Answered

Collaborators - Privacy and other Concerns

Please give this post a like to show your support in this matter.

We do a comfortable amount of business with Matterport and found one particular weak link in the chain which is a very real concern for us. The collaborator feature is not really designed to share with clients and more to be used for internal purposes. When you add a person/client as a collaborator that person will be able to see all other collaborators in your account/network. Any collaborator can view another collaborator's profile which includes name, title, phone (sometimes cell), email address (sometimes personal), account type, and upload folder to include any parent folders within that chain. IMO much of this information is meant for internal eyes only and should not be visible to other collaborators. This borders on privacy issues as well as you're sharing what may be private unpublished contact information to other collaborators that might not want their information being shared.

Also too if you assign Real Estate Broker "E" as collaborator he will see you have Real Estate Broker A,B,C and D which may be their direct competition. We generally never tell one agency what other agencies we are working with. Due to the privacy concerns and the shortcomings of the collaborator feature our business model is such that we do not offer what could otherwise be an important value add for our clients. We have some fairly large clients and as a result only "we" can make edits to their models which adds more to the administrative workload.

Another note, while we are on the subject of collaborators, is that those assigned as "editor" should be allowed to actually delete a model. Currently only primary account holder has the permission to delete a model. This again further adds to the admins workload as many models and copies of those models are uploaded tweaked and reuploaded. Unless deleted these extra models will be applied to billing as well. We have 6 photographers that do uploads into their collaborator account and models can quickly add up but only one person (moi) can delete a model.

Finally a collaborator, once logged in, will see "Order Camera" and "Support", as well as social networking links, terms of service, and privacy (which everyone should read), prominently displayed in the footer of every page. This is further discouragement in allowing client access to their models.

In an ideal world it would be an awesome feature to have a Matterport brand free portal in that the account holder may assign private collaborator access to only their models.

21

Comments

42 comments
  • This is an excellent point, Bill, and you're not the only one to raise it. I'm going to pass this on to the my.matterport.com product lead. Everyone else, please do weigh in on this, and hit "Like" if it impacts you! Thanks!

  • Thanks for bringing this up. I'd love to learn more about how your clients use (or would like to use) My.Matterport if you don't mind sharing.

    Also, point taken about the ability for editors to delete. Do others have thoughts on this topic?

  • In the early days, before realizing these concerns, we did offer this to one client (large media company) with multiple clients that they resold our services too. It was a very value service for them as they could manage folders - setting up folders for each of their sub accounts, delist if properties sold, tweak and edit text and branding as needed. And more importantly they had access to the links in their account 24/7. These large companies loose links as things get passed from one person to the next and without access if they lost a link we had to resend it. It was a challenge to move client away but we managed.

    We had to find workaround solution so we asked Matterport to allow these larger companies to create their own separate accounts (without need to buy a camera) which they did. But we were still not happy to do this as it opened up a new can of worms. We had to train them on the admin side and show them all the features. They quickly learned how easy it is to add highlight reels, Mattertags, order floorplans etc which we would normally offer as an upsell. Having their account also meant they receive all the marketing material sent by Matterport which they then come to us with added questions. Further complicating the issue is now when we shoot their properties we have to upload first into "our" account so we can tweak model until satisfied and then swap accounts on ipad to upload to "their" account. So we get charged and clients gets charged for processing the same model. And since we are a collaborator in their account we view all their stats and see all their other collaborator profiles. There have also been times a photographer has forgotten to switch accounts and uploaded to wrong account - embarrassing. If any one lands a large account I would strongly advise against suggesting they setup a separate Matterport account.

    And we hope to soon be shooting jobs like museums, historical buildings, schools, etc. These clients would want long term access to their models and depending on the agency these might be one off jobs. A school for instance might need to change out Mattertags during special events. Having ability to create a dedicated portal, brand free, while protecting other collaborators private infomation would certainly add value to the service we present.

  • To further on a collaborator not being able to delete models.

    Case in point - one client we asked to setup their own Matterport account (an extra cost to them). We are setup as collaborator with editor rights so we can upload tweak and finalize the model. As we upload many times we find we have to tweak model again and reupload. And there have times we accidentally upload another client's model forgetting to switch accounts. So now we have models piling up we cannot delete and the client gets confused which is which and moves wrong model to a folder we cannot see. We now rename the models needing to be deleted as "DELETE ME". To date they have yet to delete any models and they sit in their account piling up.

