups within the Admin Console, especially, as a large company, we have many Groups that have similar names.

   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  ·  Admin Console  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →
   existing feature  ·  katiele responded

   You can add a description for a Group through the Admin Console when creating or editing a group. You can also add a description through the Groups API.

   UI: https://community.box.com/t5/Managing-Box-Users/Creating-and-Managing-Groups/ta-p/185

   API: https://developer.box.com/v2.0/reference

2. external share

   Need the ability to provide some users/groups to create external shares for a longer or indefinite period of time. If we have a long range project I have to disable to option to control how long a share stays out there - that in my opinion is a security risk.

   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  ·  Users and Groups  ·  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. Custom scope feature for Shared Links

   We would like to request the addition of a feature that allows content sharing to be set narrower than "company users" and broader than "invited users only" in "Enterprise Settings" using groups.

   As a result, in organizations such as educational institutions where customers such as children, pupils, and students exist within the same tenant, it will be possible to guarantee the fairness of sharing safely within a limited range without collaboration.

   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  ·  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

4. Job Title in new Users & Groups page in the Admin Console

   The new experience removes Job Title visibility, and we would like this returned

   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  ·  Users and Groups  ·  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. Allow Admins to STOP Email Uploads Success/Failure Notifications

   We have a requirement for some groups to email reports into Box folders. When using the Email Upload functionality, Box will send the uploading user an email to confirm whether their upload completed successfully or failed. Employees receive excessive emails since we cannot stop Box from sending these confirmations.
   Just make it an option in the admin console to shut off these confirmation emails.

   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  ·  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

6. Better workflows for organizing content

   A colleague of mine works in an a department we'll call "DepartmentX" in a larger organization. Within other departments in the org they create a "DepartmentX" folder and share that to my colleage's box account.

   My colleague now has several "DepartmentX" folders and cannot at a glance see where they are from.

   In the initial view in Box and even on BoxDrive the "root" is polluted with other people's stuff and it is not possible to organize that into sub folders that are meaningful.

   If a user tries to drag a shared-folder into a folder they created Box attempts to copy the folder with a warning about changing permissions. What was expected to happen is that rather than appearing at the top level of the account (all files) that user-organize folders would appear and the shared folder would be in a sub-folder and continue to be a reference to wherever it is actually hosted.

   You might need to create the notion of a sharedAt folder as part of the shared-folder's data structure that says not only that it is shared to user X but that it is shared in a folder/collection within that user's box.

   The model right now is to treat the initial view like the Operating system desktop and making everything created or that other people create appear in the same space and with the possibility of having the same name.

   Whether a sharedAt solution is the right approach there needs to be a way of viewing what a user has access to that has some degree of organization, where shared content may be organized by who shared it to the user:

   MyBox
   MyContent
   User/OrganizationX
   DepartmentX (shared folder)
   Shared file.docx
   SomeFile.txt
   UserY
   DepartmentX (shared folder)
   README.txt
   UserZ
   DepartmentX (shared folder)
   Stuff.zip

   The above structure is meant to show that if organized by who shared the data multiple folders with the same name are no longer an issue. This is especially important in an enterprise scenario.

   You can do the single catch all folder if you provide for different views and who shared what is but one.

   Since you already support tags, you could have a view that shows content grouped into tag-folders.

   So the two views identified here are:
   Sharing View
   select all files owned by user as MyFiles union select all files shared to user group by owner

   Tagged Content View
   with tags as (select disticnt tags from files where owner is user or file file is shared to owner x) Select all files where tag in tags group by tag

   I know it won't be that trivial database wise, but conceptually the point of tags is for being able to find content and a sharing view.

   You could also do more of Apple's notion of "Smart Folders" where the folder is a "view" in the database sense that it is named search criteria that can be treated like a read-only folder. I think this is in part what others are calling collections, but if the search tech were expanded to allow results to be grouped into folders (at least in the display) by some property like owner or tag, then having the ability to name the search and save that as a view-folder would mean users could create criteri- based collections and have more meaningful ways to explore their content. BoxDrive could list the views much like FileExplorer has a "QuickAccess" section

   A colleague of mine works in an a department we'll call "DepartmentX" in a larger organization. Within other departments in the org they create a "DepartmentX" folder and share that to my colleage's box account.

   My colleague now has several "DepartmentX" folders and cannot at a glance see where they are from.

   In the initial view in Box and even on BoxDrive the "root" is polluted with other people's stuff and it is not possible to organize that into sub folders that are meaningful.

   If a user tries to drag a shared-folder into a folder they created Box attempts to… 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  ·  Collections  ·  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. Add Section Divider Lines and Blank Fields for Cleaner Forms

   I would recommend adding divider lines to allow cleaner grouping or sectioning of fields in a form. It would also be helpful to have "blank" field for better organizing when adding fields in two columns but the number of fields for a particular topic is an odd number. Having a blank filler field would allow starting the next topic on the next row rather than beside a field that isn't related. This would make the form look cleaner and be easier for end-users to follow.

   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 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
   not planned  ·  AdminAnonymous (Admin, Box) responded

   We've released the static text field that should resolve the blank field request and we've decided to prioritize multi page forms which could serve as a workaround for Divider lines.

8. Allow users to set a.box.com as their default engagement method to Box through a web browser.

   The ability for a user to go to box.com or cloud.box.com or domain.box.com and set the accessible version of Box as default for a specific user or group of users.

   This would allow users with unique needs such as visual impairments to navigate to their preference without first making a conscious decision to head to a.box.com or through box.com

   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
   not planned  ·  Brad Monroe responded

   We strive to integrate accessibility into the Box Web App.

9. Allows Admins to block new users from being created using unverified email Domain

   Some organizations wish to have the ability to prevent any account from being created with an email address belonging to an email domain that is not listed in the Verified Domains list in the Box Admin Console. There should be a setting either in Security or Custom Setup that can be enabled so that all admins are unable to add these types of users. In large organizations that leverage automations and integrations via SSO and security groups to push users to Box, there should be a way to have more granular control on the users that are provisioned access based on their email domain

   Some organizations wish to have the ability to prevent any account from being created with an email address belonging to an email domain that is not listed in the Verified Domains list in the Box Admin Console. There should be a setting either in Security or Custom Setup that can be enabled so that all admins are unable to add these types of users. In large organizations that leverage automations and integrations via SSO and security groups to push users to Box, there should be a way to have more granular control on the users that are provisioned access… 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  ·  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

10. Add more detail to Box Admin Report folder descriptions

    Background:In the headers of folders created by Box when Box Admin Reports are run, there is "Folder description". This gives various details associated with the report, including:
    Status, Report type, Run on, Date range

    Enhancement Required and Reason:
    When there are so many reports being run during the day, and having to wait for them to complete, it would be helpful to add further metadata:
    - Users or groups - any and all selected during report preparation
    - Affected folders and files - any and all selected during report preparation

    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  ·  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

11. Clarification needed for “Invite Collaborator” event behavior in User Activity Report　ユーザーアクティビティレポートにおける「コラボレータの招待」イベント仕様の明確化について

    【Description】
    In the User Activity Report, there is an inconsistency between “Invite Collaborator” and “Accepted Invite” events.
    Specifically, the “Invite Collaborator” event is not logged in the following cases:

    When the invited user has “Automatically accept collaboration invites” enabled
    When a group is invited

    As a result, there is a significant discrepancy between the number of “Invite Collaborator” and “Accepted Invite” events, even though these actions are part of the same collaboration flow.
    Currently, this behavior is not clearly documented in the official Box support article, and it is difficult to understand the limitations of the “Invite Collaborator” event.
    【Request】
    Please clarify and document(https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/4415012490387) the following:

    Under what conditions the “Invite Collaborator” event is not recorded
    The relationship and differences between “Invite Collaborator”, “Accepted Invite”, and related events (e.g., auto-accepted invites, group collaborations)

    This would help administrators accurately interpret User Activity Reports and track collaboration activities more effectively.

    【内容】
    ユーザーアクティビティレポートにおいて、「コラボレータの招待」と「招待の承諾」のイベント間に不整合が見られます。
    具体的には、以下のケースにおいて「コラボレータの招待」が記録されません：

    招待先ユーザーが「コラボレーションへの招待を自動的に承諾する」を有効化している場合
    グループを招待した場合

    このため、本来一連の処理であるはずの招待および承諾イベント間で、ログ件数に大きな差異が発生します。
    現状、この挙動は公式ドキュメントに明記されておらず、「コラボレータの招待」イベントの制約が把握しにくい状況です。
    【要望】
    以下について明確化および公式ドキュメント(https://support.box.com/hc/ja/articles/4415012490387)への記載をお願いします：

