Hunting AI Agent Configuration Drift with Microsoft Sentinel
Four KQL patterns for detecting instruction changes, new MCP servers, ownership changes, and organization-wide sharing I recently authored and contributed four new Microsoft Sentinel hunting queries for detecting security-relevant configuration drift in AI agents. They have been reviewed, approved, and merged into Microsoft's public Azure-Sentinel repository. I built the queries around four changes that can materially affect an agent's behavior, access, or exposure: instructions being modified, MCP servers being connected, owners being added, and sharing being expanded to the entire organization. Each modification may be legitimate, but each deserves enough context for a security team to verify that it was expected and authorized. For a security operations team, the difficult question is often not what does this agent look like now? It is what changed since the last known state? Microsoft Sentinel's AgentsInfo table provides inventory-style snapshots of AI agents and their associated configuration. That makes it useful for more than posture reporting. By comparing a recent snapshot with an earlier baseline, we can hunt for configuration drift that deserves investigation. This post walks through four practical hunting scenarios: Instructions changed on a previously published agent A newly observed MCP server on an existing agent An owner added to an MCP-enabled agent Sharing expanded from a restricted scope to the entire organization The complete hunting queries are available in Microsoft's public https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/tree/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents. The focus here is the detection design behind them, the KQL patterns they share, and the investigation questions they help answer. What I contributed I wrote the four standalone hunting queries discussed in this article and submitted them to Azure/Azure-Sentinel in https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/pull/14702: AI Agents - Instructions changed on previously published agent AI Agents - Newly observed MCP server on existing agent AI Agents - Owner added to MCP-enabled agent AI Agents - Sharing expanded to organization-wide The contribution went through several rounds of technical review. Across six commits, I aligned the queries with the unified AgentsInfo schema, added schema-tolerant IdentityInfo enrichment, improved entity mappings, bounded the identity lookback, expanded all owner values, and kept the ATT&CK mappings limited to scenarios where a precise technique could be defended. Repository collaborator v-atulyadav approved the final revision, and the four queries were merged into master on July 20, 2026. This article explains the detection logic and engineering decisions behind that contribution rather than simply reproducing the final YAML files. Why current-state queries are not enough A current-state query can answer questions such as: Which agents are published? Which agents have MCP servers configured? Which agents are shared with the organization? Who owns a particular agent? Those are important posture questions, but they do not tell us whether the state is new. An agent with an MCP server might have been reviewed and approved months ago. The same MCP server appearing for the first time today is a different security signal. Configuration-drift hunting adds the missing time dimension. Instead of treating a risky-looking property as an event, it compares two states of the same agent and reports only meaningful transitions. The common detection pattern I used the same basic time model across all four hunts: let lookback = 14d; let recent = 2d; The latest snapshot observed during the last two days becomes the current state. The latest snapshot from the preceding portion of the 14-day lookback becomes the baseline. Conceptually, the comparison looks like this: let CurrentState = AgentsInfo | where Timestamp > ago(recent) | summarize arg_max(Timestamp, *) by AgentId | where LifecycleStatus != "Deleted"; let BaselineState = AgentsInfo | where Timestamp between (ago(lookback) .. ago(recent)) | where LifecycleStatus != "Deleted" | summarize arg_max(Timestamp, *) by AgentId; CurrentState | join kind=inner BaselineState on AgentId Several details matter here: arg_max(Timestamp, *) by AgentId selects the latest available state for each agent in the relevant time range. The inner join restricts results to agents that exist in both periods. A newly created agent is therefore not automatically treated as configuration drift on an existing agent. Deleted lifecycle snapshots are excluded so that a deletion record does not become the effective baseline or current configuration. The two-day current window is operationally significant. To retain coverage, these hunts should run within two days of a change. The 14-day and two-day values are practical defaults, not universal constants. Environments with different ingestion cadence or retention requirements can adjust them, but the current and baseline windows must remain non-overlapping. Scenario 1: Instructions changed on a published agent An agent's instructions define its default behavior, persona, and operating boundaries. Changing them can be part of normal development, but it can also weaken restrictions, redirect the agent's behavior, or modify how it uses connected capabilities. The first hunt compares the current and previous instruction values only when the agent was published in both snapshots: CurrentState | join kind=inner BaselineState on AgentId | where CurrentInstructions != PreviousInstructions | extend PreviousInstructionsHash = hash_sha256(PreviousInstructions), CurrentInstructionsHash = hash_sha256(CurrentInstructions), InstructionsLengthDelta = strlen(CurrentInstructions) - strlen(PreviousInstructions) I deliberately chose to expose hashes and a length delta rather than returning both instruction bodies in plaintext. This confirms that a change occurred without unnecessarily spreading potentially sensitive prompts through query results, exports, or screenshots. Useful investigation questions include: Was the change associated with an approved development or release process? Did the agent remain published while the instructions changed? Were guardrails, declared tools, permissions, or sharing settings modified around the same time? Do audit records identify an expected actor and change path? The query maps well to an integrity-focused investigation. Its MITRE ATT&CK mapping is T1565.001 (Stored Data Manipulation), but the result is still a hunting lead rather than proof of malicious manipulation. https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoInstructionsChangedOnPublishedAgent.yaml Scenario 2: A newly observed MCP server Model Context Protocol servers can extend an agent with external tools, data sources, or actions. From a defender's perspective, the important transition is not simply that an MCP server exists. It is that a server name appears in the current configuration but was absent from the baseline. The query expands the dynamic McpServers array and builds a set of server names for each agent: let CurrentMcp = CurrentRaw | mv-expand Mcp = McpServers | extend McpName = tostring(Mcp.name) | where isnotempty(McpName) | summarize CurrentMcpServers = make_set(McpName) by AgentI It performs the same normalization for the baseline, then calculates the difference: | extend AddedMcpServers = set_difference(CurrentMcpServers, BaselineMcpServers) | where array_length(AddedMcpServers) > 0 Using set_difference() avoids raising a result merely because the order of array elements changed. The hunt reports only MCP server names present in the current set and absent from the previous set. An analyst should validate more than the displayed name: Is the MCP integration part of the approved inventory? What endpoint, authentication method, and permissions are associated with it? Which tools or data can the server expose to the agent? Was the integration introduced through an expected deployment path? Did ownership, instructions, or sharing change in the same period? I did not assign an ATT&CK technique to this query. Adding an MCP server does not, by itself, prove command execution, persistence, or a specific attacker behavior. Avoiding an overly broad mapping keeps the signal honest. https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoNewlyObservedMcpServer.yaml Scenario 3: An owner added to an MCP-enabled agent Ownership is a control-plane relationship. A newly added owner may be able to modify an agent's configuration, instructions, integrations, or publication state. The risk becomes more interesting when the agent already has MCP servers configured. The hunt first limits the current state to MCP-enabled agents: | where array_length(coalesce(McpServers, dynamic([]))) > 0 | project AgentId, Timestamp, Name, Platform, CreatedDateTime, CurrentOwners = coalesce(Owners, dynamic([])), McpServers It then compares the owner arrays as sets: | extend AddedOwners = set_difference(CurrentOwners, PreviousOwners) | where array_length(AddedOwners) > 0 | mv-expand AddedOwnerId = AddedOwners to typeof(string) Expanding AddedOwners produces one row per newly observed owner. This is more useful than returning one opaque dynamic array because every added identity can be enriched, mapped, and investigated independently. I kept the raw object identifier in the result even when identity enrichment fails: | extend AddedOwnerUpn = AccountUpn, UnresolvedAddedOwnerId = iff(isempty(AccountUpn), AddedOwnerId, "") That fallback matters. A missing UPN should not hide the underlying ownership change. Investigation should establish: Is the added owner an expected person, service identity, or administrative group? Does the identity's role and business function justify control of this agent? Was the owner added before other configuration changes? Does the identity appear in related sign-in, audit, or privileged-access activity? Should ownership be removed while the change is reviewed? This query maps to T1098 (Account Manipulation) under Persistence and Privilege Escalation. As with the instruction-change hunt, the mapping frames an investigation hypothesis; it does not label every ownership change as malicious. https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoOwnerAddedToMcpAgent.yaml Scenario 4: Sharing expanded to the entire organization An agent can move from a limited audience to