The CISO Cheat Sheet to Microsoft Digital Defense Report 2026
I know we’re all busy, so I’ve pulled the most important data from this year’s Microsoft Digital Defense Report into one short read. The full report is well worth exploring, but this article focuses on the numbers and trends most relevant to security leaders. This year’s edition shows that AI is lowering the time, expertise and cost required to discover and exploit weaknesses, enabling attackers to operate with greater speed, scale and autonomy. The report describes this as AI “changing the physics of cybersecurity”: attack timelines are compressing and agentic systems are beginning to automate more of the attack lifecycle. Trend 1: Time has collapsed The clearest finding is about speed. Vulnerability discovery is increasingly running ahead of remediation, while the time from discovery to weaponisation is shrinking. In the AI era, weaponisation can follow in hours. Vulnerability discovery and weaponisation now often needs only a well-written prompt. The median time from discovery in the wild to weaponisation is below 24 hours. Vulnerabilities were on track for a record estimated 72,000 CVEs in 2026. The report expects a multi-year period in which the number of known but unpatched vulnerabilities rises sharply before eventually declining. The median time from container start to first exploit attempt is 5.3 hours. The ransomware actor Storm-1175 moved from web-facing exploitation to deploying Medusa ransomware in as little as 24 hours. CISA added over 110 CVEs to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalogue between November 2025 and May 2026, most within a week of disclosure. The mismatch with enterprise reality is the uncomfortable part. The report says the disclosure-to-exploitation window has shrunk to single-digit days. Between November 2025 and May 2026, CISA added more than 110 vulnerabilities to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalogue, most within a week of disclosure. In one example, Storm-1175 moved from exploiting a web-facing vulnerability to deploying Medusa ransomware in as little as 24 hours. Microsoft’s Red Team makes an important point: a patch is also a disclosure. Every fix points attackers towards the flaw it closes. As AI-assisted analysis makes reversing patches faster and more reliable, the report argues that patch velocity, not simply patch availability, becomes the control that matters. Trend 2: Attack chains are gaining autonomy The report charts a clear progression: September–November 2025: AI assists in orchestrating a campaign, as in the Anthropic-reported espionage case. April–June 2026: Full-chain autonomy is demonstrated in labs. July 2026: Real-world autonomous attacks of increasing complexity appear. Two frontier models, Mythos and GPT-5.5, completed a 32-step attack chain against an emulated enterprise with no human help. The test environment had no defenders. The UK AI Security Institute reached a similar finding independently. GPT-5.5 was the second model to solve its end-to-end corporate network attack simulation, a task AISI estimates would take a human about 20 hours. Open-weight models lag closed models at orchestrating attacks by about seven months. In the wild, early July 2026 saw the first documented automated ransomware extortion attack, named JADEPUFFER by Sysdig. Microsoft has seen AI-orchestrated intrusions that share elements with it. Initial access consistently came from internet-exposed services running known-vulnerable software. The report is measured on this point. Volumes of AI-orchestrated activity remain low. In most observed real-world operations, complex end-to-end intrusions still retain meaningful human direction. The Red Team's framing is the most useful one: AI doesn't create a new class of attack, it collapses the effort needed to find and exploit existing attack paths. Trend 3: AI has become an attack surface The report's second takeaway is that attackers are already targeting AI itself. The adoption numbers explain why. 88% of enterprises are experimenting with agents, and 82% of leaders plan broader rollouts within 12–18 months. The report cites industry projections of roughly 1.3 billion agents in production by 2028. What attackers are doing to AI systems: Four techniques accounted for roughly 90% of observed attack activity in telemetry from Azure AI workloads: malicious link injection (52%), jailbreaks (16%), tool and agent abuse (12%), and identity and credential abuse (10%). Memory poisoning: An attacker who can place content anywhere an agent reads can often place it where the agent remembers. Email is the dominant pathway the Red Team has observed. Human-in-the-loop isn't a complete control: Red team testing saw approval prompts ignored, or bypassed by a policy stored in poisoned memory. Developer tools turned against their owners: The "s1ngularity" malware hijacked locally installed AI command-line tools to hunt for secrets. It leaked about 2,000 secrets and 20,000 files across 225 victims. AI browsers: In daily use at more than 40% of organisations in Microsoft's dataset, they were the initial infection vector in incidents involving 57 malware families in a May 2026 analysis. Chat histories as a target: Malicious AI-assistant extensions reached nearly 900,000 installs and more than 20,000 enterprise tenants, harvesting AI chat histories that often contain code, architecture and credentials. The identity implications are direct. Each agent needs its own identity, not one borrowed from an employee, and a named human sponsor. The report also treats revocation latency, the time to cut off a compromised agent, as a measured outcome. Trend 4: The front door is still identity AI changes the speed and personalisation of social engineering. It hasn't changed where attacks start. Initial access in Defender Experts data: User execution: 30% Valid accounts: 20% Malicious copy-and-paste: 13% Phishing: 11% Together, user execution and valid accounts account for over half of observed activity. In incident response engagements, phishing as an initial access vector jumped from 7% to 23% year on year. The standout numbers: ClickFix: Defender saw user-pasted malicious commands on more than 1.1 million unique devices between February and early May 2026, roughly an 8x increase. AiTM: URLs accounted for 45% of the identified phishing techniques in the report’s breakdown. Separately, the share of AiTM phishing and token-theft attacks more than doubled during the first six months of 2026, although the report notes that their overall share remained comparatively small. Teams vishing: Weekly confirmed malicious volume increased 502% year on year. Per attempt, 48% of vishing calls kept the victim engaged for more than 20 seconds, and 30% lasted more than one minute. When a call succeeds, attackers can persuade the victim to install a remote-management tool and complete reconnaissance in two minutes or less. Business contact impersonation (BCI): The report introduces this term for conversations that start with a trusted-looking contact. Microsoft detected more than 46 million attacks in 12 months, with a 121% spike in April 2026. The share of first-contact messages that explicitly asked for money or documents fell from 17% to 3%. The first message is deliberately bland, like "Are you at your desk?" Password attacks declined 26% year on year, which the report describes as strong evidence that MFA and passkeys are forcing attackers to pivot. That pivot includes techniques such as fatigue attacks, AiTM phishing and token theft designed to circumvent conventional MFA. Trend 5: Attackers are inheriting trust rather than breaking in The report's headline theme is that risk is increasingly interconnected. Threats travel through the trusted relationships between identities, software supply chains, partners and cloud platforms. The numbers: Supply chain: Major open-source ecosystems saw attacks roughly every ten days, accelerating through Q2 2026. Shai-Hulud 2.0 affected 25,000 repositories. Megalodon backdoored 5,561 GitHub repositories in under six hours. Trusted signing: In May 2026, Microsoft disrupted Fox Tempest, a "malware-signing-as-a-service" operation that obtained genuine certificates for ransomware loaders and infostealers. Microsoft revoked over a thousand fraudulent code-signing certificates. Legitimate access: An unsanctioned remote monitoring tool is now one of the most reliable mid-stage indicators of a human-operated intrusion. Cloud identity: Cloud identity abuse was the most observed technique against critical infrastructure, representing 78% of the technique mix in Microsoft’s data for March to June 2026. Hybrid intrusions: The Storm-2885 case showed an attacker using a privileged cloud identity to close and downgrade security alerts. The report says identity governance and alert-handling workflows deserve Tier 0 treatment. Dwell time: DART data shows a statistically significant increase in dwell time year on year, meaning organisations took longer to detect intrusions. Ransomware shows the same ecosystem pattern. Qilin led leak-site data with 16.4% of victims, up 386%. Defender detections tell a different story, with Akira at 22%. Trend 6: Defence works best when it's connected The report is not only a catalogue of threats. The strongest defensive evidence: Disruption works. Following the March 2026 disruption, Tycoon2FA activity had fallen 95% from its November 2025 peak by June. Its share of CAPTCHA-gated phishing declined from 76% in December 2025 to 12% in June 2026. Correlation is the highest-leverage variable. The report argues that how well defenders share and correlate signals across endpoint, identity, cloud, email and network is one of the highest-leverage strategic variables under their control. AI is also changing defensive operations. The report describes AI-assisted triage, incident summarisation, hunting-query generation and detection engineering as ways to accelerate investigations and allow analysts to concentrate on higher-value work. Automated disruption can compress response time. The report says that when a correlated incident reaches a defined confidence threshold, defensive systems can automatically isolate devices, disable compromised accounts, revoke sessions or quarantine affected cloud resources. It also stresses the importance of appropriate governance and human oversight for high-risk AI actions. The report also recommends changing what leaders measure. It suggests moving from patches deployed to exposure reduced, detection coverage increased and time-to-mitigate compressed. What the MDDR recommends: ten security priorities The report starts its recommendations with the foundations: Secure by Design, Secure by Default and Secure Operations, applied through identity-centric Zero Trust. Microsoft says these keep the priorities below durable as AI adds more identities, applications, agents and dependencies to govern. Govern cyber risk at leadership level. Report identity exposure, patch latency, agent permissions, critical dependencies, dwell time and recovery readiness to the board. Defend identity as the primary control plane. Deploy passkeys and phishing-resistant MFA, reduce privilege and govern human and non-human identities. Invalidate and rotate tokens and session credentials quickly. Establish governance, visibility and data controls for AI. Keep visibility of approved AI tools, services and agents, and monitor for unauthorised or unmanaged use. Apply sensitivity-aware access and data protection to the data those systems can reach. Reduce exposure and edge risk. Continuously discover internet-facing assets and patch edge devices quickly. Centralise high-fidelity logging, enforce strong authentication and combine network visibility with threat intelligence. Focus on cross-signal correlation. Correlate endpoint, identity, cloud, application, email and network signals to detect intrusions earlier. Correlation also helps defenders anticipate attack paths and likely targets. Enact a continuous threat and vulnerability management model. Combine asset visibility, vulnerability identification, threat detection and AI-accelerated insight into a single continuous programme. Validate exposure through proactive testing. Run assume-breach exercises on cloud services, SaaS platforms, APIs and workflow automation. Prioritise them by where your highest-value data is stored, accessed or aggregated. Secure software dependencies. Harden software installation, keep a software inventory and validate provenance. Monitor packages and prepare for rapid containment. Participate in collective defence. Share actionable threat indicators and victim-informed intelligence with trusted partners and law enforcement. This supports coordinated tracking, investigation and disruption. Prepare for long-horizon technology transitions. Build a cryptographic inventory and advance post-quantum planning alongside AI governance. Read together, the numbers tell one story: the attacker’s workflow is becoming faster and less expensive. AI can shorten vulnerability discovery, exploitation, secret discovery and lateral movement, while organisations still face the slower operational work of testing, coordinating and deploying safe changes across complex environments. At the same time, agent identities can proliferate faster than organisations can inventory, govern and revoke them The defining question for boards today is not whether disruption will occur, but whether the organization can continue operating, contain harm, recover quickly, and maintain trust when it does. Source: Microsoft Digital Defense Report 2026, Version 1.1. Reporting period: July 2025–June 2026.Step by Step: 2-Tier PKI Lab
Purpose of this blog Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) is the backbone of secure digital identity management, enabling encryption, digital signatures, and certificate-based authentication. However, neither setting up a PKI nor management of certificates is something most IT pros do on a regular basis and given the complexity and vastness of the subject it only makes sense to revisit the topic from time to time. What I have found works best for me is to just set up a lab and get my hands dirty with the topic that I want to revisit. One such topic that I keep coming back to is PKI - be it for creating certificate templates, enrolling clients, or flat out creating a new PKI itself. But every time I start deploying a lab or start planning a PKI setup, I end up spending too much time sifting through the documentations and trying to figure out why my issuing certificate authority won't come online! To make my life easier I decided to create a cheatsheet to deploy a simple but secure 2-tier PKI lab based on industry best practices that I thought would be beneficial for others like me, so I decided to polish it and make it into a blog. This blog walks through deploying a two-tier PKI hierarchy using Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) on Windows Server: an offline Root Certification Authority (Root CA) and an online Issuing Certification Authority (Issuing CA). We’ll cover step-by-step deployment and best practices for securing the root CA, conducting key ceremonies, and maintaining Certificate Revocation Lists (CRLs). Overview: Two-Tier PKI Architecture and Components In a two-tier PKI, the Root CA sits at the top of the trust hierarchy and issues a certificate only to the subordinate Issuing CA. The Root CA is kept offline (disconnected from networks) to protect its private key and is typically a standalone CA (not domain-joined). The Issuing CA (sometimes called a subordinate or intermediate CA) is kept online to issue certificates to end-entities (users, computers, services) and is usually an enterprise CA integrated with Active Directory for automation and certificate template support. Key components: Offline Root CA: A standalone CA, often on a workgroup server, powered on only when necessary (initial setup, subordinate CA certificate signing, or periodic CRL publishing). By staying offline, it is insulated from network threats. Its self-signed certificate serves as the trust anchor for the entire PKI. The