AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
My feedback
-
325 votes56 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Core & Technical Infrastructure · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
We understand the request, but unfortunately this is not on the near-term roadmap.
An error occurred while saving the comment AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
13 votesAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
62 votes
This is not on the short term roadmap (6 month) due to other higher priorities.
AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
1 vote0 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Partner Integrations · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
39 votesunder consideration · 11 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Web App · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
9 votes6 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Partner Integrations · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
5 votes0 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Partner Integrations · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
Hello, I would like to learn more about the problem described in the request, Please reach out to me if you like to share some feedback.
Regards,
Michal
AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
2 votesAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
-
1 vote
Thank you for your suggestion.
We explored this during our initial investigations, and our customers told us they did not want record of prior holds in this view, thus potentially implicating them in still being responsible for the litigation.
This is not planned work but may be reconsidered if there is a ton of customer feedback to the contrary.
An error occurred while saving the comment AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
commented
Ideally this would be built into the UI by now...
If the concern for adding a 'Released Holds' section is that this might implicate that a legal team and/or company is still responsible for the litigation, then this can easily be solved by flagging in the UI that this is for audit purposes only and/or the company is no longer responsible for the litigation.
At the very least there should be a report that we can pull to audit and/or see previous legal holds.
AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesnot planned · 0 comments · Help shape the future of Box » Governance · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →AdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteAdminAnonymous
(Admin, Box)
shared this idea
·
Today, there is a LOT of confusion about this...
(Scenario A) Notably, customers know that a user at the subfolder can't have LOWER permissions than the same user at the parent folder (e.g. if they own the folder, it would be odd for them to not also have owner access to everything inside of that folder).
(Scenario B) BUT... many customers want to give a user at the subfolder HIGHER permissions than the same user at the parent folder (e.g. Lisa has Editor access for HR benefits subfolder, but only Viewer access for HR parent folder... analogously, for a hotel you have "Editor" access to the "subfolder" room you are given a room key to, but you don't have access to sleep in the hotel lobby that everybody has "Viewer" access to).
Today, Scenario B is possible through proactively giving the person higher permissions at the subfolder (e.g. Editor) and then lower permissions at the parent folder (e.g. Viewer), but a lot of customers don't do this proactively, because they start by giving the person access at the parent folder, and they want to give the user permissions on the subfolder retroactively (e.g. maybe the subfolder didn't exist when the parent folder was created). When they change permissions at the subfolder retroactively, they get the error "Change Role for Parent Folder," regardless of if they are giving the user higher or lower permissions at the subfolder.
Giving customers the option to retroactively give users higher permissions at the subfolder would be immensely valuable.....