Pinned Posts
Forum Widgets
Latest Discussions
October 16 | What’s New in Copilot in Microsoft Purview
Speaker: Patrick David, Principal Product Manager, CxE CAT Compliance Join us for an insider’s look at the latest innovations in Microsoft Purview —where alert triage agents for DLP and IRM are transforming how we respond to sensitive data risks and improve investigation depth and speed. We’ll also dive into powerful new capabilities in Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) with Security Copilot, designed to supercharge your security insights and automation. Whether you're driving compliance or defending data, this session will give you the edge. Register now. Check out the rest of the Security Copilot Skilling Series here.
Auto classifcation policy - Sensitivity Lables - SIT - Fabric Delta Tables
Hi Everyone, Can you please anyone confirm, Can I apply sensitivity labels (Through Auto classification Policy) on Fabric Lakehouse delta tables using Purview Data Map. Its quite urgent, could you please confirm it. Regards, BanuMurali
Approving new Glossary Terms
Thanks for reviewing my question: In the classic glossary, one can set up a workflow that requests for Data Owners to approve new glossary terms before they are published. Im using the new enterprise glossary. It appears that workflows still point to the classic glossary. Does anyone know how to set up this approval. Also is there a way that users can notify data owners/stewards if they have comments or question on a glossary terms,. Thanks.Updates or ETA on expanded Fabric compatibility in Purview?
My organsiation has been developing a greenfields data platform in Fabric since late 2024. We had also provisionally selected Purview as our enterprise data catalogue, expecting that it would in due course be enhanced to be fully compatible with Fabric data repositories. At this point over 12 months later, we are still unable to: Scan our warehouse (the primary repsitory for silver & gold, in our platform) contents in order to make them discoverable as data assets, augment with curated business metadata, automate discovery and classification of sensitive data, etc. Profile the data in our warehouse in order to set up data quality rules and scans. It seems we still cannot even do this for semantic models (?) Given warehouses are hardly new (their Synapse predecessors have been around for years), and especially given they have a SQL endpoint, we're really surprised that nearly two years since Fabric went GA, Purview still isn't compatible with what is surely one of the two fundamental Fabric repositories. We've been making enquiries with our MS contacts, and frequently checking the Purview Roadmap ('What's new in Microsoft Purview') but still haven't seen any indication of if/when warehouses will be supported. Our Head of Data is pretty much out of patience and is asking if we need to go to market for another tool... can the MS folk on here shed any light on these compatibility/functionality gaps with Microsoft's own data platform?Custom SITs fine tunned in MIP
Hello Everyone, Currently working on MS Purview Solutions greenfield deployment project for one of the customer for on-premise data and M365 data. I have created few custom SITs classifiers with regex pattern in the MIP portal almost 3 months ago and it's classifying the data as expected but with some false positives. All of them are fine-tuned to prevent false positives. It's scanning and classifying the newly created M365 data as expected. However it's not reclassifying the previously classified false positive data. How can I forcefully rescan/reclassify the false positive M365 data. I just want to reclassify the data with fine-tuned custom SITs to correctly classify the data before labelling. One more question related to on-prem scanners. I have started the on-prem scanners to scan all the SharePoint sites and Fileshares for any sensitive information. Initially its ran full scan and later it's started as incremental scan. Above scan started before creating the custom SITs and labels. Now I want run a full scan just to classify the data with recommending the labels based on the sensitive data instead of enforcing and applying the label. Can someone throw some light which options need to be select for just recommending the label instead of applying the label. Current configuration as shown below: Any help really appreciated. Regards Anand Sunka
9M365PurvieweDiscoveryInfra touching files in office activity logs
Hi, We use Office Activity Logs through Log Analytics Workspace to report on specific files. We noticed that in our most recent report, many files were accessed by 'ExportWorker' with 'ClientAppName' M365PurvieweDiscoveryInfra. This seems to have happened on specific days a couple of weeks ago where the activity 'file accessed' whenever an ediscovery was run on a location that stored the particular file was registered. This was not the case before if I remember correctly. Does anyone know why this activity was registered as such in the logs and/or has also experienced the exportworker of M365PurvieweDiscoveryInfra touch their files when running an ediscovery? Is this a change with the new eDiscovery? It is also undesirable that users can track incident response employees touching their files in case of an investigation.