Root CA’s private key must be rigorously protected (ideally by a Hardware Security Module) because if the root is compromised, all certificates in the hierarchy are compromised. Online Issuing CA: An enterprise subordinate CA (domain-joined) that handles day-to-day certificate issuance for the organization. It trusts the Root CA (via the root’s certificate) and is the one actually responding to certificate requests. Being online, it must also be secured, but its key is kept online for operations. Typically, the Issuing CA publishes certificates and CRLs to Active Directory and/or HTTP locations for clients to download. The following diagram shows the simplified view of this implementations: The table below summarizes the roles and differences: Aspect Offline Root CA Online Issuing CA Role Standalone Root CA (workgroup) Enterprise Subordinate CA (domain member) Network Connectivity Kept offline (powered off or disconnected when not issuing) Online (running continuously to serve requests) Usage Signs only one certificate (the subordinate CA’s cert) and CRLs Issues end-entity certificates (users, computers, services) Active Directory Not a member of AD domain; doesn’t use templates or auto-enrollment Integrated with AD DS; uses certificate templates for streamlined issuance Security Extremely high: physically secured, limited access, often protected by HSM Very High: server hardened, but accessible on network; HSM recommended for private key CRL Publication Manual. Admin must periodically connect, generate, and distribute CRL. Delta CRLs usually disabled. Automatic. Publishes CRLs to configured CDP locations (AD DS, HTTP) at scheduled intervals. Validity Period Longer (e.g. 5-10+ years for the CA certificate) to reduce frequency of renewal. Shorter (e.g. 2 years) to align with organizational policy; renewed under the root when needed. In this lab setup, we will create a Contoso Root CA (offline) and a Contoso Issuing CA (online) as an example. This mirrors real-world best practices which is to "deploy a standalone offline root CA and an online enterprise subordinate CA”. Deploying the Offline Root CA Setting up the offline Root CA involves preparing a dedicated server, installing AD CS, configuring it as a root CA, and then securing it. We’ll also configure certificate CDP/AIA (CRL Distribution Point and Authority Information Access) locations so that issued certificates will point clients to the correct locations to fetch the CA’s certificate and revocation list. Step 1: Prepare the Root CA Server (Offline) Provision an isolated server: Install a Windows Server OS (e.g., Windows Server 2022) on the machine designated to be the Root CA. Preferably on a portable enterprise grade physical server that can be stored in a safe. Do not join this server to any domain – it should function in a Workgroup to remain independent of your AD forest. System configuration: Give the server a descriptive name (e.g., ROOTCA) and assign a static IP (even though it will be offline, a static IP helps when connecting it temporarily for management). Install the latest updates and security patches while it’s still able to go online. Lock down network access: Once setup is complete, disable or unplug network connections. If the server must remain powered on for any reason, ensure all unnecessary services/ports are disabled to minimize exposure. In practice, you will keep this server shut down or physically disconnected except when performing CA maintenance. Step 2: Install the AD CS Role on the Root CA Add the Certification Authority role: On the Root CA server, open Server Manager and add the Active Directory Certificate Services role. During the wizard, select the Certification Authority role service (no need for web enrollment or others on the root). Proceed through the wizard and complete the installation. You can also install the CA role and management tools via PowerShell: Install-WindowsFeature AD-Certificate -IncludeManagementToolsThis Role Services: Choose Certification Authority. Setup Type: Select Standalone CA (since this root CA is not domain-joined). CA Type: Select Root CA. Private Key: Choose “Create a new private key.” Cryptography: If using an HSM, select the HSM’s Cryptographic Service Provider (CSP) here; otherwise use default. Choose a strong key length (e.g., 2048 or 4096 bits) and a secure hash algorithm (SHA-256 or higher). CA Name: Provide a common name for the CA (e.g., “Contoso Root CA”). This name will appear in issued certificates as the Issuer. Avoid using a machine DNS name here for security – pick a name without revealing the server’s actual hostname. Validity Period: Set a long validity (e.g., 10 years) for the root CA’s self-signed certificate. A decade is common for enterprise roots, reducing how often you must touch the offline CA for renewal. Database: Specify locations for the CA database and logs (the defaults are fine for a lab). Review settings and complete the configuration. This process will generate the root CA’s key pair and self-signed certificate, establishing the Root CA.Post-install configuration: After the binary installation, click Configure Active Directory Certificate Services (a notification in Server Manager). In the configuration wizard: You can also perform this configuration via PowerShell in one line: Install-AdcsCertificationAuthority ` -CAType StandaloneRootCA ` -CryptoProviderName "YourHSMProvider" ` -HashAlgorithmName SHA256 -KeyLength 2048 ` -CACommonName "Contoso Root CA" ` -ValidityPeriod Years -ValidityPeriodUnits 10 This would set up a standalone Root CA named "Contoso Root CA" with a 2048-bit key on an HSM provider, valid for 10 years. Step 3: Integrate an HSM (Optional but Recommended) If your lab has a Hardware Security Module, use it to secure the Root CA’s keys. Using an HSM provides a dedicated, tamper-resistant storage for CA private keys and can further protect against key compromise. To integrate: Install the HSM vendor’s software and drivers on the Root CA server. Initialize the HSM and create a security world or partition as per the vendor instructions. Before or during the CA configuration (Step 2 above), ensure the HSM is ready to generate/store the key. When running the AD CS configuration, select the HSM’s CSP/KSP for the cryptographic provider so that the CA’s private key is generated on the HSM. Secure any HSM admin tokens or smartcards. For a root CA, you might employ M of N key splits – requiring multiple key custodians to collaborate to activate the HSM or key – as part of the key ceremony (discussed later). (If an HSM is not available, the root key will be stored on the server’s disk. At minimum, protect it with a strong admin passphrase when prompted, and consider enabling the option to require administrator interaction (e.g., a password) whenever the key is accessed.) Step 4: Configure CA Extensions (CDP/AIA) It’s critical to configure how the Root CA publishes its certificate and revocation list, since the root is offline and cannot use Active Directory auto-publishing. Open the Certification Authority management console (certsrv.msc), right-click the CA name > Properties, and go to the Extensions tab. We will set the CRL Distribution Points (CDP) and Authority Information Access (AIA) URLs: CRL Distribution Point (CDP): This is where certificates will tell clients to fetch the CRL for the Root CA. By default, a standalone CA might have a file:// path or no HTTP URL. Click Add and specify an HTTP URL that will be accessible to all network clients, such as: http://<IssuingCA_Server>/CertEnroll/<CaName><CRLNameSuffix><DeltaCRLAllowed>.crl For example, if your issuing CA’s server name is ISSUINGCA.contoso.local, the URL might be http://issuingca.contoso.local/CertEnroll/Contoso%20Root%20CA.crl This assumes the Issuing CA (or another web server) will host the Root CA’s CRL in the CertEnroll directory. Check the boxes for “Include in the CDP extension of issued certificates” and “Include in all CRLs. Clients use this to find Delta CRLs” (you can uncheck the delta CRL publication on the root, as we won’t use delta CRLs on an offline root). Since the root CA won’t often revoke its single issued cert (the subordinate CA), delta CRLs aren’t necessary. Note: If your Active Directory is in use and you want to publish the Root CA’s CRL to AD, you can also add an ldap:///CN=... path and check “Publish in Active Directory”. However, publishing to AD from an offline CA must be done manually using the following command when the root is temporarily connected. certutil -dspublish Many setups skip LDAP for offline roots and rely on HTTP distribution. Authority Information Access (AIA): This is where the Root CA’s certificate will be published for clients to download (to build certificate chains). Add an HTTP URL similarly, for example: http://<IssuingCA_Server>/CertEnroll/<ServerDNSName>_<CaName><CertificateName>.crt This would point to a copy of the Root CA’s certificate that will be hosted on the issuing CA web server. Check “Include in the AIA extension of issued certificates”. This way, any certificate signed by the Root CA (like your subordinate CA’s cert) contains a URL where clients can fetch the Root CA’s cert if they don’t already have it. After adding these, remove any default entries that are not applicable (e.g., LDAP if the root isn’t going to publish to AD, or file paths that won’t be used by clients). These settings ensure that certificates issued by the Root CA (in practice, just the subordinate CA’s certificate) will carry the correct URLs for chain building and revocation checking. Step 5: Back Up the Root CA and Issue the Subordinate Certificate With the Root CA configured, we need to issue a certificate for the Issuing CA (subordinate). We’ll perform that in the next section from the Issuing CA’s side via a request file. Before taking the root offline, ensure you: Back up the CA’s private key and certificate: In the Certification Authority console, or via the CA Backup wizard, export the Root CA’s key pair and CA certificate. Protect this backup (store it offline in a secure location, e.g., on encrypted removable media in a safe). This backup is crucial for disaster recovery or if the Root CA needs to be migrated or restored. Save the Root CA Certificate: You will need the Root CA’s public certificate (*.crt) to distribute to other systems. Have it exported (Base-64 or DER format) for use on the Issuing CA and for clients. Initial CRL publication: Manually publish the first CRL so that it can be distributed. Open an elevated Command Prompt on the Root CA and run: certutil -crl This generates a new CRL file (in the CA’s configured CRL folder, typically %windir%\system32\CertSrv\CertEnroll). Take that CRL file and copy it to the designated distribution point (for example, to the CertEnroll directory on the Issuing CA’s web server, as per the HTTP URL configured). If using Active Directory for CRL distribution, you would also publish it to AD now (e.g., certutil -dspublish -f RootCA.crl on a domain-connected machine). In most lab setups, copying to an HTTP share is sufficient. With these tasks done, the Root CA is ready. At this point, disconnect or power off the Root CA and store it securely – it should remain offline except when it’s absolutely needed (like publishing a new CRL or renewing the subordinate CA’s certificate in the far future). Keeping the root CA offline maximizes its security by minimizing exposure to compromise. Best Practices for Securing the Root CA: The Root CA is the trust anchor, so apply stringent security practices: Physical security: Store the Root CA machine in a locked, secure location. If it’s a virtual machine, consider storing it on a disconnected hypervisor or a USB drive locked in a safe. Only authorized PKI team members should have access. An offline CA should be treated like crown jewels – offline CAs should be stored in secure locations. Minimal exposure: Keep the Root CA powered off and disconnected when not in use. It should not be left running or connected to any network. Routine operations (like issuing end-entity certs) should never involve the root. Admin access control: Limit administrative access on the Root CA server. Use dedicated accounts for PKI administration. Enable auditing on the CA for any changes or issuance events. No additional roles or software: Do not use the Root CA server for any other function (no web browsing, no email, etc.). Fewer installed components means fewer potential vulnerabilities. Protect the private key: Use an HSM if possible; if not, ensure the key is at least protected by a strong password and consider splitting knowledge of that password among multiple people (so no single person can activate the CA). Many organizations opt for an offline root key ceremony (see below) to generate and handle the root key with multiple witnesses and strict procedures. Keep system time and settings consistent: If the Root CA is powered off for long periods, ensure its clock is accurate whenever it is started (to avoid issuing a CRL or certificate with a wrong date). Don’t change the server name or CA name after installation (doing so invalidates issued certs). Periodic health checks: Even though offline, plan to turn on the Root CA at a secure interval (e.g., semi-annually or annually) to perform tasks like CRL publishing and system updates. Make sure to apply OS security updates during these maintenance windows, as offline does not mean immune to vulnerabilities (especially if it ever connects to a network for CRL publication or uses removable media). Deploying the Online Issuing CA Next, set up the Issuing CA server which will actually issue certificates to end entities in the lab. This server will be domain-joined (if using AD integration) and will obtain its CA certificate from the Root CA we just configured. Step 1: Prepare the Issuing CA Server Provision the server: Install Windows Server on a new machine (or VM) that will be the Issuing CA. Join this server to the Active Directory domain (e.g., Contoso.local). Being an enterprise CA, it needs domain membership to publish templates and integrate with AD security groups. Rename the server to something descriptive like ISSUINGCA for clarity. Assign a static IP and ensure it can communicate on the network. IIS for web enrollment (optional): If you plan to use the Web Enrollment or Certificate Enrollment Web Services, ensure IIS is installed. (The AD CS installation wizard can add it if you include those role services.) For this guide, we will include the Web Enrollment role so that the CertEnroll directory is set up for hosting certificate and CRL files. Step 2: Install AD CS Role on Issuing CA On the Issuing CA server, add the Active Directory Certificate Services role via Server Manager or PowerShell. This time, select both Certification Authority and Certification Authority Web Enrollment role services (Web Enrollment will set up the HTTP endpoints for certificate requests if needed). For example, using PowerShell: Install-WindowsFeature AD-Certificate, ADCS-Web-Enrollment -IncludeManagementTools After installation, launch the AD CS configuration wizard: Role Services: Choose Certification Authority (and Web Enrollment if prompted). Setup Type: Select Enterprise CA (since this CA will integrate with AD DS). CA Type: Select Subordinate CA (this indicates it will get its cert from an existing root CA). Private Key: Choose “Create a new private key” (we’ll generate a new key pair for this CA). Cryptography: If using an HSM here as well, select the HSM’s CSP/KSP for the issuing CA’s key. Otherwise, choose a strong key length (2048+ bits, SHA256 or better for hash). CA Name: Provide a name (e.g., “Contoso Issuing CA”). This name will appear as the Issuer on certificates it issues. Certificate Request: The wizard will ask how you want to get the subordinate CA’s certificate. Choose “Save a certificate request to file”. Specify a path, e.g., C:\CertRequest\issuingCA.req. The wizard will generate a request file that we need to take to the Root CA for signing. (Since our Root CA is offline, this file transfer might be via secure USB or a network share when the root is temporarily online.) CA Database: Choose locations or accept defaults for the certificate DB and logs. Finish the configuration wizard, which will complete pending because the CA doesn’t have a certificate yet. The AD CS service on this server won’t start until we import the issued cert from the root. Step 3: Integrate HSM on Issuing CA (Optional) If available, repeat the HSM setup on the Issuing CA: install HSM drivers, initialize it, and generate/secure the key for the subordinate CA on the HSM. Ensure you chose the HSM provider during the above configuration so that the issuing CA’s private key is stored in the HSM. Even though this CA is online, an HSM still greatly enhances security by protecting the private key from extraction. The issuing CA’s HSM may not require multiple custodians to activate (as it needs to run continuously), but should still be physically secured. Step 4: Obtain the Issuing CA’s Certificate from the Root CA Now we have a pending request (issuingCA.req) for the subordinate CA. To get its certificate: Transport the request to the Root CA: Copy the request file to the offline Root CA (via secure means – e.g., formatted new USB stick). Start up the Root CA (in a secure, offline setting) and open the Certification Authority console. Submit the request on Root CA: Right-click the Root CA in the CA console -> All Tasks -> Submit new request, and select the .req file. The request will appear in the Pending Requests on the root. Issue the subordinate CA certificate: Find the pending request (it will list the Issuing CA’s name). Right-click and choose All Tasks > Issue. The subordinate CA’s certificate is now issued by the Root CA. Export the issued certificate: Still on the Root CA, go to Issued Certificates, find the newly issued subordinate CA cert (you can identify it by the Request ID or by the name). Right-click it and choose Open or All Tasks > Export to get the certificate in a file form. If using the console’s built-in “Export” it might only allow binary; alternatively use the certutil command: certutil -dup <RequestID> .