organization-wide availability without changing its underlying tools or instructions. That transition can materially increase exposure, especially when the agent has MCP integrations or declared tools. The hunt treats "*" in SharedWith as the organization-wide state. The current snapshot must contain it, while the baseline must not: // Current state | where set_has_element(coalesce(SharedWith, dynamic([])), "*") // Baseline state | where not(set_has_element(coalesce(SharedWith, dynamic([])), "*")) The result also counts MCP servers and declared tools: | extend McpServerCount = array_length(coalesce(McpServers, dynamic([]))), DeclaredToolCount = array_length(coalesce(DeclaredTools, dynamic([]))) | extend HasElevatedCapabilities = McpServerCount > 0 or DeclaredToolCount > 0 | sort by HasElevatedCapabilities desc, Timestamp desc I use HasElevatedCapabilities as a prioritization field, not a verdict. It brings agents with connected capabilities to the top of the result set so analysts can review the potentially larger blast radius first. Questions for triage include: Was organization-wide publication explicitly approved? Is the agent intended for every user, or was a group-based scope expected? What data sources, tools, and MCP servers can organization-wide users reach through it? Do the instructions contain assumptions that were safe only for a restricted audience? Were access reviews or user-acceptance tests completed before the expansion? No ATT&CK mapping is assigned because a broader sharing scope is a security-relevant exposure change, but not a sufficiently precise adversary technique on its own. https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoSharingExpandedToOrgWide.yaml Resolving owners without making the hunt schema-fragile The Owners field contains identifiers. Human-readable identity context makes results easier to triage, and entity mappings make those identities more useful in Sentinel investigations. I built a small, materialized IdentityInfo lookup that is shared by the four hunts: let IdentityIdtoUPN = materialize( IdentityInfo | extend ResolvedAccountUpn = tostring( column_ifexists("AccountUpn", column_ifexists("AccountUPN", ""))), IdentityTimestamp = todatetime( column_ifexists("Timestamp", column_ifexists("TimeGenerated", datetime(null)))) | where IdentityTimestamp >= ago(lookback) | where isnotempty(AccountObjectId) and isnotempty(ResolvedAccountUpn) | summarize arg_max(IdentityTimestamp, ResolvedAccountUpn) by AccountObjectId | project AccountObjectId = tostring(AccountObjectId), AccountUpn = ResolvedAccountUpn); There are three design choices worth noting: column_ifexists() accommodates observed IdentityInfo naming variants without maintaining separate query versions. The lookup is bounded by the same lookback period instead of scanning unbounded identity history. arg_max() keeps the latest usable identity record for each object ID. After enrichment, the queries map the account using the UPN components and the Entra object ID: entityMappings: - entityType: Account fieldMappings: - identifier: Name columnName: OwnerAccountName - identifier: UPNSuffix columnName: OwnerAccountUPNSuffix - identifier: AadUserId columnName: OwnerId The strong AadUserId identifier remains valuable even when display information changes. Microsoft Sentinel can use mapped entities in bookmarks and investigation experiences, so mapping the changed owner is more than cosmetic enrichment. Turning a result into an investigation These queries intentionally stop at the configuration transition. AgentsInfo tells us that two snapshots differ; it does not necessarily tell us who performed the change, through which interface, or whether the action was authorized. A practical investigation workflow is: Confirm that the two snapshots represent the expected agent and time period. Review the exact changed property and the agent's current capabilities. Identify the owner or newly added owner through IdentityInfo and Entra ID context. Correlate the transition with the relevant audit source for actor attribution. Check for related changes to permissions, tools, data sources, publication state, and sharing. Validate the change against an approved request, release, or ownership process. Restrict, unpublish, or revert the agent if the exposure cannot be justified. Expected changes can still be useful findings. Repeated legitimate results may reveal that a deployment process lacks a stable change window, that ownership is managed through noisy automation, or that the hunt's timing needs to be aligned with release activity. Tuning the hunts for your environment Before operational use, consider the following adjustments: Run cadence: Execute within the two-day current window. A daily cadence provides overlap without blending current and baseline periods. Lookback: Increase the 14-day lookback only if snapshot history and query cost support it. A longer lookback does not compensate for missing the current window. Known change windows: Add watchlists or environment-specific suppression logic for well-controlled automated deployments, while retaining enough context to audit the change. Agent scope: Filter by platform, business unit, agent naming convention, or owner if different teams require separate triage queues. Risk prioritization: Raise agents with sensitive declared data sources, powerful tools, privileged owners, or broad availability to the top of the result set. Audit correlation: Keep attribution logic separate unless the audit source and join keys are stable in your environment. This makes the configuration-drift hunt reusable while allowing each organization to attach its own control-plane evidence. Test with representative snapshots before treating any hunt as an operational control. In particular, validate array shapes for Owners, McpServers, and SharedWith, confirm the identity fields present in your workspace, and exercise both changed and unchanged states. Using the queries The four YAML definitions have been merged into the Hunting Queries/AI Agents folder of Microsoft's Azure-Sentinel repository. Each file contains the complete KQL, description, entity mappings, and ATT&CK mappings where a precise technique applies. https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoInstructionsChangedOnPublishedAgent.yaml https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoNewlyObservedMcpServer.yaml https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoOwnerAddedToMcpAgent.yaml https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/blob/master/Hunting%20Queries/AI%20Agents/AgentsInfoSharingExpandedToOrgWide.yaml The broader pattern is reusable beyond these four scenarios: select a stable current snapshot, select a non-overlapping baseline, normalize dynamic properties into comparable sets, calculate the transition, and enrich only after the drift has been identified. That keeps the core detection explainable and gives the analyst the before-and-after context needed for a defensible investigation. References https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/reference/tables/agentsinfo https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/reference/queries/agentsinfo https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-monitor/reference/tables/identityinfo https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/sentinel/entities-reference https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/pull/14702 I authored the four hunting queries discussed in this article and contributed them to Microsoft's Azure-Sentinel repository as https://github.com/Azure/Azure-Sentinel/pull/14702. The complete implementations and review history are publicly available through the links above.Sentinel - Defender XDR KQL Queries Library
Hello all, I’ve been building something over the past few weeks that I think the security community might find useful. https://goxdr.fyi is a searchable KQL query library for Microsoft Sentinel and Defender XDR. The name comes from a nickname my colleagues gave me (GoX) combined with XDR. I also picked up https://goxdr.fyi as a short and easy to remember domain for it. You can check it out here: https://goxdr.fyi The idea came from my own day to day work as someone working in IAM and SOC operations. I constantly find myself writing and refining KQL queries for threat hunting, detection engineering and incident investigation. Over time I realized I had a growing collection of queries that I kept going back to and I thought why not make these available to others? It currently has 117 queries covering identity security, BEC/AiTM detection, NTLM and LDAP attack hunting, OAuth governance, AI/Copilot security, Sentinel alert trending, SOC performance metrics and more. Some of these queries are ones I wrote from scratch based on real scenarios I encountered in production environments. Others are community queries I tested and validated in my own setup. Only the ones I found genuinely useful and that actually worked against real data made it in. Each query comes with a description explaining what it detects and why it matters, along with severity levels, platform tags (Sentinel, XDR or both) and a copy button so you can paste it directly into Advanced Hunting or use it as the basis for an Analytics Rule. The site is open source, hosted on GitHub Pages and licensed under CC BY 4.0. No sign-up, no paywall, no tracking. The source is available. I’ll keep adding queries as new scenarios come up. If there’s enough interest I’m also considering adding Cortex XQL queries for Palo Alto environments. Suggestions, feedback or ideas for new detections are always welcome. Feel free to reach out. ThanksDeclutter and Defend: Reducing promotional mail noise with Microsoft Defender
