Forum Widgets
Latest Discussions
Insecure Protocol Workbook
Greetings, maybe most orgs have already eliminated insecure protocols and this workbook is no longer functional? I have it added and it appears to be collecting but when I go to open the template it is completely empty. Is the Insecure Protocol aka IP still supported and if so is there any newer documentation than the blog from 2000 around it? I am hoping to identify ntlm by user and device as the domain controllers are all logging this and the MDI agents on them are forwarding this data to Defender for Identity and Sentinel.
event hub and azure sentinel
Hi, I landed up in the situation where I need to set up azure sentinel for my organization. I have to collect logs from all the resources and push it into azure sentinel. here is the hurdles there are tons of data and if I push all of it in azure sentinel it will cost me huge amount. that is why I have to make some queries so that I can take limit amount of data(based on queries) which I can use in azure sentinel. I have gone through multiple article but unable to find which is best in this situation. what I am thinking, all data push to event hub then through event hub it will push to azure data explorer here i will create queries to take limited amount of data then that data I will push to azure sentinel, kindle let me know if something needs to improve or if you have better solution. Thanks
S1 Data Connector malfunctioning?
I am utilizing the S1 codeless data connector available in the content hub. It would seem that only a few tables are actually populating with data now. Threats and Alerts are no longer being captured. Is anyone else experiencing this? Any work arounds available? Any suggestions would be much appreciated!
How do you investigate network anomaly related alerts?
Hello everyone. Using some of the built-in analytical rules such as "Anomaly was observed with IPv6-ICMP Traffic", when you go into the incident event details, its just some numbers of the expected baseline vs actual value. What do you do with this? Similar case with following rules: Anomaly found in Network Session Traffic (ASIM Network Session schema) Anomaly was observed with ESP Traffic Anomaly was observed with Outbound Traffic Anomaly was observed with Unassigned Traffic
IdentityInfo with analytics KQL query
Hi, I'm currently trying to create a KQL query for an alert rule in Sentinel. The log source upon which the alert rule is based, only contains the SAMAccountName, which prevents me from mapping it to an Account entity in the alert. I'm therefore trying to use the IdentityInfo table to lookup the AadUserId of the user, using the SAMAccountName. The issue I'm running into is that I want my query to run every 10 minutes, and look up data from the past 10 minutes, as this is most suitable given the nature of the alert and the log source. This however causes the lookup in the IdentityInfo table to also only check data from the last 10 minutes, which doesn't work as the data in that table may be much older and therefor fail the lookup of the AadUserId of the user. According to the documentation, the IdentityInfo table is refreshed every 14 days, so for it to work I'd have to create a query that checks all logging, including that of the log source, from the past 14 days, which is not what I want. Hopefully some of you have suggestions or ideas on how to make this work. Thanks a lot! MarekPlaybook when incident trigger is not working
Hi I want to create a playbook to automatically revoke session user when incident with specifics title or gravity is created. But after some test the playbook is'nt run autimacally, it work when I run it manually. I did'nt find what I do wrong. See the image and the code bellow. Thanks in advance! { "definition": { "$schema": "https://schema.management.azure.com/providers/Microsoft.Logic/schemas/2016-06-01/workflowdefinition.json#", "contentVersion": "1.0.0.0", "triggers": { "Microsoft_Sentinel_incident": { "type": "ApiConnectionWebhook", "inputs": { "host": { "connection": { "name": "@parameters('$connections')['azuresentinel']['connectionId']" } }, "body": { "callback_url": "@{listCallbackUrl()}" }, "path": "/incident-creation" } } }, "actions": { "Get_incident": { "type": "ApiConnection", "inputs": { "host": { "connection": { "name": "@parameters('$connections')['azuresentinel-1']['connectionId']" } }, "method": "post", "body": { "incidentArmId": "@triggerBody()?['object']?['id']" }, "path": "/Incidents" }, "runAfter": {} }, "Send_e-mail_(V2)": { "type": "ApiConnection", "inputs": { "host": { "connection": { "name": "@parameters('$connections')['office365']['connectionId']" } }, "method": "post", "body": { "To": "email address removed for privacy reasons", "Subject": "Ceci est un test", "Body": "</p> <p class="\"editor-paragraph\"">@{body('Get_incident')?['id']}</p> <p class="\"editor-paragraph\"">@{body('Get_incident')?['properties']?['description']}</p> <p class="\"editor-paragraph\"">@{body('Get_incident')?['properties']?