\ContosoIssuingCA.cer or simply open and copy to file. Save the certificate as issuingCA.cer. Also make sure you have a copy of the Root CA’s certificate (if not already done). Publish Root CA cert and CRL as needed: Before leaving the Root CA, you may also want to ensure the Root’s own certificate and latest CRL are available to the issuing CA and clients. If not already done in Step 5 of root deployment, export the Root CA cert (DER format) and copy the CRL file. You might use certutil -crl again if some time has passed since initial CRL. Now take the issuingCA.cer file (and root cert/CRL files) and move them back to the Issuing CA server. Step 5: Install the Issuing CA’s Certificate and Complete Configuration On the Issuing CA server (which is still waiting for its CA cert): Install the subordinate CA certificate: In Server Manager or the Certification Authority console on the Issuing CA, there should be an option to “Install CA Certificate” (if the AD CS configuration wizard is still open, it will prompt for the file; or otherwise, in the CA console right-click the CA name > All Tasks > Install CA Certificate). Provide the issuingCA.cer file obtained from the root. This will install the CA’s own certificate and start the CA service. The Issuing CA is now operational as a subordinate CA. Alternatively, use PowerShell: certutil -installcert C:\CertRequest\issuingCA.cer This installs the cert and associates it with the pending key. Trust the Root CA certificate: Because the Issuing CA is domain-joined, when you install the subordinate cert, it might automatically place the Root CA’s certificate in the Trusted Root Certification Authorities store on that server (and possibly publish it to AD). If not, you should manually install the Root CA’s certificate into the Trusted Root CA store on the Issuing CA machine (using the Certificates MMC or certutil -addstore -f Root rootCA.cer). This step prevents any “chain not trusted” warnings on the Issuing CA and ensures it trusts its parent. In an enterprise environment, you would also distribute the root certificate to all client machines (e.g., via Group Policy) so that they trust the whole chain. Import Root CRL: Copy the Root CA’s CRL (*.crl file) to the Issuing CA’s CRL distribution point location (e.g., C:\Windows\System32\CertSrv\CertEnroll\ if that’s the directory served by the web server). This matches the HTTP URL we configured on the root. Place the CRL file there and ensure it is accessible (the Issuing CA’s IIS might need to serve static .crl files; often, if Web Enrollment is installed, the CertEnroll folder is under C:\Inetpub\wwwroot\CertEnroll). At this point, the subordinate CA and any client hitting the HTTP URL can retrieve the root’s CRL. The subordinate CA is now fully established. It holds a certificate issued by the Root CA (forming a complete chain of trust), and it’s ready to issue end-entity certificates. Step 6: Configure Issuing CA Settings and Start Services Start the Certificate Services: If the CA service (CertSvc) isn’t started automatically, start or restart it. On PowerShell: Restart-Service certsvc The CA should show as running in the CA console with the name “Contoso Issuing CA” (or your chosen name). Configure Certificate Templates: Because this is an Enterprise CA, it can utilize certificate templates stored in Active Directory to simplify issuing common cert types (user auth, computer auth, web server SSL, etc.). By default, some templates (e.g., User, Computer) are available but not issued. In the Certification Authority console under Certificate Templates, you can choose which templates to issue (e.g., right-click > New > Certificate Template to Issue, then select templates like “User” or “Computer”). This lab guide doesn’t require specific templates but know that only Enterprise CAs can use templates. Templates define the policies and settings (cryptography, enrollment permissions, etc.) for issued certificates. Ensure you enable only the templates needed and configure their permissions appropriately (e.g., allow the appropriate groups to enroll). Set CRL publishing schedule: The Issuing CA will automatically publish its own CRL (for certificates it issues) at intervals. You can adjust the CRL and Delta CRL publication interval in the CA’s Properties > CRL Period. A common practice is a small base CRL period (e.g., 1 week or 2 weeks) for issuing CAs, because they may revoke user certs more frequently; and enable Delta CRLs (published daily) for timely revocation information. Make sure the CDP/AIA for the Issuing CA itself are properly configured too (the wizard usually sets LDAP and HTTP locations, but verify in the Extensions tab). In a lab, the default settings are fine. Web Enrollment (if installed): You can verify the web enrollment by browsing to http://<IssuingCA>/certsrv. This web UI allows browser-based certificate requests. It’s a legacy interface mostly, but for testing it can be used if your clients aren’t domain-joined or if you want a manual request method. In modern use, the Certificate Enrollment Web Service/Policy roles or auto-enrollment via Group Policy are preferred for remote and automated enrollment. At this stage, your PKI is operational: the Issuing CA trusts the offline Root CA and can issue certificates. The Root CA can be kept offline with confidence that the subordinate will handle all regular work. Validation and Testing of the PKI It’s important to verify that the PKI is configured correctly: Check CA status: On the Issuing CA, open the Certification Authority console and ensure no errors. Verify that the Issuing CA’s certificate shows OK (no red X). On the Root CA (offline most of the time), you can use the Pkiview.msc snap-in (Microsoft PKI Health Tool) on a domain-connected machine to check the health of the PKI. This tool will show if the CDPs/AIA are reachable and if certificates are properly published. Trust chain on clients: On a domain-joined client PC, the Root CA certificate should be present in the Trusted Root Certification Authorities store (if the Issuing CA was installed as Enterprise CA, it likely published the root cert to AD automatically; you can also distribute it via Group Policy or manually). The Issuing CA’s certificate should appear in the Intermediate Certification Authorities store. This establishes the chain of trust. If not, import the root cert into the domain’s Group Policy for Trusted Roots. A quick test: on a client, run certutil -config "ISSUINGCA\\Contoso Issuing CA" -ping to see if it can contact the CA (or use the Certification Authority MMC targeting the issuing CA). Enroll a test certificate: Try to enroll for a certificate from the Issuing CA. For instance, from a domain-joined client, use the Certificates MMC (in Current User or Computer context) and initiate a certificate request for a User or Computer certificate (depending on templates issued). If auto-enrollment is configured via Group Policy for a template, you can simply log on a client and see if it automatically receives a certificate. Alternatively, use the web enrollment page or certreq command to submit a request. The request should be approved and a certificate issued by "Contoso Issuing CA". After enrollment, inspect the issued certificate: it should chain up to "Contoso Root CA" without errors. Ensure that the certificate’s CDP points to the URL we set (and try to browse that URL to see the CRL file), and that the AIA points to the root cert location. Revocation test (optional): To test CRL behavior, you could revoke a test certificate on the Issuing CA (using the CA console) and publish a new CRL. On the client, after updating the CRL, the revoked certificate should show as revoked. For the Root CA, since it shouldn’t issue end-entity certs, you wouldn’t normally revoke anything except potentially the subordinate CA’s certificate (which would be a drastic action in case of compromise). By issuing a test certificate and validating the chain and revocation, you confirm that your two-tier PKI lab is functioning correctly. Maintaining the PKI: CRLs, Key Ceremonies, and Security Procedures Deploying the PKI is only the beginning. Proper maintenance and operational procedures are crucial to ensure the PKI remains secure and reliable over time. Periodic CRL Updates for the Offline Root: The Root CA’s CRL has a defined validity period (set during configuration, often 6 or 12 months for offline roots). Before the CRL expires, the Root CA must be brought online (in a secure environment) to issue a new CRL. It’s recommended to schedule CRL updates periodically (e.g., semi-annually) to prevent the CRL from expiring. An expired CRL can cause certificate chain validation to fail, potentially disrupting services. Typically, organizations set the offline root CRL validity so that publishing 1-2 times a year is sufficient. When the time comes: Start the Root CA (ensuring the system clock is correct). Run certutil -crl to issue a fresh CRL. Distribute the new CRL: copy it to the HTTP CDP location (overwrite the old file) and, if applicable, use certutil -dspublish -f RootCA.crl to update it in Active Directory. Verify that the new CRL’s next update date is extended appropriately (e.g., another 6 months out). Clients and the Issuing CA will automatically pick up the new CRL when checking for revocation. (The Issuing CA, if configured, might cache the root CRL and need a restart or certutil -setreg ca\CRLFlags +CRLF_REVCHECK_IGNORE_OFFLINE tweak if the root CRL expires unexpectedly. Keeping the schedule prevents such issues.) Issuing CA CRL and OCSP: The Issuing CA’s CRLs are published automatically as it is online. Ensure the IIS or file share hosting the CRL is accessible. Optionally, consider setting up an Online Responder (OCSP) for real-time status checking, especially if CRLs are large or you need faster revocation information. OCSP is another AD CS role service that can be configured on the issuing CA or another server to answer certificate status queries. This might be beyond a simple lab, but it’s worth mentioning for completeness. Key Ceremonies and Documentation: For production environments (and good practice even in labs), formalize the process of handling CA keys in a Key Ceremony. A key ceremony is a carefully controlled process for activities like generating the Root CA’s key pair, installing the CA, and signing subordinate certificates. It often involves multiple people to ensure no single person has unilateral control (principle of dual control) and to witness the process. Best practices for a Root CA key ceremony include: Advance Planning: Create a step-by-step script of the ceremony tasks. Include who will do what, what materials are needed (HSMs, installation media, backup devices, etc.), and the order of operations. Multiple trusted individuals present: Roles might include a Ceremony Administrator (leads the process), a Security Officer (responsible for HSM or key material handling), an Auditor (to observe and record), etc. This prevents any one person from manipulating the process and increases trust. Secure environment: Conduct the ceremony in a secure location (e.g., a locked room) free of recording devices or unauthorized personnel. Ensure the Root CA machine is isolated (no network), and ideally that BIOS/USB access controls are in place to prevent any malware. Generate keys with proper controls: If using an HSM, initialize and generate the key with the required number of key custodians each providing part of the activation material (e.g., smartcards or passphrases). Immediately back up the HSM partition or key to secure media (requiring the same custodians to restore). Sign subordinate CA certificate: As part of the ceremony, once the root key is ready, sign the subordinate’s request. This might also be a witnessed step. Document every action: Write down each command run, each key generated, serial numbers of devices used, and have all participants sign an acknowledgment of the outcomes. Also record the fingerprints of the generated Root CA certificate and any subordinate certificate to ensure they are exactly as expected. Secure storage: After the ceremony, store the Root CA machine (if it’s a laptop or VM) and HSM tokens in a tamper-evident bag or safe. The idea is to make it evident if someone tries to access the root outside of an authorized ceremony. While a full key ceremony might be overkill for a small lab, understanding these practices is important. Even in a lab, you can simulate some aspects (for learning), like documenting the procedure of taking the root online to sign the request and then locking it away. These practices greatly increase the trust in a production PKI by ensuring transparency and accountability for critical operations. Backup and Recovery Plans: Both CAs’ data should be regularly backed up: For the Root CA: since it’s rarely online, backup after any change. Typically, you’d back up the CA’s private key and certificate once (right after setup or any renewal). Store this securely offline (separate from the server itself). Also back up the CA database if it ever issues more than one cert (for root it might not issue many). For the Issuing CA: schedule automated backups of the CA database and private key. You can use the built-in certutil -backup or Windows Server Backup (which is aware of the AD CS database). Keep backups secure and test restoration procedures. Having a documented recovery procedure for the CA is crucial for continuity. Also consider backup of templates and any scripts. Maintain spare hardware or VMs in case you need to restore the CA on new hardware (especially for the root, having a procedure to restore on a new machine if the original is destroyed). Security maintenance: Apply OS updates to the CAs carefully. For the offline root, patch it offline if possible (offline servicing or connecting it briefly to a management network). For the issuing CA, treat it as a critical infrastructure server: limit its exposure (firewall it so only required services are reachable), monitor its event logs (enable auditing for Certificate Services events, which can log each issuance and revocation), and employ anti-malware tools with caution (whitelisting the CA processes to avoid interference). Also, periodically review the CA’s configuration and certificate templates to ensure they meet current security standards (for example, deprecate any weak cryptography or adjust validity periods if needed). By following these maintenance steps and best practices, your two-tier PKI will remain secure and trustworthy over time. Remember that PKI is not “set and forget” – it requires operational diligence, but the payoff is a robust trust infrastructure for your organization’s security. Additional AD CS Features and References Active Directory Certificate Services provides more capabilities than covered in this basic lab. Depending on your needs, you might explore: Certificate Templates: We touched on templates; they are a powerful feature on Enterprise CAs to enforce standardized certificate settings. Administrators can create custom templates for various use cases (SSL, S/MIME email, code signing) and control enrollment permissions. Understanding template versions and permissions is key for enterprise deployments. (Refer to Microsoft’s documentation on Certificate template concepts in Windows Server for details on how templates work and can be customized.) Web Services for Enrollment: In scenarios with remote or non-domain clients, AD CS offers the Certificate Enrollment Web Service (CES) and Certificate Enrollment Policy Web Service (CEP) role services. These allow clients to fetch enrollment policy information and request certificates over HTTP or HTTPS, even when not connected directly to the domain. They work with the certificate templates to enable similar auto-enrollment experiences over the web. See Microsoft’s guides on the Certificate Enrollment Web Service overview and Certificate Enrollment Policy Web Service overview for when to use these. Network Device Enrollment Service (NDES): This AD CS role service implements the Simple Certificate Enrollment Protocol (SCEP) to allow devices like routers, switches, and mobile devices to obtain certificates from the CA without domain credentials. NDES acts as a proxy (Registration Authority) between devices and the CA, using one-time passwords for authentication. If you need to issue certificates to network equipment or MDM-managed mobile devices, NDES is the solution. Microsoft Docs provide a Network Device Enrollment Service(NDES) overview and even details on using a policy module with NDES for advanced scenarios (like customizing how requests are processed or integrating with custom policies). Online Responders (OCSP): As mentioned, an Online Responder can be configured to answer revocation status queries more efficiently than CRLs, especially useful if your CRLs grow large or you have high-volume certificate validation (VPNs, etc.). AD CS’s Online Responder role service can be installed on a member server and configured with the OCSP Response Signing certificate from your Issuing CA. Monitoring and Auditing: Windows Servers have options to audit CA events. Enabling auditing can log events such as certificate issuance, revocation, or changes to the CA configuration. These logs are important in enterprise PKI to track who did what (for compliance and security forensics). Also, tools like the PKI Health Tool (pkiview.msc) and PowerShell cmdlets (like Get-CertificationAuthority, Get-CertificationAuthorityCertificate) can help monitor the health and configuration of your CAs. Conclusion By following this guide, you have set up a secure two-tier PKI environment consisting of an offline Root CA and an online Issuing CA. This design, which uses an offline root, is considered a security best practice for enterprise PKI deployments because it reduces the risk of your root key being compromised. With the offline Root CA acting as a hardened trust anchor and the enterprise Issuing CA handling day-to-day certificate issuance, your lab PKI can issue certificates for various purposes (HTTPS, code signing, user authentication, etc.) in a way that models real-world deployments. As you expand this lab or move to production, always remember that PKI security is as much about process as technology. Applying strict controls to protect CA keys, keeping software up to date, and monitoring your PKI’s health are all part of the journey. For further reading and official guidance, refer to these Microsoft documentation resources: 📖 AD CS PKI Design Considerations: PKI design considerations using Active Directory Certificate Services in Windows Server helps in planning a PKI deployment (number of CAs, hierarchy depth, naming, key lengths, validity periods, etc.). This is useful to read when adapting this lab design to a production environment. It also covers configuring CDP/AIA and why offline roots usually don’t need delta CRLs. 📖 AD CS Step-by-Step Guides: Microsoft’s Test Lab Guide Test Lab Guide: Deploying an AD CS Two-Tier PKI Hierarchy walk through a similar scenario.Why UK Enterprise Cybersecurity Is Failing in 2026 (And What Leaders Must Change)
Enterprise cybersecurity in large organisations has always been an asymmetric game. But with the rise of AI‑enabled cyber attacks, that imbalance has widened dramatically - particularly for UK and EMEA enterprises operating complex cloud, SaaS, and identity‑driven environments. Microsoft Threat Intelligence and Microsoft Defender Security Research have publicly reported a clear shift in how attackers operate: AI is now embedded across the entire attack lifecycle. Threat actors use AI to accelerate reconnaissance, generate highly targeted phishing at scale, automate infrastructure, and adapt tactics in real time - dramatically reducing the time required to move from initial access to business impact. In recent months, Microsoft has documented AI‑enabled phishing campaigns abusing legitimate authentication mechanisms, including OAuth and device‑code flows, to compromise enterprise accounts at scale. These attacks rely on automation, dynamic code generation, and highly personalised lures - not on exploiting traditional vulnerabilities or stealing passwords. The Reality Gap: Adaptive Attackers vs. Static Enterprise Defences Meanwhile, many UK enterprises still rely on legacy cybersecurity controls designed for a very different threat model - one rooted in a far more predictable world. This creates a dangerous "Resilience Gap." Here is why your current stack is failing- and the C-Suite strategy required to fix it. 1. The Failure of Traditional Antivirus in the AI Era Traditional antivirus (AV) relies on static signatures and hashes. It assumes malicious code remains identical across different targets. AI has rendered this assumption obsolete. Modern malware now uses automated mutation to generate unique code variants at execution time, and adapts behaviour based on its environment. Microsoft Threat Intelligence has observed threat actors using AI‑assisted tooling to rapidly rewrite payload components, ensuring that every deployment looks subtly different. In this model, there is no reliable signature to detect. By the time a pattern exists, the attacker has already moved on. Signature‑based detection is not just slow - it is structurally misaligned with AI‑driven attacks. The Risk: If your security relies on "recognising" a threat, you are already breached. By the time a signature exists, the attacker has evolved. The C-Suite Pivot: Shift investment from artifact detection to EDR/XDR (Extended Detection and Response). We must prioritise behavioural analytics and machine learning models that identify intent rather than file names. 2. Why Perimeter Firewalls Fail in a Cloud-First World Many UK enterprise still rely on firewalls enforcing static allow/deny rules based on IP addresses and ports. This model worked when applications were predictable and networks clearly segmented. Today, enterprise traffic is encrypted, cloud‑hosted, API‑driven, and deeply integrated with SaaS and identity services. AI‑assisted phishing campaigns abusing OAuth and device‑code flows demonstrate this clearly. From a network perspective, everything looks legitimate: HTTPS traffic to trusted identity providers. No suspicious port. No malicious domain. Yet the attacker successfully compromises identity. The Risk: Traditional firewalls are "blind" to identity-based breaches in cloud environments. The C-Suite Pivot: Move to Identity-First Security. Treat Identity as the new Control Plane, integrating signals like user risk, device health, and geolocation into every access decision. 3. The Critical Weakness of Single-Factor Authentication Despite clear NCSC guidance, single-factor passwords remain a common vulnerability in legacy applications and VPNs. AI-driven credential abuse has changed the economics of these attacks. Threat actors now deploy adaptive phishing campaigns that evolve in real-time. Microsoft has observed attackers using AI to hyper-target high-value UK identities- specifically CEOs, Finance Directors, and Procurement leads. The Risk: Static passwords are now the primary weak link in UK supply chain security. The C-Suite Pivot: Mandate Phishing‑resistant MFA (Passkeys or hardware security keys). Implement Conditional Access policies that evaluate risk dynamically at the moment of access, not just at login. Legacy Security vs. AI‑Era Reality 4. The Inherent Risk of VPN-Centric Security VPNs were built on a flawed assumption: that anyone "inside" the network is trustworthy. In 2026, this logic is a liability. AI-assisted attackers now use automation to map internal networks and identify escalation paths the moment they gain VPN access. Furthermore, Microsoft has tracked nation-state actors using AI to create synthetic employee identities- complete with fake resumes and deepfake communication. In these scenarios, VPN access isn't "hacked"; it is legally granted to a fraudster. The Risk: A compromised VPN gives an attacker the "keys to the kingdom." The C-Suite Pivot: Transition to Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA). Access must be explicit, scoped to the specific application, and continuously re‑evaluated using behavioural signals. 5. Data: The High-Velocity Target Sensitive data sitting unencrypted in legacy databases or backups is a ticking time bomb. In the AI era, data discovery is no longer a slow, manual process for a hacker. Attackers now use AI to instantly analyse your directory structures, classify your files, and prioritise high-value data for theft. Unencrypted data significantly increases your "blast radius," turning a containable incident into a catastrophic board-level crisis. The Risk: Beyond the technical breach, unencrypted data leads to massive UK GDPR fines and irreparable brand damage. The C-Suite Pivot: Adopt Data-Centric Security. Implement encryption by default, classify data while adding sensitivity labels and start board-level discussions regarding post‑quantum cryptography (PQC) to future-proof your most sensitive assets. 6. The Failure of Static IDS Traditional Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) rely on known indicators of compromise - assuming attackers reuse the same tools and techniques. AI‑driven attacks deliberately avoid that assumption. Threat actors are now using Large Language Models (LLMs) to weaponize newly disclosed vulnerabilities within hours. While your team waits for a "known pattern" to be updated in your system, the attacker is already using a custom, AI-generated exploit. The Risk: Your team is defending against yesterday's news while the attacker is moving at machine speed. The C-Suite Pivot: Invest in Adaptive Threat Detection. Move toward Graph‑based XDR platforms that correlate signals across email, endpoint, and cloud to automate investigation and response before the damage spreads. From Static Security to Continuous Security Closing Thought: Security Is a Journey, Not a Destination For UK enterprises, the shift toward adaptive cybersecurity is no longer optional - it is increasingly driven by regulatory expectation, board oversight, and accountability for operational resilience. Recent UK cyber resilience reforms and evolving regulatory frameworks signal a clear direction of travel: cybersecurity is now a board‑level responsibility, not a back‑office technical concern. Directors and executive leaders are expected to demonstrate effective governance, risk ownership, and preparedness for cyber disruption - particularly as AI reshapes the threat landscape. AI is not a future cybersecurity problem. It is a current force multiplier for attackers, exposing the limits of legacy enterprise security architectures faster than many organisations are willing to admit. The uncomfortable truth for boards in 2026 is that no enterprise is 100% secure. Intrusions are inevitable. Credentials will be compromised. Controls will be tested. The difference between a resilient enterprise and a vulnerable one is not the absence of incidents, but how risk is managed when they occur. In mature organisations, this means assuming breach and designing for containment: Access controls that limit blast radius Least privilege and conditional access restricting attackers to the smallest possible scope if an identity is compromised Data‑centric security using automated classification and encryption, ensuring that even when access is misused, sensitive data cannot be freely exfiltrated As a Senior Enterprise Cybersecurity Architect, I see this moment as a unique opportunity. AI adoption does not have to repeat the mistakes of earlier technology waves, where innovation moved fast and security followed years later. We now have a rare chance to embed security from day one - designing identity controls, data boundaries, automated monitoring, and governance before AI systems become business‑critical. When security is built in upfront, enterprises don’t just reduce risk - they gain the confidence to move faster and unlock AI’s value safely. Security is no longer a “department”. In the age of AI, it is a continuous business function - essential to preserving trust and maintaining operational continuity as attackers move at machine speed. References: Inside an AI‑enabled device code phishing campaign | Microsoft Security Blog AI as tradecraft: How threat actors operationalize AI | Microsoft Security Blog Detecting and analyzing prompt abuse in AI tools | Microsoft Security Blog Post-Quantum Cryptography | CSRC Microsoft Digital Defense Report 2025 | Microsoft https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/news/government-adopt-passkey-technology-digital-servicesMicrosoft Ignite 2025: Top Security Innovations You Need to Know