    「コラボレータの招待」イベントが記録されない条件
    「コラボレータの招待」と「招待の承諾」および関連イベント（自動承認、グループ招待等）との関係および差異

    これにより、管理者がユーザーアクティビティレポートを正しく解釈し、コラボレーションの監査を適切に行うことが可能になります。

    【Description】
    In the User Activity Report, there is an inconsistency between “Invite Collaborator” and “Accepted Invite” events.
    Specifically, the “Invite Collaborator” event is not logged in the following cases:

    When the invited user has “Automatically accept collaboration invites” enabled
    When a group is invited

    As a result, there is a significant discrepancy between the number of “Invite Collaborator” and “Accepted Invite” events, even though these actions are part of the same collaboration flow.
    Currently, this behavior is not clearly documented in the official Box support article, and it is difficult to understand the limitations of the “Invite Collaborator” event.
    【Request】… 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

12. New File Request Submit Button moved to top or fit within viewport

    New File Request Template moves the submit button out of the viewport. Users will upload the file without scrolling down to fully 'submit' the file. Can we move the submit button to top of page, or make that preview page smaller to fit within viewport? See Customer comment below:

    "The thing about this template is that the CTA to submit is buried in the footer and outside the user's viewport on a laptop. I’ve seen with surveys when the CTA is not in the viewport, a portion of users miss it and never actually submit. And, there is no feedback to remind the user they need to submit. In other words, the user uploads and sees that is it uploading, they enter their info and there is nothing that forces them to submit.

    Also, when you scroll down to the CTA , it bounces back to the bottom and you have to scroll again to get it into full so that you can click it. That bouncing I mentioned is due to the fact that the iframe embed forces you to scroll and and so does the page the iframe lives on. This means that even if a user scrolls down, they need to also scroll down in both places. What I do when designing those external surveys is break up the content so that all the CTA’s fall within the viewport. "

    New File Request Template moves the submit button out of the viewport. Users will upload the file without scrolling down to fully 'submit' the file. Can we move the submit button to top of page, or make that preview page smaller to fit within viewport? See Customer comment below:

    "The thing about this template is that the CTA to submit is buried in the footer and outside the user's viewport on a laptop. I’ve seen with surveys when the CTA is not in the viewport, a portion of users miss it and never actually submit. And, there is no feedback… 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  ·  Tasks  ·  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. Increase collaboration invitation limit for Hubs beyond 500

    Hubs owners/coowners can only invite 500 individual collaborators to a Hub. This poses a challenge for customers who have restrictive external collaboration settings that prevent the creation of public shared links, and need to provide access to external users via invitations to collaborate on files/folders. This limit needs to be increased (or eliminated) to support large enterprises with more restrictive security settings. Leveraging Groups is not a good alternative for users who primarily intend to use Hubs for external collaboration.

    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 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

14. Custom document repositories with metadata search

    User groups often look to create an interface for document repositories for content stored on Box, where metadata could be used to search/filter content. That would be an interface with medatada fields similar to what can be found on websites (i.e. https://www.calpnetwork.org/library/). The current experience of using the native search, then selecting a single metadata template, then selecting an attribute is not sufficiently user friendly and it's not possible to embed a pre-selected set of metadata fields for search onto an intranet or website.
    We're currently not using metadata templates much, but this would be a very practical way to demonstrate how useful metadata are for end-users.
    Adding metadata search fields to Box Hubs would be a great way to get the desired results

    User groups often look to create an interface for document repositories for content stored on Box, where metadata could be used to search/filter content. That would be an interface with medatada fields similar to what can be found on websites (i.e. https://www.calpnetwork.org/library/). The current experience of using the native search, then selecting a single metadata template, then selecting an attribute is not sufficiently user friendly and it's not possible to embed a pre-selected set of metadata fields for search onto an intranet or website.
    We're currently not using metadata templates much, but this would be a very practical… 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  ·  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

15. Dashboard

    There should be a Box Dashboard that people stay on all day. Emailed @mentions are not effective

    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

16. Filter folders that user can access by Access level in the Users & Groups tab

    Currently, all folders that a managed user may or may not have access to appear in the 'Edit User Access permissions' panel. There should be a filter for the Access level - so that eg. folders with Access level 'None' do not come up.