    In our account we have 6 photographers set up as collaborates. Here too models begin to pile up as they cannot delete a model. Only admin (me) can do this.

  • I’m struggling with these issue now.

  • Hey there Les! When you have a moment, can you expand on your struggles? It's really, REALLY helpful for us to understand where the pain points are as we work on improvements! :-)

  • Bill has eloquently spelled out the issues in his post. Thank you Bill for bring up the topic!

    In my business I do not leverage the collaborator feature -and I really want to. Privacy concerns are the biggest for me and my business.

    I envision 2 types of collaborators.

    Collaborator A: Other photographers that I may refer business to; having the ability to upload models to my account but never see other collaborators or collaborator/client information. They must only have the ability to upload models. No other access to model they’ve uploaded, folders, URL’s or iFrame codes -very restrictive.

    Collaborator B: Are clients that I would grant access to models that are specifically generated for them. These collaborators would:

    • Never have the ability to view other collaborators or collaborator information.
    • Only see folders and models I grant access to.

    On the admin side I would love to have check boxes to turn on/off different levels of access to model information and editing features. For example: Model metrics, levels of editing abilities.

    This would be for me, a great start. However this awesome feature evolves, privacy, privacy, privacy please.

  • I agree with everything above and am very stingy with creating a collaborator. We need to have privacy for our accounts, and flexibility in assigning levels. I'd like to see:

    In addition to the 2 collaborator levels, I'd like two levels of editors, the higher level having the ability to delete.

    When the 'Upload' pops-up - include what account you are logged into. This will serve as a reminder to be in the correct account before uploading, helping to prevent accidentally uploading to the wrong account. It's a pain to get models moved between accounts, and it complicates the payments and relationship.

  • Who would get edit-with-delete privileges vs. edit-without-delete?

  • It sounds like everyone here is ready to be site administrators :) I'll just leave this attachment here...

    There are also the separate permission levels for items a user creates.

  • well here we go - another interesting case in point.

    We work with one of the largest builders in the nation and for good reason they prefer to keep all models under their Matterport account. They set me up as collaborator to upload and edit models. I took a look at all their collaborators email addresses which many times lead to their website. I could then compare pricing and learned some charge less some charge more. This is why we do not allow outside collaborations. This information needs to be kept private. We hope Matterport prioritizes this concern as it effects some of the largest companies in the country that are beginning to adopt this technology.

  • Excellent points!!

  • Per MP:

    • User. They can view their own models, upload models, and share models they've uploaded.
    • Admin. Admins can view and edit any model, upload models, and add or delete other users

    I would like to have an Admin. level that allows view, upload, edit, measure, take pics, create MTags, etc. - but not be able to delete models or Users. This level would be for photographers to load daily scans to the account and work their models. They should not be able to delete models accidentally or intentionally. Deletion needs to be reserved for very trusted 'internal' persons.

  • I agree wholeheartedly that we should have the power of privacy. This is the biggest concern especially for us, who are General Contractors. Our projects ARE VERY SENSITIVE. We can't have the public having knowledge of our owners projects and we as a General Contractor MUST have the ability to share these projects with only a select few and not the general public.

  • When it comes to tagging models I definitely think that it makes more sense to allow the client to create their own tags within their models and update them whenever they felt like it.

    Of course, charging a fee to give them the ability to do this is entirely reasonable.

    As mentioned above, I fully agree that they should only be able view and edit their own models but not delete them.

  • Nice point, Bill. I think MP can have an app for our clients who don't necessarily need to buy a camera. We share the models with them so that they can download and showcase them.

  • Can we get a status update on this thread? We have prospective clients who are asking for the ability to restrict access to their models (this could be a deal breaker if we can't provide this functionality).

  • Hi @ssquires32, It appears this thread covers a few different ideas, which are all great and I'm glad to see the conversation is still going. That's exactly what we need to move forward on these suggestions.

    Please let me know what your clients needs are and what they mean by restrict access to their Spaces.

