Forum Widgets
Latest Discussions
New Blog | Microsoft Defender for Endpoint’s Safe Deployment Practices
By jweberMSFT For customers it is key to understand that software vendors use safe deployment practices that help them build resilient processes that maintain productivity. This blog addresses Microsoft Defender for Endpoint’s architectural design and its approach to delivering security updates, which is grounded in Safe Deployment Practices (SDP). Microsoft Defender for Endpoint helps protect organizations against sophisticated adversaries while optimizing for resiliency, performance, and compatibility, following best practices for managing security tools in Windows. Security tools running on Windows can balance security and reliability through careful product design, as described in this post by David Weston. Security vendors can use optimized sensors which operate within kernel mode for data collection and enforcement, limiting the risk of reliability issues. The remainder of the security solution, including managing updates, loading content, and user interaction, can occur isolated within user mode, where any reliability issues are less impactful. This architecture enables Defender for Endpoint to limit its reliance on kernel mode while protecting customers in real-time. Read the full post here: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint’s Safe Deployment Practices
Inconsistent Microsoft Defender Behaviour
Hi everyone, We have an issue whereby across several intune managed devices with identical defender AV policy, signature version, and platform version, we've found inconsistent detection/remediation behaviour. Some devices block malicious files instantly on download (expected and correct). Others only detect on open rather than on write, or log a successful detection/remediation action without the file actually being removed from disk, it remains fully accessible indefinitely. Since this occurs despite identical config, we're concerned this is a genuine gap in automatic remediation reliability that could affect real threats, not just our test files. Troubleshooting completed, issue persists: - Ruled out exclusions (path/extension/process) - Confirmed PUA protection, real-time protection, tamper protection, and all granular protection flags enabled/healthy - Removed orphaned third-party AV registrations from WSC (previously caused Defender to show as "snoozed") - Confirmed filter driver (WdFilter) loaded correctly, no conflicts - Cleared stuck "detected but not remediated" threat entries - Ruled out file locks preventing remediation - Cleared cached signature state, forced fresh signature pull - Attempted full platform reset - Confirmed cloud protection/MAPS enabled and reachable - Increased CloudBlockLevel to test enforcement aggressiveness Does anyone have any idea what could be happening here? ThanksMDVM - Patch Publication Date
Dear Microsoft MDVM Development Team, Please could you as quickly as possible implement the "Patch Publication Date" for the vulnerabilities you report on. Any major Vulnerability management platform has this simple field/record please advise you are implementing this and the timeframe for it? Kind Regards, Graeme
Defender Web Content filtering for Chrome/Firefox
Hello all, We have recently configured Web Content Filtering. I am struggling with finding what is required to have the setup effect on Chrome and Firefox, exactly as it is seen via Edge. Has anyone had success with this? Any information would be greatly appreciated. thank you.Understanding AI workloads on Linux
Hi everyone, I’m a PM working on security for Linux environments and trying to better understand how AI workloads are actually showing up in production today. Would appreciate hearing from folks here: Are you running any AI workloads on Linux today? Or actively exploring? What does your deployment/setup look like — e.g., model training/inference, agents, MCP servers, data pipelines, etc.? How are you thinking about securing this stack, if at all? If you’re open to a quick 30-min chat, I’d love to learn more from your experience as well. Thanks in advance — this will directly help shape where we invest next.
DVM Certificate Inventory Shows No Data Despite Healthy Endpoints in Defender for Endpoint
Hi Team, I'm testing Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management. Current status: - Defender Vulnerability Management Add-on enabled - Certificates inventory tab is visible - Software Inventory populated - Security Recommendations populated - Windows and Linux devices onboarded - Linux mdatp health = healthy:true, licensed:true, cloud_enabled:true - Devices have local certificates installed - Certificate Inventory page shows "No data" The DVM Add-on was enabled more than 36 hours ago. Has anyone experienced a delay in Certificate Inventory population or are there additional prerequisites beyond DVM licensing and device onboarding? Thanks.
Microsoft Defender false positive and WDSI submission details page bug
Hello, I am the developer and publisher of Pulse Launcher, a legitimate signed Windows application / Minecraft mod launcher. I already submitted this through Microsoft Security Intelligence and also opened a Microsoft Q&A thread, but I am posting here because the WDSI submission portal itself appears to be broken for these submissions. Related Microsoft Q&A thread: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5929545/microsoft-defender-false-positive-and-wdsi-submiss There are two related issues: 1. Microsoft Defender cloud ML false positives keep appearing on public multi-engine scan results for the same signed application/product family. The Microsoft detection name changes across rescans and equivalent builds, including: - PUA:Win32/Puwaders.C!ml - Program:Win32/Wacapew.C!ml - Trojan:Win32/Wacatac.B!ml - Trojan:Win32/Wacatac.C!ml - Trojan:Win32/Sabsik.EN.A!ml 2. Microsoft Security Intelligence submissions are visible in Submission history and show status "In progress", but opening the submission details page returns: "The details for the submission were not found or the submission has expired." Affected submission IDs: - dd476efa-fc04-4f13-82cf-631bbfd145a6 - efc6514c-d700-4d6a-a7e2-67a9a83334a2 - ff8d04b7-c5fc-4a05-bd53-ee7ac5981284 File details: - File name: pulse_launcher.exe - SHA-256: def6059c07c3e1f4a8c5649a1bbf190d4f355ee8e8b88c55c5b404edee99ecc8 - Signer: FOP Haponiuk Mykola Viktorovych - Certificate: GlobalSign EV Code Signing certificate The executable is not VMProtect-packed or obfuscated. It is EV-signed. A previous Microsoft analyst response stated that the file did not meet Microsoft criteria for malware or PUA, but Microsoft cloud detections continue to appear. Could someone route this to Microsoft Defender Security Intelligence / malware analysis, or advise how to escalate WDSI submissions that exist in history but whose details endpoint returns "not found or expired"? Thank you.
Content blocked by IT Admin
I am the IT Admin and I keep seeing this Windows Security pop up notification on my system about blocking mtalk.google.com. I do not have this installed nor can I find anything about it in the registry. How can I find and remove this completely to stop these notifications? Driving me crazy....
Ways to fetch quarantine files
We are working with quarantine files and have a few questions: 1. Is there a public API available to retrieve quarantined files from Microsoft Defender for Endpoint? 2. Is there a documented method to map an alert or a file SHA-1/SHA-256 hash to the corresponding object in the Defender quarantine store? 3. Is there a way to retrieve quarantined files other than using a PowerShell script through the Live Response API?Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and WDAC audit logs not include kernel audit/blocks
While testing WDAC on a fully patched Win11 pro machine - I noticed that kernel audit/block events do not get collected by MDE in the advanced hunting portal, only user mode audit/blocks are collected. Can anyone confirm they see this too and is this by design? My test case is to use a Strict Kernel Mode WDAC policy (as per: https://github.com/HotCakeX/Harden-Windows-Security/wiki/WDAC-policy-for-BYOVD-Kernel-mode-only-protection) which is active, using the global secure access client as my test, when the machine boots, the below event is generated locally on the machine: This event is never shown on the MDE advanced hunting portal, though user events do show. Examples of events that are coming through: Not receiving these events centrally for auditing would make deploying a kernel mode wdac control impossible. Would be amazing if Microsoft product team could look into this and resolve as these alerts should be captured as well please to facilitate deployment of more secure controls.
