Forum Discussion
Passwordless POC Blocked by CA BYOD Policy – Looking for Workarounds
We’re currently running a POC for passwordless authentication in our environment. One challenge we’ve hit is that our CA BYOD policy blocks personal devices, which prevents users from enabling passwordless sign-in via the Microsoft Authenticator app.
Since Authenticator is not a cloud app, we can’t exclude it from the CA policy using the usual cloud app filters. This is causing issues when users try to register or use passwordless sign-in from their personal phones.
Has anyone dealt with this scenario or found a workaround that allows passwordless sign-in while still enforcing BYOD restrictions? Any ideas, suggestions, or creative solutions would be much appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
1 Reply
- AntonyCapewellCopper Contributor
Please see below for two options which should work for you:
Option 1: Exclude Users from the Strict BYOD Policy and Apply a Core Apps Block- How it works:
- Remove your POC users from the existing BYOD CA policy.
- Create a new CA policy that blocks access to all core business apps (e.g., Microsoft 365, Exchange, SharePoint, Teams) for unmanaged devices.
- This ensures users can still set up Microsoft Authenticator and passwordless sign-in on their personal devices, but they cannot access sensitive apps or data from those devices.
- Pros:
✔ Simple to implement
✔ Maintains data security - Cons:
✖ Requires an additional policy
✖ BYOD devices still interact with the registration process
Option 2: Switch to Authentication Strengths and Require TAP only - How it works:
- Create a new Authentication Strength selecting TAP as the only method
- Change the CA policy from a hard block to require an Authentication Strength that only includes Temporary Access Pass (TAP).
- Configure TAP as one-time use and time-limited (e.g., 30–60 minutes).
- IT administrator provide user a TAP code
- Users use TAP to complete their passwordless setup without relaxing BYOD enforcement for apps.
- Pros:
✔ Strongest security posture
✔ No need to exclude users from existing policies
✔ Fully controlled and auditable - Cons:
✖ Requires TAP issuance workflow
✖ Slightly more admin overhead
- How it works: