Hierarchy Waterfall Permissions
So I'm not sure if anything has changed in BOX that would allow us to share with people outside our account.
- Parent folder(let's say this specialized group)(downloadable)
- class projects (Download privileges)
- videos(with viewing privileges only)
So would there be a way to give the group the parent folder share, so that we wouldn't have to provide multiple links
I wished there was a way to override the parent's waterfall affect though so we could single out.
-
Hi Sean,
Welcome to the Box Community and thanks for your post in the forum!Permissions in Box always follow our waterfall permission model. This means that when you add a user to a parent folder that same level of access is automatically inherited by all of the sub folders that exist in the structure at the time you add the user, as well as to any new folders that get created there later on. There is not a way of changing this behavior in Box at the individual user level.You may want to take a look at these help articles to plan how you want to share your contents to people outside your account:Hope this helps!
Regards,
France
-
Are you aware that the "waterfall permission model" sucks?
The case that Sean is highlighting applies to EVERY user of online storage including our company. There SHOULD be a way to restrict rights in subdirectories or on a file-by-file basis. The idea that you can only ADD rights is absurd to the point being useless and it is causing us to look for an alternate solution. It should be possible to REMOVE rights.
It is unfathomable to me that a company would create a product like box.com and not take the time to implement a non-waterfall system.
We have conceived a way to work around this that would work if there was a permission class that allowed people to see Folder names but NOT folder content. Sadly, even "Uploader" rights allow the use to see ALL FILE NAMES in ALL SUBDIRECTORIES. Amazing. What an incredible lack of foresight.
-
Thanks.
Yeah, I understand how the permissions go, and unfortunately, it's forced me to figure work arounds, which does make it more difficult to share certain content, and store said content. I have to create a folder outside of let's say a client's folder because the Waterfall permissions, gives them full or semi full access, and we can't have that for some materials.
So yeah, I'd say a rethink of this structure is in order, for sure. -
I just started looking into folder permissions and need to give users access to view many folders and files in a directory, but also need to allow those users to edit files within subfolders in that same directory. I am legitimately shocked that this isn't possible with Box. I don't believe it's accurate to call Box folder structure a "waterfall" when the permissions jump or "flow" back up to parent folder when I try to change permissions in a subfolder.
-
Echoing others' thoughts here... absolutely ridiculous that this is not a feature. It is making it so Box is rather difficult to be HIPAA compliant as well without implementing creative work arounds like seanlake mentioned. Also considering changing platforms due to this inability to turn off waterfall permissions.
-
I've had to come up with some interesting folder structures in order to ensure secured files are not accessible by anyone other than whom I provide access to. This leads to some oddness, needless to say. I'm making it work, it's just as I call it MacGyver fixes ;). Duct tape only holds for so long!
Good Luck Everyone!
-
Echoing others on this thread as well. This makes it extremely difficult to structure our folders. We have diverse teams that should be able to view certain subfolders under a "Parent" - however, some folks should be able to edit certain folders and others need viewer. Its a terrible model and one that is forcing us to evaluate other options. We should absolutely be able to override the parent folder permission on subfolders. These needs to be on your roadmap.
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
9 comments