Enterprise inboxes are overwhelmed with graymail — legitimate, bulk email like newsletters, vendor promotions, and product updates that isn't malicious but buries the messages that matter. When high volumes of these mails land in the inbox, it crowds out priority communications and can dull security vigilance. Employees conditioned to ignore repetitive emails may miss signs of a real threat. It also creates recurring work for admins and security teams who must continuously tune filters, manage exception requests, and chase noise from user reports for email that isn’t malicious. Because graymail passes every spam filter check, traditional defenses don't separate it — leaving this signal-to-noise gap unaddressed. Today we’re excited to announce that Microsoft Defender now includes built-in graymail filtering. It is delivered natively through a new Promotions experience in Outlook that automatically classifies and separates bulk email, so it no longer competes with business-critical communication in the inbox. Now in Public Preview, this capability learns from how users interact with graymail to become more accurate over time. Coupled with the existing Bulk Senders Insight report, Defender brings data-driven bulk classification and control into the security workflows you already use. What Is Graymail? Graymail is legitimate bulk email that isn't malicious—product newsletters, event announcements, marketing promotions, and software update notifications from reputable, authenticated senders. It is distinct from spam and from phishing - graymail comes from real organizations with proper authentication and traditional spam filters aren't designed to handle it. Graymail handling in Microsoft Defender Microsoft Defender's approach is built on three principles: classify intelligently, deliver natively, and learn continuously. Promotions Folder — Intelligent Inbox Organization A dedicated Promotions folder, natively provisioned in Outlook, now keeps legitimate bulk mail out of the primary inbox. Promotional content is separated from priority emails without being sent to Junk, which means users can still access and browse newsletters and updates at their own pace. The folder appears at the top level of the mailbox for easy discovery and is visible across all Outlook experiences. Non-spam bulk mail below the organization's configured Bulk Complaint Level threshold is automatically routed to the Promotions folder. Messages from senders the user has explicitly allowed continue to land in the Inbox. Messages identified as spam continue to go to Junk. To enable the Promotions folder administrators need to enable the "Bulk Moves Enabled" setting in their anti-spam policy. The Promotions folder is then created for all users and used for routing only when this setting is ON. Existing mail flow is unaffected. Promotional mail tagging and Mailbox Rule Support Messages classified as graymail will automatically be labeled with a "Promotions" system tag in Outlook. The tag provides instant visual context without requiring users to open each message and is visible in Outlook on the Web and the native Outlook desktop apps for Windows and Mac. During Public Preview, the tagging component is opt-in, requiring administrators to enable it by configuring an Exchange Transport Rule. Once generally available, it will be enabled by default. Because this classification is integrated at the client level, the Promotions tag can also be used as a condition in Outlook mailbox rules. This enables custom routing logic for advanced scenarios like moving all promotions-tagged messages from a specific sender to a custom folder, flagging certain promotional emails for follow-up, or auto-forwarding or deleting promotions that meet specific criteria. This transforms the Promotions classification from a one-way filter into a flexible building block for personal and organizational workflows—particularly valuable for power users and teams with compliance or archival requirements. Adaptive Learning Microsoft Defender's graymail filtering gets smarter with every interaction. The system learns directly from how users handle their mail. When a user moves a message out of the Promotions folder and back to the Inbox, future emails from that sender will no longer be placed in the Promotions folder. When a user moves a message from the Inbox into the Promotions folder, future emails from that sender will be routed to the Promotions folder automatically. This creates a personalized, self-improving experience that becomes more accurate over time - no manual rule configuration required, no safe-sender lists to maintain, and no filtering rules for IT teams to manage on behalf of individual employees. Built into existing Security Workflows Administrators also gain visibility through the Bulk Senders Insight report, which provides data-driven guidance on what your organization actually receives and can help tune your bulk mail filtering. Graymail has long been the unsolved middle ground of email security—too legitimate to block, too noisy to ignore. Microsoft Defender now handles it where it should be handled: inside the platform, inside the mailbox, and inside the security workflows your organization already relies on. No new portals, no new vendors, no compromise between security and user experience. Get Started Configure promotions tagging and the promotions folder today - Bulk email detection documentation on Microsoft Learn. Monitor the experience using the Bulk Senders Insight report.Microsoft Sentinel data lake FAQ
Microsoft Sentinel data lake (generally available) is a purpose‑built, cloud‑native security data lake. It centralizes all security data in an open format, serving as the foundation for agentic defense, enhanced security insights, and graph-based enrichment. It offers cost‑effective ingestion, long‑term retention, and advanced analytics. In this blog we offer answers to many of the questions we’ve heard from our customers and partners. General questions What is the Microsoft Sentinel data lake? Microsoft has expanded its industry-leading SIEM solution, Microsoft Sentinel, to include a unified, security data lake, designed to help optimize costs, simplify data management, and accelerate the adoption of AI in security operations. This modern data lake serves as the foundation for the Microsoft Sentinel platform. It has a cloud-native architecture and is purpose-built for security—bringing together all security data for greater visibility, deeper security analysis, contextual awareness and agentic defense. It provides affordable, long-term retention, allowing organizations to maintain robust security while effectively managing budgetary requirements. What are the benefits of Sentinel data lake? Microsoft Sentinel data lake is purpose built for security offering flexible analytics, cost management, and deeper security insights. Sentinel data lake: Centralizes security data delta parquet and open format for easy access. This unified data foundation accelerates threat detection, investigation, and response across hybrid and multi-cloud environments. Enables data federation by allowing customers to access data in external sources like Microsoft Fabric, ADLS and Databricks from the data lake. Federated data appears alongside native Sentinel data, enabling correlated hunting, investigation, and custom graph analysis across a broader digital estate. Offers a disaggregated storage and compute pricing model, allowing customers to store massive volumes of security data at a fraction of the cost compared to traditional SIEM solutions. Allows multiple analytics engines like Kusto, Spark, and ML to run on a single data copy, simplifying management, reducing costs, and supporting deeper security analysis. Integrates with GitHub Copilot and VS Code empowering SOC teams to automate enrichment, anomaly detection, and forensic analysis. Supports AI agents via the MCP server, allowing tools like GitHub Copilot to query and automate security tasks. The MCP Server layer brings intelligence to the data, offering Semantic Search, Query Tools, and Custom Analysis capabilities that make it easier to extract insights and automate workflows. Provides streamlined onboarding, intuitive table management, and scalable multi-tenant support, making it ideal for MSSPs and large enterprises. The Sentinel data lake is designed for security workloads, ensuring that processes from ingestion to analytics meet evolving cybersecurity requirements. Is Microsoft Sentinel SIEM going away? No. Microsoft is expanding Sentinel into an AI powered end-to-end security platform that includes SIEM and new platform capabilities - Security data lake, graph-powered analytics and MCP Server. SIEM remains a core component and will be actively developed and supported. Getting started What are the prerequisites for Sentinel data lake? To get started: Connect your Sentinel workspace to Microsoft Defender prior to onboarding to Sentinel data lake. Once in the Defender experience see data lake onboarding documentation for next steps. Note: Sentinel is moving to the Microsoft Defender portal and the Sentinel Azure portal will be retired by March 31, 2027. I am a Sentinel-only customer, and not a Defender customer. Can I use the Sentinel data lake? Yes. You must connect Sentinel to the Defender experience before onboarding to the Sentinel data lake. Microsoft Sentinel is generally available in the Microsoft Defender portal, with or without Microsoft Defender XDR or an E5 license. If you have created a log analytics workspace, enabled it for Sentinel and have the right Microsoft Entra roles (e.g. Global Administrator + Subscription Owner, Security Administrator + Sentinel Contributor), you can enable Sentinel in the Defender portal. For more details on how to connect Sentinel to Defender review these sources: Microsoft Sentinel in the Microsoft Defender portal In what regions is Sentinel data lake available? For supported regions see: Geographical availability and data residency in Microsoft Sentinel | Azure Docs. Is there an expected release date for Microsoft Sentinel data lake in GCC, GCC-H, and DoD? While the exact date is not yet finalized, we plan to expand Sentinel data lake to the US Government environments. . How will URBAC and Entra RBAC work together to manage the data lake given there is no centralized model? Entra RBAC will provide broad access to the data lake (URBAC maps the right permissions to specific Entra role holders: GA/SA/SO/GR/SR). URBAC will become a centralized pane for configuring non-global delegated access to the data lake. For today, you will use this for the “default data lake” workspace. In the future, this will be enabled for non-default Sentinel workspaces as well – meaning all workspaces in the data lake can be managed here for data lake RBAC requirements. Azure RBAC on the Log Analytics (LA) workspace in the data lake is respected through URBAC as well today. If you already hold a built-in role like log analytics reader, you will be able to run interactive queries over the tables in that workspace. Or, if you hold log analytics contributor, you can read and manage table data. For more details see: Roles and permissions in the