    Thanks,
    Matterport-Amir

  • We are a General Contractor and every one of our projects are of a private nature ESPECIALLY during construction. When we capture different phases of construction, we ONLY want to give access to the project stakeholders. There MUST be a way to LIMIT who can access our "Public" spaces. Maybe Matterport needs to separate the Realestate spaces from the Construction spaces and then give us Contractors the ability to truly keep our projects private but still giving us the ability to share our spaces with select individuals.

  • Hi @agradoville,

    All "Public" Spaces are actually still quite private. Without the direct share link the Space cannot be found in search results. Meaning, the link is like a key to the Space, without it, anyone other than the account admins and collaborators are out of luck. While some may want to publish that link on Facebook and Twitter, others can choose to only email it to a select few.

    I hope that helps.

    -Amir

  • Hi Amir,

    Once you send someone the URL to a model you lose all control of it.

    For example, we have clients who would prefer that their competitors are not able to see their rental apartments.

    The problem is that they need to be able to provide the URLs to their models when they advertise their rental units.

    After the apartment is rented they would still like to keep the models alive in the cloud.

    The reason being is that they are a great way to share information with their tenants (via the matter tags or through Skype sessions ...etc).

    A possible,"semi-work-around", would be to duplicate the model in the cloud (such that the duplicate has a different URL) and then remove the model that was used for advertising the apartment. This would be a bit of a headache and the tenants could still share the "secret" URL if they wanted to.

    The better option is to give each model the ability to have an access list based on e-mail addresses or possibly Facebook or Google+ logins.

    When someone first tries to visit a secure model they will need to fill out an access request form.

    The form will then notify the administrator of that model who can then grant or not grant access.

  • Point taken, @ssquires32. I can certainly understand why companies would not want competitors to have access to their Spaces and your workaround of providing two links, one "internal" for use only between the management company and it's tenants and another "public" version for times when it has to be advertised is a good one.

    I'm not sure what's required to lock each model to a list of viewers with usernames and passwords, but if enough members feel anything less is a security risk, we will certainly look into it. Some options, for example, may be to offer dual authorization. Meaning, before you can access the Space you have to enter a code sent to your phone. The code changes every time you visit the Space or daily. Just a thought :)

  • Glad I found this thread. @Matterport-Amir your answer to provide a key code sent to a phone is great. I just did a job for a private school, and they only want parents to be able to see the model. They want full control over who logs in. Security is a big question I am hearing about more and more. I am meeting the school council next week to discuss options for making sure those who see the model, have permission. Thanks and will stay on this thread as it develops.

  • Hey Brandon, That makes perfect sense to me since I too have kids in school and know about how much of an issue security is. As it is, I would say the school can feel safe in knowing if they only provide the share link with their parents, there would be no reason others would be able to get in. Of course, if a parent then goes and gives the link to their group of friends on Facebook, it is possible the link will be leaked.

    Having dual authorization could solve that, but I'm not sure it would work with such a large community of users as in this case. Let us know if you have any ideas or thoughts as to what you feel could work to make them feel more secure. Maybe they're already doing something with other media they only want shared such as field trip pictures.

  • Hi Amir,

    For organizations that have their own domains with firewalls then it could be possible for them to "self hosting" the models on their own servers.

    If self hosting is not an option then I'm guessing that there must be a way to have some sort of VPN tunnel from the organization's secure server to a non-public site on the Matterport server.

    This solution will work for schools if they are already providing the parents of their students restricted access to their systems.

    I'll do some digging and see if there are any easy ways to do this...

    We definitely know that there are clients who will not use the system until this is in place.

    All the best,

    Stu

  • I agree there are some clients who will require a more secure solution. I don't know what the best options are for them, but am happy to pass along the feedback, which is very much appreciated. If you find anything regarding VPN options, I'm happy to hear and pass that on as well.

  • They should create a login page that leads to the actual model page. Make them responsible for security.

  • They should create a login page that leads to the actual model page. Make them responsible for security.

  • That won't work John - anyone can copy the URL and share it with whoever they like unfortunately.

  • Would it be possible to add another level of security?
    At the moment we only have Private and Public how about restricted access to certain email addresses or 'friends' as per a Facebook account?

Please sign in to leave a comment.