Azure Cloud HSM: Secure, Compliant & Ready for Enterprise Migration
Azure Cloud HSM is Microsoft’s single-tenant, FIPS 140-3 Level 3 validated hardware security module service, designed for organizations that need full administrative control over cryptographic keys in the cloud. It’s ideal for migration scenarios, especially when moving on-premises HSM workloads to Azure with minimal application changes. Onboarding & Availability No Registration or Allowlist Needed: Azure Cloud HSM is accessible to all customers no special onboarding or monetary policy required. Regional Availability: Private Preview: UK West Public Preview (March 2025): East US, West US, West Europe, North Europe, UK West General Availability (June 2025): All public, US Gov, and AGC regions where Azure Managed HSM is available Choosing the Right Azure HSM Solution Azure offers several key management options: Azure Key Vault (Standard/Premium) Azure Managed HSM Azure Payment HSM Azure Cloud HSM Cloud HSM is best for: Migrating existing on-premises HSM workloads to Azure Applications running in Azure VMs or Web Apps that require direct HSM integration Shrink-wrapped software in IaaS models supporting HSM key stores Common Use Cases: ADCS (Active Directory Certificate Services) SSL/TLS offload for Nginx and Apache Document and code signing Java apps needing JCE provider SQL Server TDE (IaaS) via EKM Oracle TDE Deployment Best Practices 1. Resource Group Strategy Deploy the Cloud HSM resource in a dedicated resource group (e.g., CHSM-SERVER-RG). Deploy client resources (VM, VNET, Private DNS Zone, Private Endpoint) in a separate group (e.g., CHSM-CLIENT-RG) 2. Domain Name Reuse Policy Each Cloud HSM requires a unique domain name, constructed from the resource name and a deterministic hash. Four reuse types: Tenant, Subscription, ResourceGroup, and NoReuse choose based on your naming and recovery needs. 3. Step-by-Step Deployment Provision Cloud HSM: Use Azure Portal, PowerShell, or CLI. Provisioning takes ~10 minutes. Register Resource Provider: (Register-AzResourceProvider -ProviderNamespace Microsoft.HardwareSecurityModules) Create VNET & Private DNS Zone: Set up networking in the client resource group. Create Private Endpoint: Connect the HSM to your VNET for secure, private access. Deploy Admin VM: Use a supported OS (Windows Server, Ubuntu, RHEL, CBL Mariner) and download the Azure Cloud HSM SDK from GitHub. Initialize and Configure Edit azcloudhsm_resource.cfg: Set the hostname to the private link FQDN for hsm1 (found in the Private Endpoint DNS config). Initialize Cluster: Use the management utility (azcloudhsm_mgmt_util) to connect to server 0 and complete initialization. Partition Owner Key Management: Generate the PO key securely (preferably offline). Store PO.key on encrypted USB in a physical safe. Sign the partition cert and upload it to the HSM. Promote Roles: Promote Precrypto Officer (PRECO) to Crypto Officer (CO) and set strong password Security, Compliance, and Operations Single-Tenant Isolation: Only your organization has admin access to your HSM cluster. No Microsoft Access: Microsoft cannot access your keys or credentials. FIPS 140-3 Level 3 Compliance: All hardware and firmware are validated and maintained by Microsoft and the HSM vendor. Tamper Protection: Physical and logical tamper events trigger key zeroization. No Free Tier: Billing starts upon provisioning and includes all three HSM nodes in the cluster. No Key Sharing with Azure Services: Cloud HSM is not integrated with other Azure services for key usage. Operational Tips Credential Management: Store PO.key offline; use environment variables or Azure Key Vault for operational credentials. Rotate credentials regularly and document all procedures. Backup & Recovery: Backups are automatic and encrypted; always confirm backup/restore after initialization. Support: All support is through Microsoft open a support request for any issues. Azure Cloud HSM vs. Azure Managed HSM Feature / Aspect Azure Cloud HSM Azure Managed HSM Deployment Model Single-tenant, dedicated HSM cluster (Marvell LiquidSecurity hardware) Multi-tenant, fully managed HSM service FIPS Certification FIPS 140-3 Level 3 FIPS 140-2 Level 3 Administrative Control Full admin control (Partition Owner, Crypto Officer, Crypto User roles) Azure manages HSM lifecycle; customers manage keys and RBAC Key Management Customer-managed keys and partitions; direct HSM access Azure-managed HSM; customer-managed keys via Azure APIs Integration PKCS#11, OpenSSL, JCE, KSP/CNG, direct SDK access Azure REST APIs, Azure CLI, PowerShell, Key Vault SDKs Use Cases Migration from on-prem HSMs, legacy apps, custom PKI, direct cryptographic ops Cloud-native apps, SaaS, PaaS, Azure-integrated workloads