🤖 Security & AI -The Big Story This Year 2025 marks a turning point for cybersecurity. Rapid adoption of AI across enterprises has unlocked innovation but introduced new risks. AI agents are now part of everyday workflows-automating tasks and interacting with sensitive data—creating new attack surfaces that traditional security models cannot fully address. Threat actors are leveraging AI to accelerate attacks, making speed and automation critical for defense. Organizations need solutions that deliver visibility, governance, and proactive risk management for both human and machine identities. Microsoft Ignite 2025 reflects this shift with announcements focused on securing AI at scale, extending Zero Trust principles to AI agents, and embedding intelligent automation into security operations. As a Senior Cybersecurity Solution Architect, I’ve curated the top security announcements from Microsoft Ignite 2025 to help you stay ahead of evolving threats and understand the latest innovations in enterprise security. Agent 365: Control Plane for AI Agents Agent 365 is a centralized platform that gives organizations full visibility, governance, and risk management over AI agents across Microsoft and third-party ecosystems. Why it matters: Unmanaged AI agents can introduce compliance gaps and security risks. Agent 365 ensures full lifecycle control. Key Features: Complete agent registry and discovery Access control and conditional policies Visualization of agent interactions and risk posture Built-in integration with Defender, Entra, and Purview Available via the Frontier Program Microsoft Agent 365: The control plane for AI agents Deep dive blog on Agent 365 Entra Agent ID: Zero Trust for AI Identities Microsoft Entra is the identity and access management suite (covering Azure AD, permissions, and secure access). Entra Agent ID extends Zero Trust identity principles to AI agents, ensuring they are governed like human identities. Why it matters: Unmanaged or over-privileged AI agents can create major security gaps. Agent ID enforces identity governance on AI agents and reduces automation risks. Key Features: Provides unique identities for AI agents Lifecycle governance and sponsorship for agents Conditional access policies applied to agent activity Integrated with open SDKs/APIs for third‑party platforms Microsoft Entra Agent ID Overview Entra Ignite 2025 announcements Public Preview details Security Copilot Expansion Security Copilot is Microsoft’s AI assistant for security teams, now expanded to automate threat hunting, phishing triage, identity risk remediation, and compliance tasks. Why it matters: Security teams face alert fatigue and resource constraints. Copilot accelerates response and reduces manual effort. Key Features: 12 new Microsoft-built agents across Defender, Entra, Intune, and Purview. 30+ partner-built agents available in the Microsoft Security Store. Automates threat hunting, phishing triage, identity risk remediation, and compliance tasks. Included for Microsoft 365 E5 customers at no extra cost. Security Copilot inclusion in Microsoft 365 E5 Security Copilot Ignite blog Security Dashboard for AI A unified dashboard for CISOs and risk leaders to monitor AI risks, aggregate signals from Microsoft security services, and assign tasks via Security Copilot - included at no extra cost. Why it matters: Provides a single pane of glass for AI risk management, improving visibility and decision-making. Key Features: Aggregates signals from Entra, Defender, and Purview Supports natural language queries for risk insights Enables task assignment via Security Copilot Ignite Session: Securing AI at Scale Microsoft Security Blog Microsoft Defender Innovations Microsoft Defender serves as Microsoft’s CNAPP solution, offering comprehensive, AI-driven threat protection that spans endpoints, email, cloud workloads, and SIEM/SOAR integrations. Why It Matters Modern attacks target multi-cloud environments and software supply chains. These innovations provide proactive defense, reduce breach risks before exploitation, and extend protection beyond Microsoft ecosystems-helping organizations secure endpoints, identities, and workloads at scale. Key Features: Predictive Shielding: Proactively hardens attack paths before adversaries pivot. Automatic Attack Disruption: Extended to AWS, Okta, and Proofpoint via Sentinel. Supply Chain Security: Defender for Cloud now integrates with GitHub Advanced Security. What’s new in Microsoft Defender at Ignite Defender for Cloud innovations Global Secure Access & AI Gateway Part of Microsoft Entra’s secure access portfolio, providing secure connectivity and inspection for web and AI traffic. Why it matters: Protects against lateral movement and AI-specific threats while maintaining secure connectivity. Key Features: TLS inspection, URL/file filtering AI Prompt Injection protection Private access for domain controllers to prevent lateral movement attacks. Learn about Secure Web and AI Gateway for agents Microsoft Entra: What’s new in secure access on the AI frontier Purview Enhancements Microsoft Purview is the data governance and compliance platform, ensuring sensitive data is classified, protected, and monitored. Why it matters: Ensures sensitive data remains protected and compliant in AI-driven environments. Key Features: AI Observability: Monitor agent activities and prevent sensitive data leakage. Compliance Guardrails: Communication compliance for AI interactions. Expanded DSPM: Data Security Posture Management for AI workloads. Announcing new Microsoft Purview capabilities to protect GenAI agents Intune Updates Microsoft Intune is a cloud-based endpoint device management solution that secures apps, devices, and data across platforms. It simplifies endpoint security management and accelerates response to device risks using AI. Why it matters: Endpoint security is critical as organizations manage diverse devices in hybrid environments. These updates reduce complexity, speed up remediation, and leverage AI-driven automation-helping security teams stay ahead of evolving threats. Key Features: Security Copilot agents automate policy reviews, device offboarding, and risk-based remediation. Enhanced remote management for Windows Recovery Environment (WinRE). Policy Configuration Agent in Intune lets IT admins create and validate policies with natural language What’s new in Microsoft Intune at Ignite Your guide to Intune at Ignite Closing Thoughts Microsoft Ignite 2025 signals the start of an AI-driven security era. From visibility and governance for AI agents to Zero Trust for machine identities, automation in security operations, and stronger compliance for AI workloads-these innovations empower organizations to anticipate threats, simplify governance, and accelerate secure AI adoption without compromising compliance or control. 📘 Full Coverage: Microsoft Ignite 2025 Book of NewsMicrosoft Security Store: Now Generally Available
When we launched the Microsoft Security Store in public preview on September 30, our goal was simple: make it easier for organizations to discover, purchase, and deploy trusted security solutions and AI agents that integrate seamlessly with Microsoft Security products. Today, Microsoft Security Store is generally available—with three major enhancements: Embedded where you work: Security Store is now built into Microsoft Defender, featuring SOC-focused agents, and into Microsoft Entra for Verified ID and External ID scenarios like fraud protection. By bringing these capabilities into familiar workflows, organizations can combine Microsoft and partner innovation to strengthen security operations and outcomes. Expanded catalog: Security Store now offers more than 100 third-party solutions, including advanced fraud prevention, forensic analysis, and threat intelligence agents. Security services available: Partners can now list and sell services such as managed detection and response and threat hunting directly through Security Store. Real-World Impact: What We Learned in Public Preview Thousands of customers explored Microsoft Security Store and tried a growing catalog of agents and SaaS solutions. While we are at the beginning of our journey, customer feedback shows these solutions are helping teams apply AI to improve security operations and reduce manual effort. Spairliners, a cloud-first aviation services joint venture between Air France and Lufthansa, strengthened identity and access controls by deploying Glueckkanja’s Privileged Admin Watchdog to enforce just-in-time access. “Using the Security Store felt easy, like adding an app in Entra. For a small team, being able to find and deploy security innovations in minutes is huge.” – Jonathan Mayer, Head of Innovation, Data and Quality GTD, a Chilean technology and telecommunications company, is testing a variety of agents from the Security Store: “As any security team, we’re always looking for ways to automate and simplify our operations. We are exploring and applying the world of agents more and more each day so having the Security Store is convenient—it’s easy to find and deploy agents. We’re excited about the possibilities for further automation and integrations into our workflows, like event-triggered agents, deeper Outlook integration, and more." – Jonathan Lopez Saez, Cybersecurity Architect Partners echoed the momentum they are seeing with the Security Store: “We’re excited by the early momentum with Security Store. We’ve already received multiple new leads since going live, including one in a new market for us, and we have multiple large deals we’re looking to drive through Security Store this quarter.” - Kim Brault, Head of Alliances, Delinea “Partnering with Microsoft through the Security Store has unlocked new ways to reach enterprise customers at scale. The store is pivotal as the industry shifts toward AI, enabling us to monetize agents without building our own billing infrastructure. With the new embedded experience, our solutions appear at the exact moment customers are looking to solve real problems. And by working with Microsoft’s vetting process, we help provide customers confidence to adopt AI agents” – Milan Patel, Co-founder and CEO, BlueVoyant “Agents and the Microsoft Security Store represent a major step forward in bringing AI into security operations. We’ve turned years of service experience into agentic automations, and it’s resonating with customers—we’ve been positively surprised by how quickly they’re adopting these solutions and embedding our automated agentic expertise into their workflows.” – Christian Kanja, Founder and CEO of glueckkanja New at GA: Embedded in Defender, Entra—Security Solutions right where you work Microsoft Security Store is now embedded in the Defender and Entra portals with partner solutions that extend your Microsoft Security products. By placing Security Store in front of security practitioners, it’s now easier than ever to use the best of partner and Microsoft capabilities in combination to drive stronger security outcomes. As Dorothy Li, Corporate Vice President of Security Copilot and Ecosystem put it, “Embedding the Security Store in our core security products is about giving customers access to innovative solutions that tap into the expertise of our partners. These solutions integrate with Microsoft Security products to complete end-to-end workflows, helping customers improve their security” Within the Microsoft Defender portal, SOC teams can now discover Copilot agents from both Microsoft and partners in the embedded Security Store, and run them all from a single, familiar interface. Let’s look at an example of how these agents might help in the day of the life of a SOC analyst. The day starts with Watchtower (BlueVoyant) confirming Sentinel connectors and Defender sensors are healthy, so investigations begin with full visibility. As alerts arrive, the Microsoft Defender Copilot Alert Triage Agent groups related signals, extracts key evidence, and proposes next steps; identity related cases are then validated with Login Investigator (adaQuest), which baselines recent sign-in behavior and device posture to cut false positives. To stay ahead of emerging campaigns, the analyst checks the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Briefing Agent for concise threat rundowns tied to relevant indicators, informing hunts and temporary hardening. When HR flags an offboarding, GuardianIQ (People Tech Group) correlates activity across Entra ID, email, and files to surface possible data exfiltration with evidence and risk scores. After containment, Automated Closing Comment Generator (Ascent Global Inc.) produces clear, consistent closure notes from Defender incident details, keeping documentation tight without hours of writing. Together, these Microsoft and partner agents maintain platform health, accelerate triage, sharpen identity decisions, add timely threat context, reduce insider risk blind spots, and standardize reporting—all inside the Defender portal. You can read more about the new agents available in the Defender portal in this blog. In addition, Security Store is now integrated into Microsoft Entra, focused on identity-centric solutions. Identity admins can discover and activate partner offerings for DDoS protection, intelligent bot defense, and government ID–based verification for account recovery —all within the Entra portal. With these capabilities, Microsoft Entra delivers a seamless, multi-layered defense that combines built-in identity protection with best-in-class partner technologies, making it easier than ever for enterprises to strengthen resilience against modern identity threats. Learn more here. Levent Besik, VP of Microsoft Entra, shared that “This sets a new benchmark for identity security and partner innovation at Microsoft. Attacks on digital identities can come from anywhere. True security comes from defense in depth, layering protection across the entire user journey so every interaction, from the first request to identity recovery, stays secure. This launch marks only the beginning; we will continue to introduce additional layers of protection to safeguard every aspect of the identity journey” New at GA: Services Added to a Growing Catalog of Agents and SaaS For the first time, partners can offer their security services directly through the Security Store. Customers can now find, buy, and activate managed detection and response, threat hunting, and other expert services—making it easier to augment internal teams and scale security operations. Every listing has a MXDR Verification that certifies they are providing next generation advanced threat detection and response services. You can browse all the services available at launch here, and read about some of our exciting partners below: Avanade is proud to be a launch partner for professional services in the Microsoft Security Store. As a leading global Microsoft Security Services provider, we’re excited to make our offerings easier to find and help clients strengthen cyber defenses faster through this streamlined platform - Jason Revill, Avanade Global Security Technology Lead ProServeIT partnering with Microsoft to have our offers in the Microsoft Security Store helps ProServeIT protect our joint customers and allows us to sell better with Microsoft sellers. It shows customers how our technology and services support each other to create a safe and secure platform - Eric Sugar, President Having Reply’s security services showcased in the Microsoft Security Store is a significant milestone for us. It amplifies our ability to reach customers at the exact point where they evaluate and activate Microsoft security solutions, ensuring our offerings are visible alongside Microsoft’s trusted technologies. Notable New Selections Since public preview, the Security Store catalog has grown significantly. Customers can now choose from over 100 third-party solutions, including 60+ SaaS offerings and 50+ Security Copilot agents, with new additions every week. Recent highlights include Cisco Duo and Rubrik: Cisco Duo IAM delivers comprehensive, AI-driven identity protection combining MFA, SSO, passwordless and unified directory management. Duo IAM seamlessly integrates across the Microsoft Security suite—enhancing Entra ID with risk-based authentication and unified access policy management across cloud and on-premises applications seamlessly in just a few clicks. Intune for device compliance and access enforcement. Sentinel for centralized security monitoring and threat detection through critical log ingestion about authentication events, administrator actions, and risk-based alerts, providing real-time visibility across the identity stack. Rubrik's data security platform delivers complete cyber resilience across enterprise, cloud, and SaaS alongside Microsoft. Through the Microsoft Sentinel integration, Rubrik’s data management capabilities are combined with Sentinel’s security analytics to accelerate issue resolution, enabling unified visibility and streamlined responses. Furthermore, Rubrik empowers organizations to reduce identity risk and ensure operational continuity with real-time protection, unified visibility and rapid recovery across Microsoft Active Directory and Entra ID infrastructure. The Road Ahead This is just the beginning. Microsoft Security Store will continue to make it even easier for customers to improve their security outcomes by tapping into the innovation and expertise of our growing partner ecosystem. The momentum we’re seeing is clear—customers are already gaining real efficiencies and stronger outcomes by adopting AI-powered agents. As we work together with partners, we’ll unlock even more automation, deeper integrations, and new capabilities that help security teams move faster and respond smarter. Explore the Security Store today to see what’s possible. For a more detailed walk-through of the capabilities, read our previous public preview Tech Community post If you’re a partner, now is the time to list your solutions and join us in shaping the future of security.GenAI vs Cyber Threats: Why GenAI Powered Unified SecOps Wins
