Pinned Posts
Forum Widgets
Latest Discussions
Issue wiht the downgraing label
Hello, We are experiencing an issue with sensitivity labels configured for SharePoint using Confidential – Encrypted. When User A uploads a file with this label applied automatically rom the SharePoint library , User B is unable to downgrade the label to a different one and receives an error message. We have confirmed that both User A and User B have the same permissions (Co-author access) to the file and location. Could you please advise what might be causing this or what additional permissions or configuration may be required? Any help would be much appreciated.miro2022Feb 05, 2026Copper Contributor7Views0likes0Comments[HELP] "Action required for browser protections" alert
Hello! I have an Endpoint DLP policy with Device location. After several scoping changes (device groups, inclusions/exclusions) to narrow it to a specific target group, the orange alert appeared: Action required for browser protections. One or more policies were not applied in Edge for Business. This could be due to a policy sync issue, lack of required permissions, or an issue with the server. Either resync these policies or contact an admin with the required permissions to resync. After resyncing, you might still see this message for up to 1 day while the system completes the sync and activates protections. The policies were working before. Clicked Resync multiple times, only for the error to return. Please help!DevincitFeb 05, 2026Occasional Reader6Views0likes0Comments[HELP]"Action required for browser protections" alert
Hello! I have an Endpoint DLP policy with the Devices location. After multiple scoping changes (device groups, inclusions/exclusions) to narrow it to a specific target group, the alert appeared: Action required for browser protections. One or more policies were not applied in Edge for Business. This could be due to a policy sync issue, lack of required permissions, or an issue with the server. Either resync these policies or contact an admin with the required permissions to resync. After resyncing, you might still see this message for up to 1 day while the system completes the sync and activates protections. The policies were working before. Clicked Resync multiple times, banner disappears briefly, only to return. Please help!DevincitFeb 05, 2026Occasional Reader3Views0likes0CommentsPurview Data Map scanning Microsoft Fabric and no classifications applied or scan rule sets
Microsoft Purview cannot currently apply built-in or custom classifications (including sensitive information types) to metadata discovered from Microsoft Fabric workspace scans. While Purview can register Fabric workspaces and extract structural metadata (workspaces, Lakehouses, Warehouses, tables, columns, and limited lineage), classification rules are not executed against Fabric assets in the same way they are for supported sources such as Azure SQL, ADLS Gen2, or on-prem databases. This results in classification gaps across a core enterprise analytics platform. Why This Is a Significant Service Omission 1. Breaks the Core Value Proposition of Purview 2. Undermines Regulatory and Risk Management Controls 3. Creates an Inconsistent Governance Experience 4. Blocks Downstream Purview Capabilities 5. Forces Anti-Patterns and Workarounds The lack of automated classification support for Microsoft Fabric workspace data represents a material service omission in Microsoft Purview, significantly limiting its effectiveness as a unified data governance platform and introducing avoidable compliance, operational, and assurance risks—particularly in regulated environments. Are there plans to improve this and if so what are the timescales?AdamPurviewProFeb 04, 2026Copper Contributor24Views0likes0CommentsEncryption disappears in Outlook - Sensitivity Label not working
Hello everyone, we implemented Sensitivity Labels at our client and have iconsistent and unexpected behavior, we cannot explain. Maybe some of you can help or have ideas on whats going on: Scenario / Use Case A customer is using Sensitivity Labels to encrypt emails in Exchange Online. Label configuration: The sensitivity label applies encryption The label is scoped (published) to a Microsoft 365 group User A and User B are members of this Microsoft 365 group and therefore can apply the label User are licensed with M365 Business Premium The label is published and available to User A and User B (member of above M365 group) User C is an external recipient and not included in the label’s publishing scope Observed Behaviors Scenario 1 – Encryption Lost When Forwarded Externally User A (internal) sends an email to User B (internal) using a sensitivity label that applies encryption. User B receives the email correctly: The lock icon in Outlook is displayed, the message is encrypted as expected User B forwards the email to User C (external) User C receives the forwarded email unencrypted: No lock icon is shown, User C can read the entire conversation history, including content that was previously encrypted Scenario 2 – Encryption Disappears Within an Internal Email Conversation In addition to the external forwarding scenario, we are also observing the following behavior within an internal email thread: User A sends an encrypted email to User B using the sensitivity label. User B replies to User A: The reply remains encrypted User A replies again within the same conversation Suddenly, the encryption disappears: The lock icon is no longer shown The message and the full conversation history is no longer protected This happens without any user action to remove or change the sensitivity label. Key Observation Both scenarios occur intermittently: Sometimes encryption behaves as expected Sometimes encryption disappears “out of nowhere” The behavior is not reliably reproducible, which makes troubleshooting very difficult. Any help is appreciated!pmb90Feb 03, 2026Copper Contributor114Views1like2CommentsDatascan not picking up the schema of .parquet files ParquetFormat JavaInvocationException happened
