Have a new access right on folders called "Organizer" and this user can not see passwords but can share, put in folders, and add tags

I could not find this suggested. I am not sure if anyone else is facing this issue. It seems like low hanging fruit to add.

As a user I can give access to another user but only to all data EXCEPT the password. This would be for someone I want to organize all password for myself and my team. Often the team does not keep things organized by client and such. I may want an organizer user with no access to the password but does have access to all else to be able tag with tags. I’m not sure what to do about the issue where this organizer user could put passwords into folders and effectively share them by doing that. Perhaps in that case it requires approval first by a owner or a can update user.

Q1. What is the problem that you are trying to solve?
Keeping things organized and having help doing it.

Q2 - Who is impacted?
Company Owner: because its all organized for him
Users: can find passwords easier

Q3 - Why is it important and/or urgent?
Because many users have 8 years of passwords saved and with companies that deal with passwords routinely it could be 5000+ passwords for one company and over the years I have bank and really high security passwords I need organized better then it has been in the past. Right now I the company owner (for passwords that require my eyes only) can not delegate the task to organizing this data.

Q4 - What is your proposed solution? (optional)
Have a new user role called “Organizer” where I share (with organizer role) folders with them. They can then change the folder structure of the shared folder (all levels) and they can also tag the passwords.

Q5. Community support
People can vote for this idea to show traction:

  • :ok_woman: Must have: this is critical for me to have this
  • :raising_hand_woman: Should have: this is important for me to have this
  • :tipping_hand_woman: Could have: this could be nice to have
  • :no_good_woman: Won’t have: we should not schedule this (explain why)

0 voters