Microsoft Sentinel platform | Microsoft Learn Data ingestion and storage How do I ingest data into the Sentinel data lake? To ingest data into the Sentinel data lake, you can use existing Sentinel data connectors or custom connectors to bring data from Microsoft and third-party sources. Data can be ingested into the analytics tier or the data lake tier. Data ingested into the analytics tier is automatically mirrored to the lake (at no additional cost). Alternatively, data that is not needed in the analytics tier can be ingested directly into the data lake. Data retention is configured directly in table management, for both analytics retention and data lake storage. Note: Certain tables do not support data lake-only ingestion via either API or data connector UI. See here for more information: Custom log tables. What is Microsoft’s guidance on when to use analytics tier vs. the data lake tier? Sentinel data lake offers flexible, built-in data tiering (analytics and data lake tiers) to effectively meet diverse business use cases and achieve cost optimization goals. Analytics tier: Is ideal for high-performance, real-time, end-to-end detections, enrichments, investigation and interactive dashboards. Typically, high-fidelity data from EDRs, email gateways, identity, SaaS and cloud logs, threat intelligence (TI) should be ingested into the analytics tier. Data in the analytics tier is best monitored proactively with scheduled alerts and scheduled analytics to enable security detections Data in this tier is retained at no cost for up to 90 days by default, extendable to 2 years. A copy of the data in this tier is automatically available in the data lake tier at no extra cost, ensuring a unified copy of security data for both tiers. Data lake tier: Is designed for cost-effective, long-term storage. High-volume logs like NetFlow logs, TLS/SSL certificate logs, firewall logs and proxy logs are best suited for data lake tier. Customers can use these logs for historical analysis, compliance and auditing, incident response (IR), forensics over historical data, build tenant baselines, TI matching and then promote resulting insights into the analytics tier. Customers can run full Kusto queries, Spark Notebooks and scheduled jobs over a single copy of their data in the data lake. Customers can also search, enrich and promote data from the data lake tier to the analytics tier for full analytics. For more details see documentation. What does it mean that a copy of all new analytics tier data will be available in the data lake? When Sentinel data lake is enabled, a copy of all new data ingested into the analytics tier is automatically duplicated into the data lake tier. This means customers don’t need to manually configure or manage this process, every new log or telemetry added to the analytics tier becomes instantly available in the data lake. This allows security teams to run advanced analytics, historical investigations, and machine learning models on a single, unified copy of data in the lake, while still using the analytics tier for real-time SOC workflows. It’s a seamless way to support both operational and long-term use cases—without duplicating effort or cost. What is the guidance for customers using data federation capability in Sentinel data lake? Starting April 1, 2026, federate data from Microsoft Fabric, ADLS, and Azure Databricks into Sentinel data lake. Use data federation when data is exploratory, infrequently accessed, or must remain at source due to governance, compliance, sovereignty, or contractual requirements. Ingest data directly into Sentinel to unlock full SIEM capabilities, always-on detections, advanced automation, and AI‑driven defense at scale. This approach lets security teams start where their data already lives — preserving governance, then progressively ingest data into Sentinel for full security value. Is there any cost for retention in the analytics tier? Analytics ingestion includes 90 days of interactive retention, at no additional cost. Simply set analytics retention to 90 days or less. Analytics retention beyond 90 days will incur a retention cost. Data can be retained longer within the data lake by using the “total retention” setting. This allows you to extend retention within the data lake for up to 12 years. While data is retained within the analytics tier, there is no charge for the mirrored data within the lake. Retaining data in the lake beyond the analytics retention period incurs additional storage costs. See documentation for more details: Manage data tiers and retention in Microsoft Sentinel | Microsoft Learn What is the guidance for Microsoft Sentinel Basic and Auxiliary Logs customers? If you previously enabled Basic or Auxiliary Logs plan in Sentinel: You can view Basic Logs in the Defender portal but manage it from the Log Analytics workspace. To manage it in the Defender portal, you must change the plan from Basic to Analytics. Once the table is transitioned to the analytics tier, if desired, it can then be transitioned to the data lake. Existing Auxiliary Log tables will be available in the data lake tier for use once the Sentinel data lake is enabled. Billing for these tables will automatically switch to the Sentinel data lake meters. Microsoft Sentinel customers are recommended to start planning their data management strategy with the data lake. While Basic and Auxiliary Logs are still available, they are not being enhanced further. Sentinel data lake offers more capabilities at a lower price point. Please plan on onboarding your security data to the Sentinel data lake. Azure Monitor customers can continue to use Basic and Auxiliary Logs for observability scenarios. What happens to customers that already have Archive logs enabled? If a customer has already configured tables for Archive retention, existing retention settings will not change and will be automatically inherited by the Sentinel data lake. All data, including existing data in archive retention will be billed using the data lake storage meter, benefiting from 6x data compression. However, the data itself will not move. Existing data in archive will continue to be accessible through Sentinel search and restore experiences: o Data will not be backfilled into the data lake. o Data will be billed using the data lake storage meter. New data ingested after enabling the data lake: o Will be automatically mirrored to the data lake and accessible through data lake explorer. o Data will be billed using the data lake storage meter. Example: If a customer has 12 months of total retention enabled on a table, 2 months after enabling ingestion into the Sentinel data lake, the customer will still have access to 10 months of archived data (through Sentinel search and restore experiences), but access to only 2 months of data in the data lake (since the data lake was enabled). Key considerations for customers that currently have Archive logs enabled: The existing archive will remain, with new data ingested into the data lake going forward; previously stored archive data will not be backfilled into the lake. Archive logs will continue to be accessible via the Search and Restore tab under Sentinel. If analytics and data lake mode are enabled on table, which is the default setting for analytics tables when Sentinel data lake is enabled, all new data will be ingested into the Sentinel data lake. There will only be one storage meter (which is data lake storage) going forward. Archive will continue to be accessible via Search and Restore. If Sentinel data lake-only mode is enabled on table, new data will be ingested only into the data lake; any data that’s not already in the Sentinel data lake won’t be migrated/backfilled. Only data that was previously ingested under the archive plan will be accessible via Search and Restore. What is the guidance for customers using Azure Data Explorer (ADX) alongside Microsoft Sentinel? Some customers might have set up ADX cluster for their DIY lake setup. Customers can choose to continue using that setup and gradually migrate to Sentinel data lake for new data that they want to manage. The lake explorer will support federation with ADX to enable the customers to migrate gradually and simplify their deployment. What happens to the Defender XDR data after enabling Sentinel data lake? By default, Defender XDR tables are available for querying in advanced hunting, with 30 days of analytics tier retention included with the XDR license. To retain data beyond this period, an explicit change to the retention setting is required, either by extending the analytics tier retention or the total retention period. You can extend the retention period of supported Defender XDR tables beyond 30 days and ingest the data into the analytics tier. For more information see Manage XDR data in Microsoft Sentinel. You can also ingest XDR data directly into the data lake tier. See here for more information. A list of XDR advanced hunting tables supported by Sentinel are documented here: Connect Microsoft Defender XDR data to Microsoft Sentinel | Microsoft Learn. KQL queries and jobs Is KQL and Notebook supported over the Sentinel data lake? Yes, via the data lake KQL query experience along with a fully managed Notebook experience which enables spark-based big data analytics over a single copy of all your security data. Customers can run queries across any time range of data in their Sentinel data lake. In the future, this will be extended to enable SQL query over lake as well. Note: Triggering a KQL job directly via an API or Logic App is not yet supported but is on the roadmap. Why are there two different places to run KQL queries in Sentinel experience? Advanced hunting queries both XDR and analytics tables, with compute cost included. Data lake explorer only queries data in the lake and incurs a separate compute cost. Consolidating advanced hunting and KQL explorer user interfaces is on the roadmap. This will provide security analysts a unified query experience across both analytics and data lake tiers. Where is the output from KQL jobs stored? KQL jobs are written into existing or new custom tables in the analytics tier. Is it possible to run KQL queries on multiple data lake tables? Yes, you can run KQL interactive queries and jobs using operators like join or union. Can KQL queries (either interactive or via KQL jobs) join data across multiple workspaces? Security teams can run multi-workspace KQL queries for broader threat correlation Pricing and billing How does a customer pay for Sentinel data lake? Billing is automatically enabled at the time of onboarding based on Azure Subscription and Resource Group selections. Customers are then charged based on the volume of data ingested, retained, and analyzed (e.g. KQL Queries and Jobs). See Sentinel pricing page for more details. 