Network Access Private VNET only; not accessible by other Azure services Accessible by Azure services (e.g., Storage, SQL, Disk Encryption) Key Usage by Azure Services Not supported (no integration with Azure services) Supported (can be used for disk, storage, SQL encryption, etc.) BYOK/Key Import Supported (with key wrap methods) Supported (with Azure Key Vault import tools) Key Export Supported (if enabled at key creation) Supported (with exportable keys) Billing Hourly fee per cluster (3 HSMs per cluster); always-on Consumption-based (per operation, per key, per hour) Availability High availability via 3-node cluster; automatic failover and backup Geo-redundant, managed by Azure Firmware Management Microsoft manages firmware; customer cannot update Fully managed by Azure Compliance Meets strictest compliance (FIPS 140-3 Level 3, single-tenant isolation) Meets broad compliance (FIPS 140-2 Level 3, multi-tenant isolation) Best For Enterprises migrating on-prem HSM workloads, custom/legacy integration needs Cloud-native workloads, Azure service integration, simplified management When to Choose Each? Azure Cloud HSM is ideal if you: Need full administrative control and single-tenant isolation. Are migrating existing on-premises HSM workloads to Azure. Require direct HSM access for legacy or custom applications. Need to meet the highest compliance standards (FIPS 140-3 Level 3). Azure Managed HSM is best if you: Want a fully managed, cloud-native HSM experience. Need seamless integration with Azure services (Storage, SQL, Disk Encryption, etc.). Prefer simplified key management with Azure RBAC and APIs. Are building new applications or SaaS/PaaS solutions in Azure. Scenario Recommended Solution Migrating on-prem HSM to Azure Azure Cloud HSM Cloud-native app needing Azure service keys Azure Managed HSM Custom PKI or direct cryptographic operations Azure Cloud HSM SaaS/PaaS with Azure integration Azure Managed HSM Highest compliance, single-tenant isolation Azure Cloud HSM Simplified management, multi-tenant Azure Managed HSM Azure Cloud HSM is the go-to solution for organizations migrating HSM-backed workloads to Azure, offering robust security, compliance, and operational flexibility. By following best practices for onboarding, deployment, and credential management, you can ensure a smooth and secure transition to the cloud.
Hunting for MFA manipulations in Entra ID tenants using KQL
The following article, Hunting for MFA manipulations in Entra ID tenants using KQL proved to be an invaluable resource in my search for an automated way to notify users of MFA modifications. I've adapted the KQL query to function within Defender Advanced Hunting or Azure Entra, my objective is to establish an alert that directly E-Mails the affected user, informing them of the MFA change and advising them to contact security if they did not initiate it. While the query runs correctly under Defender Advanced Hunting, I'm currently unable to create a workable custom alert because no "ReportId" is being captured. Despite consulting with Copilot, Gemini, CDW Support, and Microsoft Support, no workable solution has been achieved. Any insight would be greatly appreciated - Thank You! //Advanced Hunting query to parse modified: //StrongAuthenticationUserDetails (SAUD) //StrongAuthenticationMethod (SAM) let SearchWindow = 1h; let AuthenticationMethods = dynamic(["TwoWayVoiceMobile","TwoWaySms","TwoWayVoiceOffice","TwoWayVoiceOtherMobile","TwoWaySmsOtherMobile","OneWaySms","PhoneAppNotification","PhoneAppOTP"]); let AuthenticationMethodChanges = CloudAppEvents | where ActionType == "Update user." and RawEventData contains "StrongAuthenticationMethod" | extend Target = tostring(RawEventData.ObjectId) | extend Actor = tostring(RawEventData.UserId) | mv-expand ModifiedProperties = parse_json(RawEventData.ModifiedProperties) | where ModifiedProperties.Name == "StrongAuthenticationMethod" | project Timestamp,Actor,Target,ModifiedProperties,RawEventData,ReportId; let OldValues = AuthenticationMethodChanges | extend OldValue = parse_json(tostring(ModifiedProperties.OldValue)) | mv-apply OldValue on (extend Old_MethodType=tostring(OldValue.MethodType),Old_Default=tostring(OldValue.Default) | sort by Old_MethodType); let NewValues = AuthenticationMethodChanges | extend NewValue = parse_json(tostring(ModifiedProperties.NewValue)) | mv-apply NewValue on (extend New_MethodType=tostring(NewValue.MethodType),New_Default=tostring(NewValue.Default) | sort by New_MethodType); let RemovedMethods = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | join kind=leftouter NewValues on ReportId,$left.Old_MethodType==$right.New_MethodType | where Old_MethodType != New_MethodType | extend Action = strcat("Removed (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(Old_MethodType)], ") from Authentication Methods.") | extend ChangedValue = "Method Removed"; let AddedMethods = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner NewValues on ReportId | join kind=leftouter OldValues on ReportId,$left.New_MethodType==$right.Old_MethodType | where Old_MethodType != New_MethodType | extend Action = strcat("Added (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)], ") as Authentication Method.") | extend ChangedValue = "Method Added"; let DefaultMethodChanges = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | join kind=inner NewValues on ReportId | where Old_Default != New_Default and Old_MethodType == New_MethodType and New_Default == "true" | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | where Old_Default1 == "true" and Old_MethodType1 != New_MethodType | extend Old_MethodType = Old_MethodType1 | extend Action = strcat("Default Authentication Method was changed to (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)], ").") | extend ChangedValue = "Default Method"; let AuthenticationMethodReport = union RemovedMethods,AddedMethods,DefaultMethodChanges | project Timestamp,Action,Actor,Target,ChangedValue,OldValue=case(isempty(Old_MethodType), "",strcat(Old_MethodType,": ", AuthenticationMethods[toint(Old_MethodType)])),NewValue=case(isempty( New_MethodType),"", strcat(New_MethodType,": ", AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)])); let AuthenticationDetailsChanges = CloudAppEvents | where ActionType == "Update user." and RawEventData contains "StrongAuthenticationUserDetails" | extend Target = tostring(RawEventData.ObjectId) | extend Actor = tostring(RawEventData.UserId) | extend ReportId= tostring(RawEventData.ReportId) | mvexpand ModifiedProperties = parse_json(RawEventData.ModifiedProperties) | where ModifiedProperties.Name == "StrongAuthenticationUserDetails" | extend NewValue = parse_json(replace_string(replace_string(tostring(ModifiedProperties.NewValue),"[",""),"]","")) | extend OldValue = parse_json(replace_string(replace_string(tostring(ModifiedProperties.OldValue),"[",""),"]","")) | mv-expand NewValue | mv-expand OldValue | where (tostring( bag_keys(OldValue)) == tostring(bag_keys(NewValue))) or (isempty(OldValue) and tostring(NewValue) !contains ":null") or (isempty(NewValue) and tostring(OldValue) !contains ":null") | extend ChangedValue = tostring(bag_keys(NewValue)[0]) | extend OldValue = tostring(parse_json(OldValue)[ChangedValue]) | extend NewValue = tostring(parse_json(NewValue)[ChangedValue]) | extend OldValue = case(ChangedValue == "PhoneNumber" or ChangedValue == "AlternativePhoneNumber", replace_strings(OldValue,dynamic([' ','(',')']), dynamic(['','',''])), OldValue ) | extend NewValue = case(ChangedValue == "PhoneNumber" or ChangedValue == "AlternativePhoneNumber", replace_strings(NewValue,dynamic([' ','(',')']), dynamic(['','',''])), NewValue ) | where tostring(OldValue) != tostring(NewValue) | extend Action = case(isempty(OldValue), strcat("Added new ",ChangedValue, " to Strong Authentication."),isempty(NewValue),strcat("Removed existing ",ChangedValue, " from Strong Authentication."),strcat("Changed ",ChangedValue," in Strong Authentication.")); union AuthenticationMethodReport, AuthenticationDetailsChanges | extend AccountUpn = Target | where Timestamp > ago(SearchWindow) //| summarize count() by Timestamp, Action, Actor, Target, ChangedValue, OldValue, NewValue, ReportId, AccountDisplayName, AccountId, AccountUpn | summarize arg_max(Timestamp, *) by Action | project Timestamp, Action, Actor, Target, ChangedValue, OldValue, NewValue, ReportId, AccountDisplayName, AccountId, AccountUpn | sort by Timestamp descCannot login to Service Trust Portal
Hi, I'm trying to get some certificates from the service trust portal, but I keep getting "Service Trust Portal no longer support Microsoft Account (MSA) access." I'm using an account registered on Azure and I checked the Azure Active Directory, and the user exists (seeing it's the owner of the account). What am I missing here?Anomalies with Conditional Access Policy "Terms of Use" Failures