['incidentNumber']}</p> <p>", "Importance": "Normal" }, "path": "/v2/Mail" }, "runAfter": { "Get_incident": [ "Succeeded" ] } } }, "outputs": {}, "parameters": { "$connections": { "type": "Object", "defaultValue": {} } } }, "parameters": { "$connections": { "type": "Object", "value": { "azuresentinel": { "id": "/subscriptions/xxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/locations/xxxxx/managedApis/xxxxxxx", "connectionId": "/subscriptions/xxxxxxx/resourceGroups/xxxxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/connections/azuresentinel-Revoke-RiskySessions1", "connectionName": "azuresentinel-Revoke-RiskySessions1", "connectionProperties": { "authentication": { "type": "ManagedServiceIdentity" } } }, "azuresentinel-1": { "id": "/subscriptions/xxxxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/locations/xxxx/managedApis/xxx", "connectionId": "/subscriptions/xxxxxxx/resourceGroups/xxxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/connections/xxxx", "connectionName": "xxxxxx", "connectionProperties": { "authentication": { "type": "ManagedServiceIdentity" } } }, "office365": { "id": "/subscriptions/xxxxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/locations/xxxxx/managedApis/office365", "connectionId": "/subscriptions/xxxxx/resourceGroups/xxxxxx/providers/Microsoft.Web/connections/o365-Test_Send-email-incident-to-xxxx", "connectionName": "o365-Test_Send-email-incident-to-xxxxx" } } } } }413 Request Entity Too Large error while updating watchlist
We are getting an error while using Watchlists API. We are deleting the Watchlists and then creating the watchlists. While creating this watchlist, before it was giving the error "Cannot upload watchlist ''. Delete is currently in progress" But from last week we are getting a different error pasted below. We need to resolve both errors as many customers are impacted cause of this. We have tried with watchlist items as well rather than using watchlists but getting watchlist items only return 100 records at one time. This is timing out if lists are big. FYI our largest list is around 1.5 MB and I see in the documentation that upto 3.8 MB is supported while pushing watchlists. Here is the full error detail – Encountered an unknown error while processing technology action - Error handling method 'AzureSentinelManagementClient updateWatchListForIntelPush due to [] with response status 413 and body 413 Request Entity Too Large[DevOps] dps.sentinel.azure.com no longer responds
Hello, Ive been using Repository connections in sentinel to a central DevOps for almost two years now. Today i got my first automated email on error for a webhook related to my last commit from the central repo to my Sentinel intances. Its a webhook that is automticly created in connections that are made the last year (the once from 2 years ago dont have this webhook automaticly created). The hook is found in devops -> service hooks -> webhooks "run state change" for each connected sentinel However, after todays run (which was successfull, all content deployed) this hook generates alerts. It says it cant reach: (EU in my case) eu.prod.dps.sentinel.azure.com full url: https://eu.prod.dps.sentinel.azure.com/webhooks/ado/workspaces/[REDACTED]/sourceControls/[REDACTED] So, what happened to this domain? why is it no longer responding and when was it going offline? I THINK this is the hook that sets the status under Sentinel -> Repositories in the GUI. this success status in screenshoot is from 2025/02/06, no new success has been registered in the receiving Sentinel instance. For the Sentinel that is 2 year old and dont have a hook in my DevOps that last deployment status says "Unknown" - so im fairly sure thats what the webhook is doing. So a second question would be, how can i set up a new webhook ? (it want ID and password of the "Azure Sentinel Content Deployment App" - i will never know that password....) so i cant manually add ieather (if the URL ever comes back online or if a new one exists?). please let me know.Sentinel WorkDay connector won't work w/ Entra SSO/SAML
We're using MS Entra SSO/SAML to login to our WorkDay instance. After configuring the Sentinel WorkDay Data connector and hitting "connect" , we are prompted for a username/password. We raised a support ticket but were told that we need to remove SSO from the WorkDay Enterprise application - not an option. These are 2 Microsoft products Entra SSO and Sentinel - is there a way to make them compatible?
Optimisation For Abnormal Deny Rate for Source IP
Hi, I have recently enabled the "Abnormal Deny Rate for Source IP" alert in Microsoft Sentinel and found it to be quite noisy, generating a large number of alerts many of which do not appear to be actionable. I understand that adjusting the learning period is one way to reduce this noise. However, I am wondering if there are any other optimisation strategies available that do not involve simply changing the learning window. Has anyone had success with tuning this rule using: Threshold-based suppression (e.g. minimum deny count)? Source IP allowlists? Frequency filters (e.g. repeated anomalies over multiple intervals)? Combining with other signal types before generating alerts? Open to any suggestions, experiences, or best practices that others may have found effective in reducing false positives while still maintaining visibility into meaningful anomalies. Thanks in advance,