Cybersecurity is evolving faster than ever. Attackers are leveraging automation and AI to scale their operations, so how can defenders keep up? The answer lies in Microsoft Unified Security Operations powered by Generative AI (GenAI). This opens the Cybersecurity Paradox: Attackers only need one successful attempt, but defenders must always be vigilant, otherwise the impact can be huge. Traditional Security Operation Centers (SOCs) are hampered by siloed tools and fragmented data, which slows response and creates vulnerabilities. On average, attackers gain unauthorized access to organizational data in 72 minutes, while traditional defense tools often take on average 258 days to identify and remediate. This is over eight months to detect and resolve breaches, a significant and unsustainable gap. Notably, Microsoft Unified Security Operations, including GenAI-powered capabilities, is also available and supported in Microsoft Government Community Cloud (GCC) and GCC High/DoD environments, ensuring that organizations with the highest compliance and security requirements can benefit from these advanced protections. The Case for Unified Security Operations Unified security operations in Microsoft Defender XDR consolidates SIEM, XDR, Exposure management, and Enterprise Security Posture into a single, integrated experience. This approach allows the following: Breaks down silos by centralizing telemetry across identities, endpoints, SaaS apps, and multi-cloud environments. Infuses AI natively into workflows, enabling faster detection, investigation, and response. Microsoft Sentinel exemplifies this shift with its Data Lake architecture (see my previous post on Microsoft Sentinel’s New Data Lake: Cut Costs & Boost Threat Detection), offering schema-on-read flexibility for petabyte-scale analytics without costly data rehydration. This means defenders can query massive datasets in real time, accelerating threat hunting and forensic analysis. GenAI: A Force Multiplier for Cyber Defense Generative AI transforms security operations from reactive to proactive. Here’s how: Threat Hunting & Incident Response GenAI enables predictive analytics and anomaly detection across hybrid identities, endpoints, and workloads. It doesn’t just find threats—it anticipates them. Behavioral Analytics with UEBA Advanced User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) powered by AI correlates signals from multi-cloud environments and identity providers like Okta, delivering actionable insights for insider risk and compromised accounts. [13 -Micros...s new UEBA | Word] Automation at Scale AI-driven playbooks streamline repetitive tasks, reducing manual workload and accelerating remediation. This frees analysts to focus on strategic threat hunting. Microsoft Innovations Driving This Shift For SOC teams and cybersecurity practitioners, these innovations mean you spend less time on manual investigations and more time leveraging actionable insights, ultimately boosting productivity and allowing you to focus on higher-value security work that matters most to your organization. Plus, by making threat detection and response faster and more accurate, you can reduce stress, minimize risk, and demonstrate greater value to your stakeholders. Sentinel Data Lake: Unlocks real-time analytics at scale, enabling AI-driven threat detection without rehydration costs. Microsoft Sentinel data lake overview UEBA Enhancements: Multi-cloud and identity integrations for unified risk visibility. Sentinel UEBA’s Superpower: Actionable Insights You Can Use! Now with Okta and Multi-Cloud Logs! Security Copilot & Agentic AI: Harnesses AI and global threat intelligence to automate detection, response, and compliance across the security stack, enabling teams to scale operations and strengthen Zero Trust defenses defenders. Security Copilot Agents: The New Era of AI, Driven Cyber Defense Sector-Specific Impact All sectors are different, but I would like to focus a bit on the public sector at this time. This sector and critical infrastructure organizations face unique challenges: talent shortages, operational complexity, and nation-state threats. GenAI-centric platforms help these sectors shift from reactive defense to predictive resilience, ensuring mission-critical systems remain secure. By leveraging advanced AI-driven analytics and automation, public sector organizations can streamline incident detection, accelerate response times, and proactively uncover hidden risks before they escalate. With unified platforms that bridge data silos and integrate identity, endpoint, and cloud telemetry, these entities gain a holistic security posture that supports compliance and operational continuity. Ultimately, embracing generative AI not only helps defend against sophisticated cyber adversaries but also empowers public sector teams to confidently protect the services and infrastructure their communities rely on every day. Call to Action Artificial intelligence is driving unified cybersecurity. Solutions like Microsoft Defender XDR and Sentinel now integrate into a single dashboard, consolidating alerts, incidents, and data from multiple sources. AI swiftly correlates information, prioritizes threats, and automates investigations, helping security teams respond quickly with less manual work. This shift enables organizations to proactively manage cyber risks and strengthen their resilience against evolving challenges. Picture a single pane of glass where all your XDRs and Defenders converge, AI instantly shifts through the noise, highlighting what matters most so teams can act with clarity and speed. That may include: Assess your SOC maturity and identify silos. Use the Security Operations Self-Assessment Tool to determine your SOC’s maturity level and provide actionable recommendations for improving processes and tooling. Also see Security Maturity Model from the Well-Architected Framework Explore Microsoft Sentinel, Defender XDR, and Security Copilot for AI-powered security. Explains progressive security maturity levels and strategies for strengthening your security posture. What is Microsoft Defender XDR? - Microsoft Defender XDR and What is Microsoft Security Copilot? Design Security in Solutions from Day One! Drive embedding security from the start of solution design through secure-by-default configurations and proactive operations, aligning with Zero Trust and MCRA principles to build resilient, compliant, and scalable systems. Design Security in Solutions from Day One! Innovate boldly, Deploy Safely, and Never Regret it! Upskill your teams on GenAI tools and responsible AI practices. Guidance for securing AI apps and data, aligned with Zero Trust principles Build a strong security posture for AI About the Author: Hello Jacques "Jack” here! I am a Microsoft Technical Trainer focused on helping organizations use advanced security and AI solutions. I create and deliver training programs that combine technical expertise with practical use, enabling teams to adopt innovations like Microsoft Sentinel, Defender XDR, and Security Copilot for stronger cyber resilience. #SkilledByMTT #MicrosoftLearnBlog Series: Securing the Future: Protecting AI Workloads in the Enterprise
Post 1: The Hidden Threats in the AI Supply Chain Your AI Supply Chain Is Under Attack — And You Might Not Even Know It Imagine deploying a cutting-edge AI model that delivers flawless predictions in testing. The system performs beautifully, adoption soars, and your data science team celebrates. Then, a few weeks later, you discover the model has been quietly exfiltrating sensitive data — or worse, that a single poisoned dataset altered its decision-making from the start. This isn’t a grim sci-fi scenario. It’s a growing reality. AI systems today rely on a complex and largely opaque supply chain — one built on shared models, open-source frameworks, third-party datasets, and cloud-based APIs. Each link in that chain represents both innovation and vulnerability. And unless organizations start treating the AI supply chain as a security-critical system, they risk building intelligence on a foundation they can’t fully trust. Understanding the AI Supply Chain Much like traditional software, modern AI models rarely start from scratch. Developers and data scientists leverage a mix of external assets to accelerate innovation — pretrained models from public repositories like Hugging Face (https://huggingface.co/), data from external vendors, third-party labeling services, and open-source ML libraries. Each of these layers forms part of your AI supply chain — the ecosystem of components that power your model’s lifecycle, from data ingestion to deployment. In many cases, organizations don’t fully know: Where their datasets originated. Whether the pretrained model they fine-tuned was modified or backdoored. If the frameworks powering their pipeline contain known vulnerabilities. AI’s strength — its openness and speed of adoption — is also its greatest weakness. You can’t secure what you don’t see, and most teams have very little visibility into the origins of their AI assets. The New Threat Landscape Attackers have taken notice. As enterprises race to operationalize AI, threat actors are shifting their attention from traditional IT systems to the AI layer itself — particularly the model and data supply chain. Common attack vectors now include: Data poisoning: Injecting subtle malicious samples into training data to bias or manipulate model behavior. Model backdoors: Embedding hidden triggers in pretrained models that can be activated later. Dependency exploits: Compromising widely used ML libraries or open-source repositories. Model theft and leakage: Extracting proprietary weights or exploiting exposed inference APIs. These attacks are often invisible until after deployment, when the damage has already been done. In 2024, several research teams demonstrated how tampered open-source LLMs could leak sensitive data or respond with biased or unsafe outputs — all due to poisoned dependencies within the model’s lineage. The pattern is clear: adversaries are no longer only targeting applications; they’re targeting the intelligence that drives them. Why Traditional Security Approaches Fall Short Most organizations already have strong DevSecOps practices for traditional software — automated scanning, dependency tracking, and secure Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) pipelines. But those frameworks were never designed for the unique properties of AI systems. Here’s why: Opacity: AI models are often black boxes. Their behavior can change dramatically from minor data shifts, making tampering hard to detect. Lack of origin: Few organizations maintain a verifiable “family tree” of their models and datasets. Limited tooling: Security tools that detect code vulnerabilities don’t yet understand model weights, embeddings, or training lineage. In other words: You can’t patch what you can’t trace. The absence of traceability leaves organizations flying blind — relying on trust where verification should exist. Securing the AI Supply Chain: Emerging Best Practices The good news is that a new generation of frameworks and controls is emerging to bring security discipline to AI development. The following strategies are quickly becoming best practices in leading enterprises: Establish Model Origin and Integrity Maintain a record of where each model originated, who contributed to it, and how it’s been modified. Implement cryptographic signing for model artifacts. Use integrity checks (e.g., hash validation) before deploying any model. Incorporate continuous verification into your MLOps pipeline. This ensures that only trusted, validated models make it to production. Create a Model Bill of Materials (MBOM) Borrowing from software security, an MBOM documents every dataset, dependency, and component that went into building a model — similar to an SBOM for code. Helps identify which datasets and third-party assets were used. Enables rapid response when vulnerabilities are discovered upstream. Organizations like NIST, MITRE, and the Cloud Security Alliance are developing frameworks to make MBOMs a standard part of AI risk management. NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework NIST AI RMF Playbook https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework/nist-ai-rmf-playbook MITRE AI Risk Database (with Robust Intelligence) https://www.mitre.org/news-insights/news-release/mitre-and-robust-intelligence-tackle-ai-supply-chain-risks MITRE’s SAFE-AI Framework https://atlas.mitre.org/pdf-files/SAFEAI_Full_Report.pdf Cloud Security Alliance – AI Model Risk Management Framework https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/ai-model-risk-management-framework Secure Your Data Supply Chain The quality and integrity of training data directly shape model behavior. Validate datasets for anomalies, duplicates, or bias. Use data versioning and lineage tracking for full transparency. Where possible, apply differential privacy or watermarking to protect sensitive data. Remember: even small amounts of corrupted data can lead to large downstream risks. Evaluate Third-Party and Open-Source Dependencies Open-source AI tools are powerful — but not always trustworthy. Regularly scan models and libraries for known vulnerabilities. Vet external model vendors and require transparency about their security practices. Treat external ML assets as untrusted code until verified. A simple rule of thumb: if you wouldn’t deploy a third-party software package without security review, don’t deploy a third-party model that way either. The Path Forward: Traceability as the Foundation of AI Trust AI’s transformative potential depends on trust — and trust depends on visibility. Securing your AI supply chain isn’t just about compliance or risk mitigation; it’s about protecting the integrity of the intelligence that drives business decisions, customer interactions, and even national infrastructure. As AI becomes the engine of enterprise innovation, we must bring the same rigor to securing its foundations that we once brought to software itself. Every model has a lineage. Every lineage is a potential attack path. In the next post, we’ll explore how to apply DevSecOps principles to MLOps pipelines — securing the entire AI lifecycle from data collection to deployment. Key Takeaway The AI supply chain is your new attack surface. The only way to defend it is through visibility, origin, and continuous validation — before, during, and after deployment. Contributors Juan José Guirola Sr. (Security GBB for Advanced Identity - Microsoft) References Hugging Face - https://huggingface.co/ Research Gate - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381514112_Exploiting_Privacy_Vulnerabilities_in_Open_Source_LLMs_Using_Maliciously_Crafted_Prompts/fulltext/66722cb1de777205a338bbba/Exploiting-Privacy-Vulnerabilities-in-Open-Source-LLMs-Using-Maliciously-Crafted-Prompts.pdf NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework NIST AI RMF Playbook https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework/nist-ai-rmf-playbook MITRE AI Risk Database (with Robust Intelligence) https://www.mitre.org/news-insights/news-release/mitre-and-robust-intelligence-tackle-ai-supply-chain-risks MITRE’s SAFE-AI Framework https://atlas.mitre.org/pdf-files/SAFEAI_Full_Report.pdf Cloud Security Alliance – AI Model Risk Management Framework https://cloudsecurityalliance.org/artifacts/ai-model-risk-management-frameworkIntroducing Microsoft Security Store