Hello Microsoft Community, I'm reaching out with a bit of a puzzle regarding our "Terms of Use" Conditional Access policy, and I'm eager to tap into the collective wisdom here for some insights. In our Entra ID User Sign-In logs, we've identified intermittent "failure" entries associated with the "Terms of Use" Conditional Access policy. Interestingly, even for users who had previously accepted the "Terms of Use". There appears to be no discernible impact, and they continue their tasks without interruption. This observation became apparent during the troubleshooting of unrelated Surface Hub and Edge Sync issues at some client sites. What adds to the complexity of the situation is that for the same users, both before and after these "failure" entries, the Conditional Access policy is marked as "success". Hence, it doesn't seem to be a straightforward case of the policy erroneously detecting non-acceptance of the "Terms of Use". The mystery lies in understanding why these intermittent "failure" entries occur for users who have already accepted the terms, especially when the policy consistently reports "success" for the same users. Furthermore, the Insights for the "Terms of Use" Conditional Access policy show around 1.48k successes and 1.43k failures in the last 90 days, yet there's no discernible impact on user functionality. Observations: "Failure" entries in Sign-In logs don't seem to disrupt users' day-to-day activities. The ratio of successes to failures is balanced, yet users experience no noticeable problems. The issue complicates troubleshooting efforts but doesn't significantly affect the user experience. I'm turning to the community for guidance on interpreting and resolving this discrepancy between "failure" entries in the Conditional Access policy logs and the seemingly unaffected user experience. Any insights into why these failures occur without user impact would be greatly appreciated. For additional context, I've attached screenshots of a user's Sign-In log entry and the insight chart from the Conditional Access policy. Sign-In log of a user (failure): Sign-In log of same user (success): Current Conditional Access insights: Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. I look forward to any guidance or solutions you can provide. Best regards, Leon Tüpker
RSS feeds to security blogs?
Hello, After the update of blogs here i no longer see any RSS feeds or links. Where can those RSS feed be found now? It was the only newsfeed where blogs could be aggregated. perhaps im just blind :) but i cant find the new RSS feeds. Thank you! Previously (before this weeks update) the links to those RSS feed was as follows: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSecurityandCompliance https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Identity https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=CoreInfrastructureandSecurityBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=AzureNetworkSecurityBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=IdentityStandards https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftThreatProtectionBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderCloudBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderATPBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderIoTBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=DefenderExternalAttackSurfaceMgmtBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Vulnerability-Management https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=DefenderThreatIntelligence https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSecurityExperts https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Microsoft-Security-Baselines https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSentinelBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderforOffice365Blog
SMTP XOAuth authentication and Microsoft authentication libraries
Due to the upcoming deprecation of basic authentication our company is looking to move all our products to modern authentication protocols for sending emails but we have some unusual usage scenarios that have me running in circles. I have been through all available documentation multiple times and I'm stuck. The problem is that we have on premise web applications that are running on multiple client servers and not a central location. This creates a problem when using standard OAuth flows since there is no fixed URL to use as a redirect URI. Because of this I have created a separate API on a fixed URL that will serve as the redirect URI for all clients and instances of our web applications. This breaks the standard usage of MSAL library and I had to go around chasing my tail to even be able to implement something that could possibly work. I have been able to do it using Microsoft.Identity.Client MSAL library but I hit a problem since I need to use the ConfidentialClientApp.AcquireTokenByAuthorizationCode call to redeem the access code obtained after user login but apparently SMTP does not allow confidential clients to login. We need the application to be able to send emails from any account any tenant or personal accounts. I have obtained the access token for a personal account but SMTP rejects it with this error: 535: 5.7.3 Authentication unsuccessful [AM8P251CA0016.EURP251.