PIM
Hello, everyone. I need some help. We already use PIM for Just-in-Time activation of administrative functions in Entra ID, but we would like something more granular. For example, we want certain administrative actions in Microsoft 365, such as accessing sensitive data or performing critical tasks, to only be possible upon specific request and approval, even if the user has already activated the function in PIM. Is this only possible with PIM, or is there another feature in Microsoft 365 for this type of control?Display On-prem Password Policy on SSPR Page
Hi All We are beginning to rollout SSPR with on-prem writeback. So far so good. Is there a way we can display our on-prem password policy requirements on the SSPR screen? I have seen the MS docs, but can't really make any sense of them so any help would be greatly appreciated. SK
AADSTS50105 error message is unreadable for end users — UX improvement suggestion
1. What’s wrong with the current error message a. It’s written for administrators, not users The message exposes: Internal system names (AADSTS50105) GUIDs (aaaabbbb-cccc-dddd-eeee-ffff01234567) Identity provider jargon (“direct member of a group with access”) None of this helps the person who sees the error decide what to do next. b. The actual problem is buried in a wall of text The real issue is simply: You don’t have permission to access this app. Instead, the message forces users to: Read a long paragraph Decode domain-specific language Guess which part matters Cognitively, this is high effort for low payoff. c. “Contact your administrator” is vague and unhelpful Users ask: Which administrator? IT? Security? App owner? Their manager? What should they say? Without context, users either: Ignore the error Forward screenshots randomly Open the wrong support ticket d. Error codes without guidance increase support load AADSTS50105 may be meaningful internally, but: Users don’t know whether to Google it Support teams receive unclear tickets (“it doesn’t work”) This paradoxically raises support cost instead of lowering it. 2. What a better error message should do A good error message answers four questions in order: What happened? Why did it happen (in plain language)? What can the user do next? Who specifically can help? And it does so in under 30 seconds of reading time. 3. Example of a much better error message You don’t have access to [APPLICATION] Your account (email address removed for privacy reasons) isn’t currently authorized to use [APPLICATION]. This usually means: You haven’t been added to the required security group, or Access hasn’t been requested or approved yet. What to do next If you believe you should have access, contact IT Service Desk or your [APPLICATION] owner and request access. Helpful details to include in your request Application name: [APPLICATION] Your email: email address removed for privacy reasons Error reference: Access not assigned (Error ID: AADSTS50105 — for IT use) 4. Optional but high-impact improvement: Add a “Request Access” button or link One-click takes users to: ServiceNow / Jira / internal form Auto-populates app name and user email Administrators configure support link when configuring the applicationGrant Just-in-Time Admin Access with Microsoft Entra PIM
In my lab, I worked with Microsoft Entra Privileged Identity Management (PIM) to grant Just-in-Time admin access. Instead of permanent assignments, users become eligible for roles and must activate them only when needed. Steps I tested: - Configured roles as eligible rather than permanent - Required MFA and approval for role activation - Verified access automatically expired after the time window This approach reduces standing privileges and aligns with Zero Trust by securing privileged access. Curious — does your org still keep permanent Global Admins, or have you moved to JIT with PIM?
Block all 365 apps except Outlook via CA
Trying to block 365 for a subset of users, except email. The old app-based CA rules made this easy. The new 'resource' based setup... I'm not even sure if it's possible. CoPilot just keeps telling me to use the old version of CA, because it hasn't clued into Microsoft's downgrade cycle. If I try to filter by resource attribute, I'm told I don't have permission to do so. I'm the global admin. Here's what searching for Outlook gives me and Exchange Advice? We ARE intune licensed, but i'm not sure App Protection Policies will help here. The intention is to block BYOD from accessing anything but Outlook / Exchange. That is, Mobile devices that aren't (whatever param I decide on)Entra Verified ID: CAP Preview Feature to require Face Check
During one of the MS demo video, I saw a preview feature for Conditional Access Policy to require "Face Check". I have now enabled Entra Verified ID and also switched on Face Check. When I create a new CAP, I do not see the "Require Face Check" option under the Grant. How can I request to have this feature released to my tenant? Thanks!"sign-in frequency" every time not working as expected and described.
We have several PIM managed groups in an Entra ID tenant. Members are added as eligible. For the activation of the memberships an Authentication Context is created which is linked to a conditional access policy. The conditional access policy requires MFA with phishing resistant authentication factors, and "sign in frequency" is set to "every time". When activating membership authentication is required. When activating membership to another group (>5min in between activations) one would expect to request an authentication prompt, as described in Microsoft documentation. In Firefox this works as expected, In Edge and Chrome there is no re-authentication required every time, and sometimes even not for the first activation, not even in an in-private session. The device is not joined to this tenant, and the account used to log on is different from the one used to logon to the Entra ID portal. This is a test tenant with only those CA rules configured, no other policies or rules are in place. Anyone experiencing the same, or knowing the cause?Add members to a dynamic sec-grp excluding users with a specific "serviceplanid" assigned license
Hello, I am trying to populate dynamically a security group that shoud contain all members with a specific attribut value and trying to filter the groupe membership based on a serviceplanId assigned to members (user.extensionAttribute9 -startsWith "83") -and (user.accountEnabled -eq True) -and (user.mail -ne null) -and (User.AssignedPlans -any (assignedPlan.servicePlanId -ne "818523f5-016b-4355-9be8-ed6944946ea7" -and assignedPlan.capabilityStatus -eq "Enabled")) How to exclude members with the ServicePlanId : "818523f5-016b-4355-9be8-ed6944946ea7" from the list of the groupe members ?