Security is being reengineered for the AI era—moving beyond static, rulebound controls and after-the-fact response toward platform-led, machine-speed defense. We recognize that defending against modern threats requires the full strength of an ecosystem, combining our unique expertise and shared threat intelligence. But with so many options out there, it’s tough for security professionals to cut through the noise, and even tougher to navigate long procurement cycles and stitch together tools and data before seeing meaningful improvements. That’s why we built Microsoft Security Store - a storefront designed for security professionals to discover, buy, and deploy security SaaS solutions and AI agents from our ecosystem partners such as Darktrace, Illumio, and BlueVoyant. Security SaaS solutions and AI agents on Security Store integrate with Microsoft Security products, including Sentinel platform, to enhance end-to-end protection. These integrated solutions and agents collaborate intelligently, sharing insights and leveraging AI to enhance critical security tasks like triage, threat hunting, and access management. In Security Store, you can: Buy with confidence – Explore solutions and agents that are validated to integrate with Microsoft Security products, so you know they’ll work in your environment. Listings are organized to make it easy for security professionals to find what’s relevant to their needs. For example, you can filter solutions based on how they integrate with your existing Microsoft Security products. You can also browse listings based on their NIST Cybersecurity Framework functions, covering everything from network security to compliance automation — helping you quickly identify which solutions strengthen the areas that matter most to your security posture. Simplify purchasing – Buy solutions and agents with your existing Microsoft billing account without any additional payment setup. For Azure benefit-eligible offers, eligible purchases contribute to your cloud consumption commitments. You can also purchase negotiated deals through private offers. Accelerate time to value – Deploy agents and their dependencies in just a few steps and start getting value from AI in minutes. Partners offer ready-to-use AI agents that can triage alerts at scale, analyze and retrieve investigation insights in real time, and surface posture and detection gaps with actionable recommendations. A rich ecosystem of solutions and AI agents to elevate security posture In Security Store, you’ll find solutions covering every corner of cybersecurity—threat protection, data security and governance, identity and device management, and more. To give you a flavor of what is available, here are some of the exciting solutions on the store: Darktrace’s ActiveAI Security SaaS solution integrates with Microsoft Security to extend self-learning AI across a customer's entire digital estate, helping detect anomalies and stop novel attacks before they spread. The Darktrace Email Analysis Agent helps SOC teams triage and threat hunt suspicious emails by automating detection of risky attachments, links, and user behaviors using Darktrace Self-Learning AI, integrated with Microsoft Defender and Security Copilot. This unified approach highlights anomalous properties and indicators of compromise, enabling proactive threat hunting and faster, more accurate response. Illumio for Microsoft Sentinel combines Illumio Insights with Microsoft Sentinel data lake and Security Copilot to enhance detection and response to cyber threats. It fuses data from Illumio and all the other sources feeding into Sentinel to deliver a unified view of threats across millions of workloads. AI-driven breach containment from Illumio gives SOC analysts, incident responders, and threat hunters unified visibility into lateral traffic threats and attack paths across hybrid and multi-cloud environments, to reduce alert fatigue, prioritize threat investigation, and instantly isolate workloads. Netskope’s Security Service Edge (SSE) platform integrates with Microsoft M365, Defender, Sentinel, Entra and Purview for identity-driven, label-aware protection across cloud, web, and private apps. Netskope's inline controls (SWG, CASB, ZTNA) and advanced DLP, with Entra signals and Conditional Access, provide real-time, context-rich policies based on user, device, and risk. Telemetry and incidents flow into Defender and Sentinel for automated enrichment and response, ensuring unified visibility, faster investigations, and consistent Zero Trust protection for cloud, data, and AI everywhere. PERFORMANTA Email Analysis Agent automates deep investigations into email threats, analyzing metadata (headers, indicators, attachments) against threat intelligence to expose phishing attempts. Complementing this, the IAM Supervisor Agent triages identity risks by scrutinizing user activity for signs of credential theft, privilege misuse, or unusual behavior. These agents deliver unified, evidence-backed reports directly to you, providing instant clarity and slashing incident response time. Tanium Autonomous Endpoint Management (AEM) pairs realtime endpoint visibility with AI-driven automation to keep IT environments healthy and secure at scale. Tanium is integrated with the Microsoft Security suite—including Microsoft Sentinel, Defender for Endpoint, Entra ID, Intune, and Security Copilot. Tanium streams current state telemetry into Microsoft’s security and AI platforms and lets analysts pivot from investigation to remediation without tool switching. Tanium even executes remediation actions from the Sentinel console. The Tanium Security Triage Agent accelerates alert triage, enabling security teams to make swift, informed decisions using Tanium Threat Response alerts and real-time endpoint data. Walkthrough of Microsoft Security Store Now that you’ve seen the types of solutions available in Security Store, let’s walk through how to find the right one for your organization. You can get started by going to the Microsoft Security Store portal. From there, you can search and browse solutions that integrate with Microsoft Security products, including a dedicated section for AI agents—all in one place. If you are using Microsoft Security Copilot, you can also open the store from within Security Copilot to find AI agents - read more here. Solutions are grouped by how they align with industry frameworks like NIST CSF 2.0, making it easier to see which areas of security each one supports. You can also filter by integration type—e.g., Defender, Sentinel, Entra, or Purview—and by compliance certifications to narrow results to what fits your environment. To explore a solution, click into its detail page to view descriptions, screenshots, integration details, and pricing. For AI agents, you’ll also see the tasks they perform, the inputs they require, and the outputs they produce —so you know what to expect before you deploy. Every listing goes through a review process that includes partner verification, security scans on code packages stored in a secure registry to protect against malware, and validation that integrations with Microsoft Security products work as intended. Customers with the right permissions can purchase agents and SaaS solutions directly through Security Store. The process is simple: choose a partner solution or AI agent and complete the purchase in just a few clicks using your existing Microsoft billing account—no new payment setup required. Qualifying SaaS purchases also count toward your Microsoft Azure Consumption Commitment (MACC), helping accelerate budget approvals while adding the security capabilities your organization needs. Security and IT admins can deploy solutions directly from Security Store in just a few steps through a guided experience. The deployment process automatically provisions the resources each solution needs—such as Security Copilot agents and Microsoft Sentinel data lake notebook jobs—so you don’t have to do so manually. Agents are deployed into Security Copilot, which is built with security in mind, providing controls like granular agent permissions and audit trails, giving admins visibility and governance. Once deployment is complete, your agent is ready to configure and use so you can start applying AI to expand detection coverage, respond faster, and improve operational efficiency. Security and IT admins can view and manage all purchased solutions from the “My Solutions” page and easily navigate to Microsoft Cost Management tools to track spending and manage subscriptions. Partners: grow your business with Microsoft For security partners, Security Store opens a powerful new channel to reach customers, monetize differentiated solutions, and grow with Microsoft. We will showcase select solutions across relevant Microsoft Security experiences, starting with Security Copilot, so your offerings appear in the right context for the right audience. You can monetize both SaaS solutions and AI agents through built-in commerce capabilities, while tapping into Microsoft’s go-to-market incentives. For agent builders, it’s even simpler—we handle the entire commerce lifecycle, including billing and entitlement, so you don’t have to build any infrastructure. You focus on embedding your security expertise into the agent, and we take care of the rest to deliver a seamless purchase experience for customers. Security Store is built on top of Microsoft Marketplace, which means partners publish their solution or agent through the Microsoft Partner Center - the central hub for managing all marketplace offers. From there, create or update your offer with details about how your solution integrates with Microsoft Security so customers can easily discover it in Security Store. Next, upload your deployable package to the Security Store registry, which is encrypted for protection. Then define your license model, terms, and pricing so customers know exactly what to expect. Before your offer goes live, it goes through certification checks that include malware and virus scans, schema validation, and solution validation. These steps help give customers confidence that your solutions meet Microsoft’s integration standards. Get started today By creating a storefront optimized for security professionals, we are making it simple to find, buy, and deploy solutions and AI agents that work together. Microsoft Security Store helps you put the right AI‑powered tools in place so your team can focus on what matters most—defending against attackers with speed and confidence. Get started today by visiting Microsoft Security Store. If you’re a partner looking to grow your business with Microsoft, start by visiting Microsoft Security Store - Partner with Microsoft to become a partner. Partners can list their solution or agent if their solution has a qualifying integration with Microsoft Security products, such as a Sentinel connector or Security Copilot agent, or another qualifying MISA solution integration. You can learn more about qualifying integrations and the listing process in our documentation here.Cybersecurity: What Every Business Leader Needs to Know Now
As a Senior Cybersecurity Solution Architect, I’ve had the privilege of supporting organisations across the United Kingdom, Europe, and the United States—spanning sectors from finance to healthcare—in strengthening their security posture. One thing has become abundantly clear: cybersecurity is no longer the sole domain of IT departments. It is a strategic imperative that demands attention at board-level. This guide distils five key lessons drawn from real-world engagements to help executive leaders navigate today’s evolving threat landscape. These insights are not merely technical—they are cultural, operational, and strategic. If you’re a C-level executive, this article is a call to action: reassess how your organisation approaches cybersecurity before the next breach forces the conversation. In this article, I share five lessons (and quotes) from the field that help demystify how to enhance an organisation’s security posture. 1. Shift the Mindset “This has always been our approach, and we’ve never experienced a breach—so why should we change it?” A significant barrier to effective cybersecurity lies not in the sophistication of attackers, but in the predictability of human behaviour. If you’ve never experienced a breach, it’s tempting to maintain the status quo. However, as threats evolve, so too must your defences. Many cyber threats exploit well-known vulnerabilities that remain unpatched or rely on individuals performing routine tasks in familiar ways. Human nature tends to favour comfort and habit—traits that adversaries are adept at exploiting. Unlike many organisations, attackers readily adopt new technologies to advance their objectives, including AI-powered ransomware to execute increasingly sophisticated attacks. It is therefore imperative to recognise—without delay—that the advent of AI has dramatically reduced both the effort and time required to compromise systems. As the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has stated: “AI lowers the barrier for novice cyber criminals, hackers-for-hire and hacktivists to carry out effective access and information gathering operations. This enhanced access will likely contribute to the global ransomware threat over the next two years.” Similarly, McKinsey & Company observed: “As AI quickly advances cyber threats, organisations seem to be taking a more cautious approach, balancing the benefits and risks of the new technology while trying to keep pace with attackers’ increasing sophistication.” To counter this evolving threat landscape, organisations must proactively leverage AI in their cyber defence strategies. Examples include: Identity and Access Management (IAM): AI enhances IAM by analysing real-time signals across systems to detect risky sign-ins and enforce adaptive access controls. Example: Microsoft Entra Agents for Conditional Access use AI to automate policy recommendations, streamlining access decisions with minimal manual input. Figure 1: Microsoft Entra Agents Threat Detection: AI accelerates detection, response, and recovery, helping organisations stay ahead of sophisticated threats. Example: Microsoft Defender for Cloud’s AI threat protection identifies prompt injection, data poisoning, and wallet attacks in real time. Incident Response: AI facilitates real-time decision-making, removing emotional bias and accelerating containment and recovery during security incidents. Example: Automatic Attack Disruption in Defender XDR, which can automatically contain a breach in progress. AI Security Posture Management AI workloads require continuous discovery, classification, and protection across multi-cloud environments. Example: Microsoft Defender for Cloud’s AI Security Posture Management secures custom AI apps across Azure, AWS, and GCP by detecting misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, and compliance gaps. Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) for AI AI interactions must be governed to ensure privacy, compliance, and insider risk mitigation. Example: Microsoft Purview DSPM for AI enables prompt auditing, applies Data Loss Prevention (DLP) policies to third-party AI apps like ChatGPT, and supports eDiscovery and lifecycle management. AI Threat Protection Organisations must address emerging AI threat vectors, including prompt injection, data leakage, and model exploitation. Example: Defender for AI (private preview) provides model-level security, including governance, anomaly detection, and lifecycle protection. Embracing innovation, automation, and intelligent defence is the secret sauce for cyber resilience in 2026. 