    1 vote

    Vote Vote Vote Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Vote

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Close

    Close

    Submit Rating

17. Nested folders

    With the current collections capability, it looks like collections don’t have any organization within them. If you wanted to organize things into “folders” within your projects you’d have to title collections all at the top level with a naming that implied a hierarchy in order to map shared items into groupings one layer of organization down. Something like:

    Collections:
    Project1-folder1
    Project1-folder2
    Project1-folder3
    Project2-folder1
    …

    I would have preferred to build an arbitrary folder tree and place shared items into specific places in my folder hierarchy.

    Obviously it would be more useful if this organization was available in Box Drive too.

    With the current collections capability, it looks like collections don’t have any organization within them. If you wanted to organize things into “folders” within your projects you’d have to title collections all at the top level with a naming that implied a hierarchy in order to map shared items into groupings one layer of organization down. Something like:

    Collections:
    Project1-folder1
    Project1-folder2
    Project1-folder3
    Project2-folder1
    …

    I would have preferred to build an arbitrary folder tree and place shared items into specific places in my folder hierarchy.

    Obviously it would be more useful if this organization was available in Box Drive… 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  ·  Collections  ·  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. Provide functionality to extend the 30 day time limit on user acceptance when enabling External User TOS

    Currently, the documentation states that when enabling external user TOS, if the user does not accept the TOS within 30 days then they have all access to collaborated content revoked. This is problematic as we have external users that need occasional access but may not heed the warning to accept the TOS. I would like a mechanism to manage this time frame, either extending to 90 days or reset the time for users/groups.

    Link to documentation: https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044192733-Using-Custom-Terms-Of-Service

    If any external collaborators do not accept the ToS within 30 days, they will be removed as a collaborator from the content.

    Currently, the documentation states that when enabling external user TOS, if the user does not accept the TOS within 30 days then they have all access to collaborated content revoked. This is problematic as we have external users that need occasional access but may not heed the warning to accept the TOS. I would like a mechanism to manage this time frame, either extending to 90 days or reset the time for users/groups.

    Link to documentation: https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044192733-Using-Custom-Terms-Of-Service

    If any external collaborators do not accept the ToS within 30 days, they will be removed as a collaborator from the… 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  ·  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

19. Exports users doesn't reflect the latest users

    We're using the list of users which we can export from 'Export Users' button in Users and Groups menu to verify if the user provisioning tool is working correctly on the daily basis.

    Although I heard from Box that Box reports are being migrated to new data platform to improve the performance, this new Export Users report doesn't reflect the latest users. Maybe this new one reports the user list as of roughly half a day ago, so we can't our daily verification task correctly...

    I think user list should reflect the latest status so I want Box to fix this issue as soon as possible.

    We're using the list of users which we can export from 'Export Users' button in Users and Groups menu to verify if the user provisioning tool is working correctly on the daily basis.

    Although I heard from Box that Box reports are being migrated to new data platform to improve the performance, this new Export Users report doesn't reflect the latest users. Maybe this new one reports the user list as of roughly half a day ago, so we can't our daily verification task correctly...

    I think user list should reflect the latest status so I want Box to… 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

    delivered  ·  0 comments  ·  Users and Groups  ·  Delete…  ·  Admin →

20. Additional suggestions for creating reports by specifying keys when creating Box reports

    I want to accurately manage the content owned by the tenant's managed users. Currently, I am creating a report of "folders and files" of Box to retrieve data, and the output report is divided into 1 million object units. (My tenant is currently making about 70.).

    Since these reports are not sorted and the contents owned by each user are output to a file separately, they cannot be used even if they can be output at the same time. Our company automates report merging and folder sorting, which can take several hours.

    As an improvement request, it is requested to improve the current item "owner name, owner login, path, path ID, item name, item ID, item type, size, creation, last modified date, upload" so that it can be sorted by the specified field and output. The most desirable condition now is to sort and output "paths" as keys.

    By adding this function, the user can visualize how much data exists in the current BOX and how it is used. By visualizing all file information, we believe that we can reduce the risk of data leakage by allocating the man-hours required for operation to each company in the group, deleting data that is not always needed, and implementing archiving. Please Consider adding features to Box reports.

    I want to accurately manage the content owned by the tenant's managed users. Currently, I am creating a report of "folders and files" of Box to retrieve data, and the output report is divided into 1 million object units. (My tenant is currently making about 70.).

    Since these reports are not sorted and the contents owned by each user are output to a file separately, they cannot be used even if they can be output at the same time. Our company automates report merging and folder sorting, which can take several hours.

    As an improvement request, it is requested to… 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