Since about a week we have a problem with our datascan on ADLS not picking up the schema of .parquet files. It does pick up on the asset but not on the schema of said asset. The parquet files are perfectly readable and writeable with Fabric/spark. Purview had no issue picking them up before last week, but it seems that something has changed on the Microsoft side? Anyone else facing these issues recently? 2026-02-02T06:21:47.116Z,SystemError,ReadData,https://xxx.dfs.core.windows.net/landingzone/masterdata/someotherfile.parquet,ParquetFormat JavaInvocationException happened,ScanErr0000OlivierSweepFeb 02, 2026Copper Contributor10Views0likes0CommentsUnexpected Service Principal Additions After Purview Label Schema Migration
Hi everyone, I recently migrated our Microsoft Purview label schema in our tenant and noticed some interesting audit log entries right after the migration. Specifically, Entra ID recorded Add service principal actions for: Microsoft Edge management service Purview Ecosystem (https://api.purview.microsoft.com) Both events were logged under my admin account, with the User-Agent showing kiota-dotnet/1.16.4, which suggests an automated process or Microsoft Graph SDK interaction. Here are some details: Operation: Add service principal Result: Success Tags: disableLegacyUserImpersonationClient, disableLegacyUserImpersonationResource, and for Purview: GitCreatedApp Triggered at: The exact time I completed the label schema migration. My question: Is this expected behavior when migrating Purview label schemas? Are these service principals required for Purview and Edge management integration? Any best practices to confirm these additions are legitimate and secure? Thanks in advance for your insights! Best regards StephanStephanGeeFeb 02, 2026Steel Contributor107Views1like3CommentsHow to offboarding endpoint from Purview
Hi I'm a fresh user of Purview and after creating policies linked to Exchange, I've enabled the onboarding of computer. Unfortunately, all Defender endpoints have been onboarded, and I've not be able to define which one was concerned. Now, I would like to offboard all those devices from purview and only keep them in Defender without any DLP protection. I tried to remove them with the onboarding script, but my endpoints are still present in Purview. How can I completely remove them? Thanks for your help YohannCovUser06Feb 02, 2026Copper Contributor335Views0likes4CommentsTest DLP Policy: On-Prem
We have DLP policies based on SIT and it is working well for various locations such as Sharepoint, Exchange and Endpoint devices. But the DLP policy for On-Prem Nas shares is not matching when used with Microsoft Information Protection Scanner. DLP Rule: Conditions Content contains any of these sensitive info types: Credit Card Number U.S. Bank Account Number U.S. Driver's License Number U.S. Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) U.S. Social Security Number (SSN) The policy is visible to the Scanner and it is being logged as being executed MSIP.Lib MSIP.Scanner (30548) Executing policy: Data Discovery On-Prem, policyId: 85........................ and the MIP reports are listing files with these SITs The results Information Type Name - Credit Card Number U.S. Social Security Number (SSN) U.S. Bank Account Number Action - Classified Dlp Mode -- Test Dlp Status -- Skipped Dlp Comment -- No match There is no other information in logs. Why is the DLP policy not matching and how can I test the policy ? thanks97Views1like2CommentsTeams Private Channels Reengineered: Compliance & Data Security Actions Needed by Sept 20, 2025
You may have missed this critical update, as it was published only on the Microsoft Teams blog and flagged as a Teams change in the Message Center under MC1134737. However, it represents a complete reengineering of how private channel data is stored and managed, with direct implications for Microsoft Purview compliance policies, including eDiscovery, Legal Hold, Data Loss Prevention (DLP), and Retention. 🔗 Read the official blog post here New enhancements in Private Channels in Microsoft Teams unlock their full potential | Microsoft Community Hub What’s Changing? A Shift from User to Group Mailboxes Historically, private channel data was stored in individual user mailboxes, requiring compliance and security policies to be scoped at the user level. Starting September 20, 2025, Microsoft is reengineering this model: Private channels will now use dedicated group mailboxes tied to the team’s Microsoft 365 group. Compliance and security policies must be applied to the team’s Microsoft 365 group, not just individual users. Existing user-level policies will not govern new private channel data post-migration. This change aligns private channels with how shared channels are managed, streamlining policy enforcement but requiring manual updates to ensure coverage. Why This Matters for Data Security and Compliance Admins If your organization uses Microsoft Purview for: eDiscovery Legal Hold Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Retention Policies You must review and update your Purview eDiscovery and legal holds, DLP, and retention policies. Without action, new private channel data may fall outside existing policy coverage, especially if your current policies are not already scoped to the team’s group. This could lead to significant data security, governance and legal risks. Action Required by September 20, 2025 Before migration begins: Review all Purview policies related to private channels. Apply policies to the team’s Microsoft 365 group to ensure continuity. Update eDiscovery searches to include both user and group mailboxes. Modify DLP scopes to include the team’s group. Align retention policies with the team’s group settings. Migration will begin in late September and continue through December 2025. A PowerShell command will be released to help track migration progress per tenant. Migration Timeline Migration begins September 20, 2025, and continues through December 2025. Migration timing may vary by tenant. A PowerShell command will be released to help track migration status. I recommend keeping track of any additional announcements in the message center.591Views2likes1Comment
Resources
Tags
- purview139 Topics
- microsoft purview85 Topics
- Information Protection26 Topics
- Sensitivity Labels24 Topics
- ediscovery16 Topics
- Azure Purview15 Topics
- endpoint dlp14 Topics
- data loss prevention13 Topics
- Retention Policy13 Topics
- api10 Topics