2. Avoid One-Off Purchases – Invest with a Strategy “One MDE and one Sentinel to go, please.” Organisations often approach me intending to purchase a specific cybersecurity product—such as Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (MDE)—without a clearly articulated strategic rationale. My immediate question is: what is the broader objective behind this purchase? Is it driven by perceived value or popularity, or does it form part of a well-considered strategy to enhance endpoint security? Cybersecurity investments should be guided by a long-term, holistic strategy that spans multiple years and is periodically reassessed to reflect evolving threats. Strengthening endpoint protection must be integrated into a wider effort to improve the organisation’s overall security posture. This includes ensuring seamless integration between security solutions and avoiding operational silos. For example, deploying robust endpoint protection is of limited value if identities are not safeguarded with multi-factor authentication (MFA), or if storage accounts remain publicly accessible. A cohesive and forward-looking approach ensures that all components of the security architecture work in concert to mitigate risk effectively. Security Adoption Journey (Based on Zero Trust Framework) Assess – Evaluate the threat landscape, attack surface, vulnerabilities, compliance obligations, and critical assets. Align – Link security objectives to broader business goals to ensure strategic coherence. Architect – Design integrated and scalable security solutions, addressing gaps and eliminating operational silos. Activate – Implement tools with robust governance and automation to ensure consistent policy enforcement. Advance – Continuously monitor, test, and refine the security posture to stay ahead of evolving threats. Security tools are not fast food—they work best as part of a long-term plan, not a one-off order. This piecemeal approach runs counter to the modern Zero Trust security model, which assumes no single tool will prevent every breach and instead implements layered defences and integration. 3. Legacy Systems Are Holding You Back “Unfortunately, we are unable to implement phishing-resistant MFA, as our legacy app does not support integration with the required protocols.” A common challenge faced by many organisations I have worked with is the constraint on innovation within their cybersecurity architecture, primarily due to continued reliance on legacy applications—often driven by budgetary or operational necessity. These outdated systems frequently lack compatibility with modern security technologies and may introduce significant vulnerabilities. A notable example is the deployment of phishing-resistant multi-factor authentication (MFA)—such as FIDO2 security keys or certificate-based authentication—which requires advanced identity protocols and conditional access policies. These capabilities are available exclusively through Microsoft Entra ID. To address this issue effectively, it is essential to design security frameworks based on the organisation’s future aspirations rather than its current limitations. By adopting a forward-thinking approach, organisations can remain receptive to emerging technologies that align with their strategic cybersecurity objectives. Moreover, this perspective encourages investment in acquiring the necessary talent, thereby reducing reliance on extensive change management and staff retraining. I advise designing for where you want to be in the next 1–3 years—ideally cloud-first and identity-driven—essentially adopting a Zero Trust architecture, rather than being constrained by the limitations of legacy systems. 4. Collaboration Is a Security Imperative “This item will need to be added to the dev team's backlog. Given their current workload, they will do their best to implement GitHub Security in Q3, subject to capacity.” Cybersecurity threats may originate from various parts of an organisation, and one of the principal challenges many face is the fragmented nature of their defence strategies. To effectively mitigate such risks, cybersecurity must be embedded across all departments and functions, rather than being confined to a single team or role. In many organisations, the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) operates in isolation from other C-level executives, which can limit their influence and complicate the implementation of security measures across the enterprise. Furthermore, some teams may lack the requisite expertise to execute essential security practices. For instance, an R&D lead responsible for managing developers may not possess the necessary skills in DevSecOps. To address these challenges, it is vital to ensure that the CISO is empowered to act without political or organisational barriers and is supported in implementing security measures across all business units. When the CISO has backing from the COO and HR, initiatives such as MFA rollout happen faster and more thoroughly. Cross-Functional Security Responsibilities Role Security Responsibilities R&D - Adopt DevSecOps practices - Identify vulnerabilities early - Manage code dependencies - Detect exposed secrets - Embed security in CI/CD pipelines CIO - Ensure visibility over organizational data - Implement Data Loss Prevention (DLP) - Safeguard sensitive data lifecycle - Ensure regulatory compliance CTO - Secure cloud environments (CSPM) - Manage SaaS security posture (SSPM) - Ensure hardware and endpoint protection COO - Protect digital assets - Secure domain management - Mitigate impersonation threats - Safeguard digital marketing channels and customer PII Support & Vendors - Deliver targeted training - Prevent social engineering attacks - Improve awareness of threat vectors HR - Train employees on AI-related threats - Manage insider risks - Secure employee data - Oversee cybersecurity across the employee lifecycle Empowering the CISO to act across departments helps organisations shift towards a security-first culture—embedding cybersecurity into every function, not just IT. 5. Compliance Is Not Security “We’re compliant, so we must be secure.” Many organisations mistakenly equate passing audits—such as ISO 27001 or SOC 2—with being secure. While compliance frameworks help establish a baseline for security, they are not a guarantee of protection. Determined attackers are not deterred by audit checklists; they exploit gaps, misconfigurations, and human error regardless of whether an organisation is certified. Moreover, due to the rapidly evolving nature of the cyber threat landscape, compliance frameworks often struggle to keep pace. By the time a standard is updated, attackers may already be exploiting new techniques that fall outside its scope. This lag creates a false sense of security for organisations that rely solely on regulatory checkboxes. Security is a continuous risk management process—not a one-time certification. It must be embedded into every layer of the enterprise and treated with the same urgency as other core business priorities. Compliance may be the starting line, not the finish line. Effective security goes beyond meeting regulatory requirements—it demands ongoing vigilance, adaptability, and a proactive mindset. Conclusion: Cybersecurity Is a Continuous Discipline Cybersecurity is not a destination—it is a continuous journey. By embracing strategic thinking, cross-functional collaboration, and emerging technologies, organisations can build resilience against today’s threats and tomorrow’s unknowns. The lessons shared throughout this article are not merely technical—they are cultural, operational, and strategic. If there is one key takeaway, it is this: avoid piecemeal fixes and instead adopt an integrated, future-ready security strategy. Due to the rapidly evolving nature of the cyber threat landscape, compliance frameworks alone cannot keep pace. Security must be treated as a dynamic, ongoing process—one that is embedded into every layer of the enterprise and reviewed regularly. Organisations should conduct periodic security posture reviews, leveraging tools such as Microsoft Secure Score or monthly risk reports, and stay informed about emerging threats through threat intelligence feeds and resources like the Microsoft Digital Defence Report, CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency), NCSC (UK National Cyber Security Centre), and other open-source intelligence platforms. As Ann Johnson aptly stated in her blog: “The most prepared organisations are those that keep asking the right questions and refining their approach together.” Cyber resilience demands ongoing investment—in people (through training and simulation drills), in processes (via playbooks and frameworks), and in technology (through updates and adoption of AI-driven defences). To reduce cybersecurity risk over time, resilient organisations must continually refine their approach and treat cybersecurity as an ongoing discipline. The time to act is now. Resources: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/report/impact-of-ai-on-cyber-threat Defend against cyber threats with AI solutions from Microsoft - Microsoft Industry Blogs Generative AI Cybersecurity Solutions | Microsoft Security Require phishing-resistant multifactor authentication for Microsoft Entra administrator roles - Microsoft Entra ID | Microsoft Learn AI is the greatest threat—and defense—in cybersecurity today. Here’s why. Microsoft Entra Agents - Microsoft Entra | Microsoft Learn Smarter identity security starts with AI https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2025/06/12/cyber-resilience-begins-before-the-crisis/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/security-insider/threat-landscape/microsoft-digital-defense-report-2023-critical-cybersecurity-challenges https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2025/06/12/cyber-resilience-begins-before-the-crisis/
Unveiling the Shadows: Extended Critical Asset Protection with MSEM
As cybersecurity evolves, identifying critical assets becomes an essential step in exposure management, as it allows for the prioritization of the most significant assets. This task is challenging because each type of critical asset requires different data to indicate its criticality. The challenge is even greater when a critical asset is not managed by a security agent such as EDR or AV, making the relevant data unreachable. Breaking traditional boundaries, Microsoft Security Exposure Management leverages multiple insights and signals to provide enhanced visibility into both managed and unmanaged critical assets. This approach allows customers to enhance visibility and facilitates more proactive defense strategies by maintaining an up-to-date, prioritized inventory of assets. Visibility is the Key Attackers often exploit unmanaged assets to compromise systems, pivot, or target sensitive data. The risk escalates if these devices are critical and have access to valuable information. Thus, organizations must ensure comprehensive visibility across their networks. This blog post will discuss methods Microsoft Security Exposure Management uses to improve visibility into both managed and unmanaged critical assets. Case Study: Domain Controllers A domain controller server is one of the most critical assets within an organization’s environment. It authenticates users, stores sensitive Active Directory data like user password hashes, and enforces security policies. Threat actors frequently target domain controller servers because once they are compromised, they gain high privileges, which allow full control over the network. This can result in a massive impact, such as organization-wide encryption. Therefore, having the right visibility into both managed and unmanaged domain controllers is crucial to protect the organization's network. Microsoft Security Exposure Management creates such visibility by collecting and analyzing signals and events from Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (MDE) onboarded devices. This approach extends, enriches, and improves the customer’s device inventory, ensuring comprehensive insight into both managed and unmanaged domain controller assets. Domain Controller Discovery Methods Microsoft Browser Protocol The Microsoft Browser protocol, a component of the SMB protocol, facilitates the discovery and connection of network resources within a Windows environment. Once a Windows server is promoted to a domain controller, the operating system automatically broadcasts Microsoft Browser packets to the local network, indicating that the originating server is a domain controller. These packets hold meaningful information such as the device’s name, operating system-related information, and more. 1: An MSBrowser packet originating from a domain controller. Microsoft Security Exposure Management leverages Microsoft Defender for Endpoint’s deep packet inspection capabilities to parse and extract valuable data such as the domain controller’s NetBios name, operating system version and more from the Microsoft Browser protocol. Group Policy Events Group Policy (GPO) is a key component in every Active Directory environment. GPO allows administrators to manage and configure operating systems, applications, and user settings in an Active Directory domain-joined environment. Depending on the configuration, every domain-joined device locates the relevant domain controller within the same Active Directory site and pulls the relevant group policies that should be applied. During this process, the client's operating system audits valuable information within the Windows event log Once the relevant event has been observed on an MDE onboarded device, valuable information such as the domain controller’s FQDN and IP address is extracted from it. LDAP Protocol A domain controller stores the Active Directory configuration in a central database that is replicated between the domain controllers within the same domain. This database holds user data, user groups, security policies, and more. To query and update information in this database, a dedicated network protocol, LDAP (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol), is used. For example, to retrieve a user’s display name or determine their group membership, an LDAP query is directed to the domain controller for the relevant information. This same database also holds details about other domain controllers, configured domain trusts, and additional domain-related metadata. 3: Domain controller computer account in Active directory Users and Computers management console. Once a domain controller is onboarded to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, the LDAP protocol is used to identify all other domain controllers within the same domain, along with their operating system information, FQDN, and more. Identifying what is critical After gaining visibility through various protocols, it's crucial to identify which domain controllers are production and contain sensitive data, distinguishing them from test assets in a testing environment. Microsoft Security Exposure Management uses several techniques, including tracking the number of devices, users, and logins, to accurately identify production domain controllers. Domain controllers and other important assets not identified as production assets are not automatically classified as critical assets by the system. However, they remain visible under the relevant classification, allowing customers to manually override the system’s decision and classify them as critical. Building the Full Picture In addition to classifying assets as domain controllers, Microsoft Security Exposure Management provides customers with additional visibility by automatically classifying other critical devices and identities such as Exchange servers, VMware vCenter, backup servers, and more. 4: Microsoft Defender XDR Critical Asset Management settings page. Identifying critical assets and distinguishing them from other assets empowers analysts and administrators with additional information to prioritize tasks related to these assets. The context of asset criticality is integrated within various Microsoft Defender XDR experiences, including the device page, incidents, and more. This empowers customers to streamline SOC operations, swiftly prioritize and address threats to critical assets, implement targeted security recommendations, and disrupt ongoing attacks. For those looking to learn more about critical assets and exposure management, here are some additional resources you can explore. Overview of critical asset protection - Overview of critical asset management in Microsoft Security Exposure Management - Microsoft Security Exposure Management | Microsoft Learn Learn about predefined classifications - Criticality Levels for Classifications - Microsoft Security Exposure Management | Microsoft Learn Overview of critical assets protection blog post - Critical Asset Protection with Microsoft Security Exposure Management | Microsoft Community Hub