2. What are the pricing components for Sentinel data lake? Sentinel data lake offers a flexible pricing model designed to optimize security coverage and costs. At a high level, pricing is based on the volume of data ingested/processed, the volume of data retained, and the volume of data processed. For specific meter definitions, see documentation. 3. How does the business model for Sentinel SIEM change with the introduction of the data lake? There is no change to existing Sentinel analytics tier ingestion business model. Sentinel data lake has separate meters for ingestion, storage and analytics. 4. What happens to the existing Sentinel SIEM and related Azure Monitor billing meters when a customer onboards to Sentinel data lake? When a customer onboards to the Sentinel data lake, nothing changes with analytic ingestion or retention. Customers using data archive and Auxiliary Logs will automatically transition to the new data lake meters. How does data lake storage affect cost efficiency for high volume data retention? Sentinel data lake offers cost-effective, long-term storage with uniform data compression of 6:1 across all data sources, applicable only to data lake storage. Example: For 600GB of data stored, you are only billed for 100GB compressed data. This approach allows organizations to retain greater volumes of security data over extended periods cost-effectively, thereby reducing security risks without compromising their overall security posture. here How “Data Processing” billed? To support the ingestion and standardization of diverse data sources, the Data Processing feature applies a $0.10 per GB (US East) charge for all data ingested into the data lake. This feature enables a broad array of transformations like redaction, splitting, filtering and normalization. The data processing charge is applied per GB of uncompressed data Note: For regional pricing, please refer to the “Data processing” meter within the Microsoft Sentinel Pricing official documentation. Does “Data processing” meter apply to analytics tier data mirrored in the data lake? No. Data processing charge will not be applied to mirrored data. Data mirrored from the analytic tier is not subject to either data ingestion or processing charges. How is retention billed for tables that use data lake-only ingestion & retention? Sentinel data lake decouples ingestion, storage, and analytics meters. Customers have the flexibility to pay based on how data is retained and used. For tables that use data lake‑only ingestion, there is no included free retention—unlike the analytics tier, which includes 90 days of analytics retention. Retention charges begin immediately once data is stored in the data lake. Data lake storage billing is based on compressed data size rather than raw ingested volume, which significantly reduces storage costs and delivers lower overall retention spend for customers. Does data federation incur charges? Data federation does not generate any ingestion or storage fees in Sentinel data lake. Customers are billed only when they run analytics or queries on federated data, with charges based on Sentinel data lake compute and analytics meters. This means customers pay solely for actual data usage, not mere connectivity. How do I understand Sentinel data lake costs? Sentinel data lake costs driven by three primary factors: how much data is ingested, how long that data is retained, and how the data is used. Customers can flexibly choose to ingest data into the analytics tier or data lake tier, and these architectural choices directly impact cost. For example, data can be ingested into the analytics tier—where commitment tiers help optimize costs for high data volumes—or ingested data directly into the Sentinel data lake for lower‑cost ingestion, storage, and on‑demand analysis. Customers are encouraged to work with their Microsoft account team to obtain an accurate cost estimate tailored to their environment. See Sentinel pricing page to understand Sentinel pricing. How do I manage Sentinel data lake costs? Built-in cost management experiences help customers with cost predictability, billing transparency, and operational efficiency. Reports provide customers with insights into usage trends over time, enabling them to identify cost drivers and optimize data retention and processing strategies. Set usage-based alerts on specific meters to monitor and control costs. For example, receive alerts when query or notebook usage passes set limits, helping avoid unexpected expenses and manage budgets. See our Sentinel cost management documentation to learn more. If I’m an Auxiliary Logs customer, how will onboarding to the Sentinel data lake affect my billing? Once a workspace is onboarded to Sentinel data lake, all Auxiliary Logs meters will be replaced by new data lake meters. Do we charge for data lake ingestion and storage for graph experiences? Microsoft Sentinel graph-based experiences are included as part of the existing Defender and Purview licenses. However, Sentinel graph requires Sentinel data lake and specific data sources to build the underlying graph. Enabling these data sources will incur ingestion and data lake storage costs. Note: For Sentinel SIEM customers, most required data sources are free for analytics ingestion. Non-entitled sources such as Microsoft Entra ID logs will incur ingestion and data lake storage costs. How is Entra asset data and ARG data billed? Data lake ingestion charges of $0.05 per GB (US EAST) will apply to Entra asset data and ARG data. Note: This was previously not billed during public preview and is billed since data lake GA. To learn more, see: https://learn.microsoft.com/azure/sentinel/datalake/enable-data-connectors When a customer activates Sentinel data lake, what happens to tables with archive logs enabled? To simplify billing, once the data lake is enabled, all archive data will be billed using the data lake storage meter. This provides consistent long-term retention billing and includes automatic 6x data compression. For most customers, this change results in lower long‑term retention costs. However, customers who previously had discounted archive retention pricing will not automatically receive the same discounts on the new data lake storage meters. In these cases, customers should engage their Microsoft account team to review pricing implications before enabling the Sentinel data lake. Thank you Thank you to our customers and partners for your continued trust and collaboration. Your feedback drives our innovation, and we’re excited to keep evolving Microsoft Sentinel to meet your security needs. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to reach out—we’re here to support you every step of the way. Learn more: Get started with Sentinel data lake today: https://aka.ms/Get_started/Sentinel_datalake Microsoft Sentinel AI-ready platform: https://aka.ms/Microsoft_Sentinel Sentinel data lake videos: https://aka.ms/Sentineldatalake_videos Latest innovations and updates on Sentinel: https://aka.ms/msftsentinelblog Sentinel pricing page: https://aka.ms/MicrosoftSentinel_PricingDetecting AI agents and non-human identities in Microsoft Sentinel: the classic-agent blind spot
Build 2026 made the direction official. The industry is moving from the app era into the agent era, and Microsoft spent a real share of the keynote on securing agents across their lifecycle, from discovering what is exploitable to governing what is running in production. On the identity side the centerpiece is Microsoft Entra Agent ID, now generally available, which gives AI agents first-class identities and extends Conditional Access, Identity Protection, and full audit logging to them. That is good news for agents you build the new way. It is not the whole picture, and the gap is where most SOCs will get hurt first. Modern agents are covered. Classic agents are not. Entra Agent ID draws a hard line between two kinds of agent. Modern agents are created through the Agent ID platform, each backed by an agent identity blueprint. They carry a proper Agent ID, a full audit trail, and the complete set of governance capabilities, including Identity Protection for Agents, which establishes a baseline for an agent's normal activity and flags anomalies automatically. Classic agents are everything that came before, or that gets built outside the platform: AI agents implemented as ordinary service principals or app registrations, for example Copilot Studio agents created before Agent ID was enabled, or any home-grown automation calling Graph with client credentials. In the Entra agent registry they appear with "Has Agent ID: No," and that flag matters, because the Agent ID protections apply to identities that actually hold an Agent ID. Classic agents sit outside Identity Protection for Agents and Conditional Access for Agents. Here is the uncomfortable part. The non-human identities you already run, the service principals behind your pipelines, your integrations, your scripts, your pre-platform Copilot Studio bots, are almost all classic agents. They tend to outnumber your human accounts, they have no MFA in any meaningful sense, and a credential added to one does not show up in the Azure portal. The new platform protections do not reach them. Until you migrate them, the only place you get detection coverage on that population is your SIEM. So this is the job Sentinel does that Agent ID does not: detect risky behavior on the classic, service-principal-backed agents that the platform cannot yet protect. The telemetry you have, and the one switch people forget Three tables carry most of the signal. AADServicePrincipalSignInLogs records service principal authentications, the client-credentials sign-ins your agents and automation use. No user, no MFA, just an app proving it holds a secret or certificate. AADManagedIdentitySignInLogs does the same for managed identities. AuditLogs records directory changes, including the one that matters most for persistence: a new credential added to an application or service principal. One practical warning before any of this works. Service principal and managed identity sign-in logs