What is a one sentence summary of your feature request?
Separated eDiscovery and Cap features from file location in the allowlist.
Please describe your idea in detail. What is your problem, why do you feel this idea is the best solution, etc.
Hello, I’m Kim Dong-hyun.
In order to exclude certain paths of folders from the scope of eDiscovery, we have confirmed that we have set the path of that folder in the file location entry in the Allow list, which has caused the Cap policy to allow files within that path folder.
If you add the ability to apply this to eDiscovery and Cap policies respectively, it will be much easier to avoid browsing the files you want for your own purposes.
How do you currently solve the challenges you have by not having this feature?
To address this, the Denylists - Scan Location feature limits the scope of eDiscovery and excludes discovery folders from this scope. However, this method is cumbersome to move folders and change policies.