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM]. If I switch to PublicClientApplication then there is no AcquireTokenByAuthorizationCode method and I can't even use client secret so I'm not even sure how this works in redeeming a code. I am going by instructions on this page: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/client-developer/legacy-protocols/how-to-authenticate-an-imap-pop-smtp-application-by-using-oauth and it mentions no requirement of a public client application. It states I can use authorization code flow and the documentation on authorization code flow states it can be used by web apps and desktop apps. Well how am I supposed to use it when SMTP won't accept a confidential app and the PublicClientApplication does not have a method to redeem it? If I drop the authentication library and go for pure REST API call implementation, which application credentials should I use that the acquired tokens will be accepted by the SMTP server? Also I would like to know if office 365 users still have to disable security defaults and enable STMP Authentication to use SMTP with OAuth 2? This would defeat the whole purpose of migrating to OAuth 2 and the blog about deprecation states that moving to OAuth 2 is the way to prepare your app for this deprecation, but I've seen instructions on SMTP OAuth that state SMTP Authentication still needs to be enabled.WAF custom rule for bock others cookie and permit only a specific cookie name and value
Hello all, I need to create a custom WAF rule that only allows traffic for a specific request URI (/example-path) if it contains a particular cookie, Cookie=abc123, and blocks all other requests. Additionally, could someone clarify the difference between configuring the policy this way: RequestHeaders['Cookie'], Operator=DoesNotEqual, Values="Cookie=abc123" RequestCookie, Values="CookieName", Operator=Equal, valueOfTheCookie="abc123" I hope I explained myself clearly. Thanks in advance for your responses!Azure OpenAI FedRAMP High + M365 Copilot Targeting Sept 2025 for GCC High/DOD
We’re excited to share two major updates for our public sector and defense customers: Azure OpenAI Service is now FedRAMP High authorized for Azure Government. This approval allows government agencies to securely leverage advanced AI capabilities, including GPT-4o, within their Azure Government environment. For the first time, we’re targeting a General Availability (GA) of September 2025 for Microsoft 365 Copilot in GCC High and DOD environments (pending government authorization). Copilot will deliver powerful AI tools tailored for decision-making, automation, and enhanced collaboration, all while meeting the strict compliance and security needs of our defense and government customers. For more information on these updates and how they can impact your workflows, check out the full blog post Let’s discuss how you’re planning to use these AI advancements in your environments!
Block standard C:\Users\%User%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps Path environment variable
Hello togehter, for security reasons I like to block (GPO?) / delete the standard Windows-path-enviroment variable: C:\Users\%User%\AppData\Local\Microsoft\WindowsApps First of all: Does it make sense to do this? I want to exclude a case that some user / unwanted software are copied here by attackers. Thanks a lot Kevin
New Blog | Onboard to Azure Arc with Security in Mind
By Simone Oor Introduction Azure Arc allows certain on-premises resources, typically servers, to be managed from Azure, depending on the configuration mode selected and currently available features. While this allows for a more integrated approach to hybrid environments, it also further blurs the administrative boundary between on-premises and cloud. This increases the risk that a vulnerability on either side lowers the level of security across the entire plane. This article contains tips for managing this risk and approaching Arc Onboarding with security in mind. It focuses only on servers. The link below contains information about the full range of Azure Arc: Azure Arc overview - Azure Arc | Microsoft Learn. Azure Arc and its service principal Onboarding to Azure Arc can be done using a service principal in Entra ID for authentication. Service principals can be thought of as “service accounts” in Azure. One way of generating this service principal is from the Azure Arc blade in the Azure portal. Navigate to Azure Arc / Management / Service principals. Below one such an entry: Figure 1: Azure Arc service principals Here the scope of the service principal (for example the resource group “RG-ARC”) and the Arc-specific roles can be assigned. Most common is the “Azure Connected Machine Onboarding” role, as shown above. Read the full post here: Onboard to Azure Arc with Security in Mind