are not streamed by default. You have to enable those categories explicitly in the Entra diagnostic settings feeding your workspace. Plenty of teams write the detection, never check, and never notice the table is empty. Verify that first. Detection 1: a new credential on a service principal or app Adding a secret or certificate to an existing service principal is one of the cleanest persistence techniques in a Microsoft cloud. The attacker compromises a privileged user or app, drops a fresh credential on a service principal that already holds useful Graph permissions, and now has access that survives password resets and session revocation. It maps to MITRE T1098.001, Account Manipulation: Additional Cloud Credentials. For a classic agent it is especially nasty, because there is no Identity Protection baseline watching it. // Detection 1: new secret or certificate added to an application or service principal // MITRE T1098.001 - Account Manipulation: Additional Cloud Credentials AuditLogs | where OperationName has_any ("Add service principal", "Certificates and secrets management") | where Result =~ "success" | extend Initiator = coalesce( tostring(InitiatedBy.user.userPrincipalName), tostring(InitiatedBy.app.displayName)) | extend InitiatorIp = tostring(InitiatedBy.user.ipAddress) | mv-apply Target = TargetResources on ( where Target.type =~ "Application" | extend TargetName = tostring(Target.displayName), TargetId = tostring(Target.id), KeyChanges = Target.modifiedProperties ) | mv-apply Prop = KeyChanges on ( where tostring(Prop.displayName) =~ "KeyDescription" | extend NewKeys = parse_json(tostring(Prop.newValue)), OldKeys = parse_json(tostring(Prop.oldValue)) ) | extend AddedKeys = set_difference(NewKeys, OldKeys) | where array_length(AddedKeys) > 0 | project TimeGenerated, Initiator, InitiatorIp, TargetName, TargetId, AddedKeys | order by TimeGenerated desc The operation filter catches the three shapes this event takes in the log: "Add service principal," "Add service principal credentials," and "Update application - Certificates and secrets management." The modifiedProperties parsing isolates the KeyDescription change, and set_difference confirms a key was actually added rather than removed, so rotating out an old credential does not, on its own, fire the rule. False positives come from legitimate rotation and from automation that provisions app credentials (CI/CD, infrastructure as code). The initiator is the discriminant. A credential added by your deployment pipeline's service account at the usual time is routine. The same change initiated by an interactive admin out of hours, or by an account that never normally touches app credentials, is what you want to surface. Allow-list the expected initiators, not the targets. Detection 2: a classic agent signing in from a first-seen IP A service principal that has only ever authenticated from your Azure regions and suddenly signs in from somewhere new is a strong signal that its credential has been lifted and is being used elsewhere. Service principals have stable, boring network behavior, which makes a first-seen IP a far cleaner indicator for them than it is for roaming human users. This is the behavioral baseline Identity Protection gives you for free on modern agents, rebuilt in KQL for the classic ones it ignores. MITRE T1078.004, Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts. // Detection 2: classic-agent service principal signing in from a previously unseen IP // MITRE T1078.004 - Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts let baseline = 14d; let detection = 1d; let KnownIPs = AADServicePrincipalSignInLogs | where TimeGenerated between (ago(baseline + detection) .. ago(detection)) | where tostring(ResultType) == "0" | summarize KnownIPSet = make_set(IPAddress) by AppId; AADServicePrincipalSignInLogs | where TimeGenerated > ago(detection) | where tostring(ResultType) == "0" | lookup kind=leftouter KnownIPs on AppId | where set_has_element(KnownIPSet, IPAddress) == false | summarize FirstSeen = min(TimeGenerated), Resources = make_set(ResourceDisplayName, 10) by ServicePrincipalName, AppId, IPAddress | order by FirstSeen desc The query builds a per-application baseline of source IPs over the previous two weeks, then flags any successful sign-in today from an address outside that set. Two tuning notes. Brand-new service principals have no baseline, so they surface on first use. That is usually worth seeing once, but you can exclude AppIds younger than the baseline window if it gets noisy. And if your agents egress through shifting cloud IP ranges, widen the comparison from an exact IP to the autonomous system number or a known-range allow-list, otherwise you will chase your own infrastructure. This complements Agent ID, it does not replace it! The endgame is not to run these rules forever. It is to shrink the population they apply to. Inventory your tenant for agents marked "Has Agent ID: No," prioritize the ones holding sensitive Graph permissions, and migrate them onto the Agent ID platform, where Identity Protection and Conditional Access take over the baselining you are doing here by hand. Microsoft has signaled a migration path from classic to modern agents. Treat these two detections as the coverage you need in the meantime, and as a permanent safety net for anything that never makes the move. If you do one thing this week: enable the service principal sign-in log category, deploy detection 1, and pull a list of every service principal that had a credential added in the last 90 days. That list alone tends to be more interesting than people expect. Cheers, MarcelThe Worm in the Supply Chain: How Defender for Endpoint and Sentinel for SAP BTP Caught Shai-Hulud
On 29 April 2026, malicious versions of multiple SAP ecosystem npm packages were briefly published, creating a supply-chain exposure for SAP Cloud Application Programming (CAP) development environments and CI/CD pipelines. For a brief window that morning, affected developers have executed a credential-stealing payload on a workstation or, in higher-impact cases, within a CI/CD pipeline. SAP developers don't usually think of themselves as a juicy npm target. CAP, BTP, Fiori - that's enterprise turf, not crypto-stealer type territory – Until it is. Join me for the ride. See our latest click-video for an even more dynamic experience of SAP compromises. Affected packages and scope Four official npm packages from the SAP development ecosystem were published in malicious versions that day. Security researchers are calling the campaign "Mini Shai-Hulud" - the little cousin of the worm family that has been chewing its way through open-source registries for months. So, the "mini" part is a generous description in my opinion. Shai-Hulud has wriggled directly into the SAP supply chain, and that detail alone deserves a pause... SAP CAP is now interesting enough to have become a target. Four packages, all wearing legitimate SAP branding, all quietly swapped for evil twins: @cap-js/sqlite v2.2.2 @cap-js/postgres v2.2.2 @cap-js/db-service v2.10.1 mbt v1.2.48 These packages are not peripheral dependencies. The @cap-js/* modules are part of the SAP CAP Model used across custom development on SAP BTP, while mbt is the Cloud MTA Build Tool commonly embedded in CI/CD workflows that package and deploy Multi-Target Applications to BTP and on-premises environments. At roughly 930,000 weekly downloads, the combined exposure created meaningful downstream attack surface. The good news: SAP spotted the compromise fast, yanked the bad versions, and shipped clean replacements. The official guidance lives in SAP Security Note 3747787 - which carries the list of indicators of compromise, file hashes, and mitigation steps. Enough theory and evidence talk! Now, SHOW ME the detection! When the worm stirs beneath the sand, weak defenses vanish first. Observed telemetry in Microsoft Security products See below excerpt of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint from a compromised developer machine. The worm was neutralized immediately. Check the detection time (same day of release): Windows Defender AV detected malware ToString: DefenderDetection: File: /Users/User***/Projects/dara-api-manager-ui/node_modules/mbt/File***.js, Sha256: *** [Trojan:JS/SPchnStlr.BB], BlockingStatus: Prevented, BlockingStatusPriority: 900 DetectionTime: 2026-04-29 11:52:11Z DetectorName: Microsoft.Cyber.ObservationDetectors.DefenderConcreteDetector Observations (2): DefenderObservation Description: Defender detected and quarantined 'Trojan:JS/SPchnStlr.BB' in file 'File***.js' ThreatCategory = Trojan, ThreatFamily = SPchnStlr, How the Threat Actors Operationalized the Stolen Data The compromise allowed harvesting GitHub tokens, AWS/Azure/GCP secrets, npm credentials, Kubernetes config, SSH keys, .npmrc and .git-credentials files, and CI/CD environment variables. The hackers created a public GitHub repository on the victim’s own account, tagged with the description “A Mini Shai-Hulud has Appeared“ to exfiltrate their reaping. Within hours, more than a thousand such repositories were visible in public GitHub search. For additional views on the topic check out the blogs of our Sentinel for SAP partners: Onapsis, Pathlock, and SecurityBridge. Containment and Impact Reduction If you were not as lucky as the developer using Defender for Endpoint and VS Code, you need end to end monitoring of your landscape in and around SAP. Once the worm is loose with cloud tokens it may appear in various unexpected places. Microsoft Sentinel Solution for SAP covers your ERP crown jewels, your SAP BTP landscape and allows informed correlation with the rest of your IT estate. Microsoft’s correlation engine: ensures traceability automatic attack disruption and just-in-time hardening of potential attack paths. Developers using the cloud-based IDE SAP Business Application Studio are out of reach by Defender for Endpoint but profit from threat monitoring through Sentinel for SAP BTP integrating SAP BTP’s malware scanner the same way. See this in action in this click-video and in below screenshot. SOC analysts get actionable insights and tailored guidance from Security Copilot once SAP BTP signals are added to the Microsoft incident graph - no matter where the threat involving SAP originates from. Getting Started with Sentinel Solution for SAP Rollout of Sentinel for SAP BTP can happen immediately. Learn more from our deployment guide. Check out the security content reference for more info out-of-the-box detections. Sentinel for SAP which covers your ERP solutions and more, requires configuration of SAP Integration Suite as intermediary step. Learn more from our deployment guide. Check out the security content reference for more info out-of-the-box detections Final Words This incident illustrates how far the SAP BTP attack surface now extends and why patching alone is insufficient once malicious code reaches developer tooling and build infrastructure. Effective defense also requires telemetry, correlation, and response coverage across SAP and non-SAP environments. See you out there folks! #Kudos to Mahesh Mandva and Cameron Gardiner on riding shai-holud with me. Feel free to reach out to talk more about SAP Cyber Security. Cheers, Martin Useful Links SAP Note 3747787 with mitigation guide Mini Shai-Hulud: Multi-Ecosystem Developer Supply Chain Attack – Lab Space Click-Demo for SAP Cyber Security with Microsoft Sentinel for SAP Security Content | Microsoft Learn Sentinel for SAP BTP Security Content | Microsoft LearnMicrosoft Defender for Office 365: Fine-Tuning
In incident response, most business email compromise doesn’t start with “sophisticated zero-day malware.” It starts with configuration gaps: forwarding mail outside the tenant, users clicking through Safe Links warnings, impersonation policies left at day-one defaults, or post-delivery cleanup still relying on a human analyst at 2:00 AM. Those gaps are what attackers actually exploit. This blog covers our top recommendations for fine-tuning Microsoft Defender for Office 365 configuration from hundreds of deployments and recovery engagements: Core fine-tuning actions every email or security admin should land right now Data-driven bulk mail tuning (BCL and Bulk Mail Insights) Impersonation and anti-phishing policy hygiene for executive protection Automate post-delivery cleanup by enabling Automated Remediation Each section includes a short video and practical guidance you can apply immediately in Microsoft Defender for Office 365. These recommendations align with Microsoft’s “secure by default” direction: applying the Standard and Strict preset security policies to users, using Configuration analyzer to catch configuration drift, and enforcing least-privilege release of high-risk mail. When possible, enable the Preset security policies to give you Microsoft’s recommended settings for Safe Links, Safe Attachments, Anti-Phishing, and Anti-Spam. If you use custom policies (or if you exclude users from the Presets) then use Configuration analyzer regularly to compare custom policies to the Standard/Strict baselines, since those get updated as Microsoft updates the Preset policies. Core Fine-Tuning Checklist for Defender for Office 365 This section highlights six controls we recommend implementing broadly. These are “day one hardening” items we repeatedly validate with customers. Block automatic external forwarding by default Attackers often create hidden inbox rules that quietly forward mail (invoices, purchase orders, wire info) to an external account they control. Use outbound spam policies to block automatic external forwarding for the entire org and then create tightly scoped exceptions only for the handful of mailboxes that legitimately need it. This prevents data leakage and payment fraud scenarios where mail auto-forwards out of your tenant without anyone noticing. Although this setting is on by default (“System Controlled” means that external forwarding is disabled), we’ve found many tenants where this was disabled because the admin didn’t know how to create a custom policy for authorized forwarders. The trick is to order custom outbound policies to run as a higher priority than the default outbound policy which should be set to block auto-forwarded emails. It is a good idea to regularly review the auto forwarded message report (located in the Exchange Admin Center). Use Enhanced Filtering for Connectors (“skip listing”) when necessary If you’re routing inbound mail through a third-party Secure Email Gateway or an on-prem hop before Microsoft 365, Defender will see that intermediary as the source IP instead of the original sending IP, which degrades anti-spoofing effectiveness.Enhanced Filtering for Connectors — also called skip listing — lets Microsoft 365 look past that last hop and evaluate the real sending IP and headers, so SPF / DKIM / DMARC and anti-spam logic work correctly. This setting does not support centralized mail routing (unless the routing is linear; see the Enhanced Filtering for Connectors learn article), so make sure you are not using that before enabling Enhanced Filtering. Centralized routing is sometimes used by organizations running a hybrid Exchange deployment, connecting Exchange Online with an on-premises Exchange Server organization. Important: Do this instead of blanket SCL -1 transport rules that “bypass spam filtering for anything coming from our gateway.” Over-bypassing means phishing that slipped through the third-party filter can sail straight to user inboxes, which Microsoft specifically warns against. Turn on Safe Attachments protection beyond email (SharePoint, OneDrive, Teams) In the Safe Attachments “Global settings,” make sure Defender for Office 365 is set to protect files in SharePoint, OneDrive, and Microsoft Teams. When enabled, if a file is identified as malicious, Defender automatically locks the file in-place so users can’t open it in Teams or OneDrive. This gives you malware detonation and containment in collaboration channels, not just email. This step closes a gap we still see a lot: customers protect mail attachments well, but shared files and Teams chats are wide open. In the 1st part of this blog series, Microsoft MVP Purav Desai describes (here) how to prevent users from downloading malicious files by running a SharePoint PowerShell cmdlet: Set-SPOTenant -DisallowInfectedFileDownload $true Don’t let users click through Safe Links warnings Safe Links rewrites and time-of-click scans URLs in mail, Office apps, and Teams. In the Safe Links policy, clear “Let users click through to the original URL.” That prevents the classic “I know it says it’s malicious, but I really need to see it…” moment. Users get blocked instead of “warned but allowed.” This setting is also enforced in Microsoft’s Standard AND Strict preset security policies where click-through is explicitly disabled. Go beyond the default Common Attachment filter The anti-malware policy’s Common Attachment filter blocks known dangerous file extensions (executable content, scriptable content, etc.). Microsoft ships a default list (historically 50+ high-risk extensions), and you can customize it to block additional file types common in malware delivery, like HTML droppers or password-protected archives. Messages with those file types are treated as malware and quarantined. Do this centrally rather than relying on users to “spot a suspicious attachment.” Automation beats user judgment here. Use custom quarantine policies that require admin approval (instead of self-release) If you are not using the Preset Policies, you can create a quarantine policy to customize the user experience with quarantined messages. For anything phishing-related, I recommend creating a custom policy that allows the user to “request release from admin.” That means users can raise a hand if they think something should not have been quarantined, and an Incident is created for administrators to review before it is released. To me, this strikes the best balance between security and productivity. This keeps containment intact and gives the SOC final say. It also creates an auditable workflow: who asked for release, who approved it, and why. Bulk Mail Insights: Tune BCL using your tenant’s mail Bulk email (“graymail”) is noisy. Payroll alerts and benefits notifications are legitimate, but they look exactly like phishing. At the same time, true marketing email (graymail) are also bulk. The traditional response (“just whitelist the sender so users stop complaining”) often opens the door for attacker-looking mail to get delivered straight to executives. Defender for Office 365 gives you something better: Bulk Mail Insights (a.k.a. Bulk senders insight). This report shows, over the last 60 days, how much mail at each Bulk Complaint Level (BCL 1–9) was delivered vs. blocked, which senders are generating volume, and where users are likely to experience false positives or false negatives. You can interactively simulate raising or lowering the bulk threshold and immediately see, “If we tighten BCL, how many more messages get quarantined? How many of those were probably junk? How many were probably wanted?” Why this matters: You stop tuning bulk mail based on anecdotes and start tuning based on real telemetry from your own tenant. You can justify decisions to leadership and audit (“We set BCL at X because here is the simulation showing false positive/false negative impact”). You avoid blanket allow rules. Instead, you adjust bulk thresholds for legitimate high-volume senders while keeping stricter actions for everyone else. Note: You can modify the BCL threshold in your default or custom anti-spam policy, but you can’t change it inside the Standard (BCL:6) or Strict (BCL:5) preset security policies themselves. Standard and Strict are already aligned to Microsoft’s recommended baselines. Additional Links: https://security.microsoft.com/senderinsights https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-office-365/anti-spam-bulk-senders-insight https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-office-365/mdo-deployment-guide#step-2-configure-threat-policies https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-office-365/preset-security-policies#policy-settings-in-preset-security-policies https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-office-365/recommended-settings-for-eop-and-office365 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2025/07/17/transparency-on-microsoft-defender-for-office-365-email-security-effectiveness/ Anti-Phishing / Impersonation Tuning: Protect the people attackers actually spoof Business email compromise very often looks like this: “Hi, can you handle this payment today?” sent from an address that looks like your CFO or CEO. Microsoft Defender for Office 365 includes targeted impersonation protection, but it only really works if you target your most targeted executives. Here are five pitfalls we see over and over: Empty or stale VIP list Populate “users to protect / high value targets” with executives, finance approvers, legal, anyone authorized to move money or data. Review it monthly. Roles change, and you only get a finite number of protected users (for example, ~350 entries). An out-of-date list silently weakens protection for the people attackers actually impersonate. Phishing email threshold stuck at 1 forever We find organizations that are not using the preset policies have left their phishing threshold values at the default “1” because of initial false positives. We recommend raising it to match the Standard Preset (“3”) or Strict (“4”). Weak action If suspicious “CFO” mail just goes to Junk, users can still act on it. High-confidence impersonation of executives should be quarantined with AdminOnly or request-release workflows, not left in end-user control. Tie this back to the custom quarantine policies (discussed later in this article). Common-name overload If your CEO’s name is something extremely common, you’ll get noise. Expect it. Don’t “turn off” protection for that name — add that address to the Trusted Senders otherwise it will be blocked as an impersonation attempt. Use Trusted Senders / Trusted Domains for known-good partners and vendors so you keep protection high without drowning in alerts. Add only legitimate senders/domains to the Trusted Senders or Trusted Domains instead of lowering enforcement. No scheduled review This control can’t be “set and forget.” Put impersonation tuning and spoof intelligence review on a monthly checklist. That lets you catch new vendors pretending to be finance, new “urgent wire” lure patterns, and any drift from Standard / Strict baseline that Configuration analyzer will also call out. When done right, impersonation protection is not just “spam reduction.” It’s payment fraud prevention. Automated Investigation & Response (AIR): Let Defender remove malicious email before your SOC has to! One of the biggest wins you can land quickly is letting Microsoft Defender for Office 365 automatically remove clusters of malicious messages — without waiting for analyst approval on every single item. Here’s how it works. Defender’s Automated Investigation and Response (AIR) groups messages into “clusters” based on shared indicators like the same malicious URL or malicious file hash. If you opt in to automatic remediation for those cluster types, AIR will go find every matching copy of that threat across the tenant and soft-delete those messages, not just the one that triggered the alert. Why this matters: It turns post-delivery cleanup into something that happens immediately instead of “after Tier 1 has time to review.” It removes known-bad messages from user mailboxes (and related collaboration surfaces like Teams) before a target can click. It dramatically cuts the classic “Did anyone else get this?” manual hunt-and-purge work that burns out SOC analysts. When you configure AIR automation settings in the Microsoft Defender portal (Settings > Email & collaboration > MDO automation settings), you’ll see checkboxes for “Similar files” and “Similar URLs.” Selecting those opts you into automatic soft delete for those clusters. Today, soft delete is the default supported action for these automatic remediations, enabling administrators to undo a deletion, if necessary. This is Defender for Office 365 Plan 2 / Microsoft 365 E5 functionality, and it’s exactly the kind of “secure operations by default” Microsoft has been pushing: detect, contain, and clean up automatically, then let humans investigate with context instead of manually chasing every copy of a phish. This automation triggers when malicious clusters are detected. For automating the classification and triage of user-submitted phishing incidents, check out the Security Copilot Phishing Triage Agent (Preview). Additional Links: GA Announcement: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/-/auto-remediation-of-malicious-messages-in-automated/4418047 Docs: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-office-365/air-auto-remediation Final Thoughts Defender for Office 365 is more than “email filtering.” It’s part of your security operations surface. The decisions you make about automated remediation (AIR), bulk mail thresholds, Safe Links/Attachment behavior, outbound forwarding, connector hygiene, quarantine policy, and impersonation tuning directly determine how easy — or how hard — it is for an attacker to penetrate your organization. Microsoft’s current guidance is clear: Apply Standard or Strict preset security policies so users get the recommended protections by default (for example, Safe Links with no click-through). If you must use a custom policy, review the recommendations from the Configuration analyzer monthly for new recommendations, or to catch and correct drift whenever someone weakens a control. Align internal procedures with the excellent Security Operations Guide for Defender for Office 365. Lock down quarantine so only admins can release high-risk messages, with an auditable “request release” path for users. Turn on automated remediation so Defender can remove malicious clusters of messages before anyone clicks. Organizations that land these basics are in a dramatically better position during an incident. Instead of “Who clicked the link?” you can say, “AIR already pulled it, users were blocked from clicking through, outbound forwarding is disabled, and impersonation of the CFO is quarantined for admin review.” That’s what “secure by default” actually looks like in production. ________ This blog was authored by Joe Stocker, Microsoft Security MVP and Founder of Patriot Consulting Technology Group, in partnership with the Microsoft Defender for Office 365 product team, including Paul Newell, Senior Product Manager, Microsoft Defender for Office 365. Joe Stocker Microsoft Security MVP Learn More and Meet the Author 1) December 16th Ask the Experts Webinar: Microsoft Defender for Office 365 | Ask the Experts: Tips and Tricks (REGISTER HERE) DECEMBER 16, 8 AM US Pacific You’ve watched the latest Microsoft Defender for Office 365 best practices videos and read the blog posts by the esteemed Microsoft Most Valuable Professionals (MVPs). Now bring your toughest questions or unique situations straight to the experts. In this interactive panel discussion, Microsoft MVPs will answer your real-world scenarios, clarify best practices, and highlight practical tips surfaced in the recent series. We’ll kick off with a who’s who and recent blog/video series recap, then dedicate most of the time to your questions across migration, SOC optimization, fine-tuning configuration, Teams protection, and even Microsoft community engagement. Come ready with your questions (or pre-submit here) for the expert Security MVPs on camera, or the Microsoft Defender for Office 365 product team in the chat! REGISTER NOW for 12/16. 2) Additional MVP Tips and Tricks Blogs and Videos in this Four-Part Series: Microsoft Defender for Office 365: Migration & Onboarding by Purav Desai Safeguarding Microsoft Teams with Microsoft Defender for Office 365 by Pierre Thoor You may be right after all! Disputing Submission Responses in Microsoft Defender for Office 365 by Mona Ghadiri (This post) "Microsoft Defender for Office 365: Fine-Tuning" by Joe Stocker Learn and Engage with the Microsoft Security Community Log in and follow this Microsoft Defender for Office 365 blog and follow/post in the Microsoft Defender for Office 365 discussion space. Follow = Click the heart in the upper right when you're logged in 🤍 Learn more about the Microsoft MVP Program. Join the Microsoft Security Community and be notified of upcoming events, product feedback surveys, and more. Get early access to Microsoft Security products and provide feedback to engineers by joining the Microsoft Customer Connection Community. Join the Microsoft Security Community LinkedIn
Protect your organizations against QR code phishing with Defender for Office 365
QR code phishing campaigns have most recently become the fastest growing type of email-based attack. These types of attacks are growing and embed QR code images linked to malicious content directly into the email body, to evade detection. They often entice unwitting users with seemingly genuine prompts, like a password reset or a two-factor authentication request. Microsoft Defender for Office 365 is continuously adapting as threat actors evolve their methodologies. In this blog post we’ll share more details on how we’re helping defenders address this threat and keeping end-users safe.RSAC 2026: New Microsoft Sentinel Connectors Announcement
Microsoft Sentinel helps organizations detect, investigate, and respond to security threats across increasingly complex environments. With the rollout of the Microsoft Sentinel data lake in the fall, and the App Assure-backed Sentinel promise that supports it, customers now have access to long-term, cost-effective storage for security telemetry, creating a solid foundation for emerging Agentic AI experiences. Since our last announcement at Ignite 2025, the Microsoft Sentinel connector ecosystem has expanded rapidly, reflecting continued investment from software development partners building for our shared customers. These connectors bring diverse security signals together, enabling correlation at scale and delivering richer investigation context across the Sentinel platform. Below is a snapshot of Microsoft Sentinel connectors newly available or recently enhanced since our last announcement, highlighting the breadth of partner solutions contributing data into, and extending the value of, the Microsoft Sentinel ecosystem. New and notable integrations Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to bring data protection and security telemetry into a centralized SOC view. The connector streams alerts, events, and activity data - spanning backup, endpoint protection, and workload security - into Microsoft Sentinel for correlation with other signals. This integration helps security teams investigate ransomware and data-centric threats more effectively, leverage built-in hunting queries and detection rules, and improve visibility across managed environments without adding operational complexity. Anvilogic Anvilogic integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to help security teams operationalize detection engineering at scale. The connector streams Anvilogic alerts into Microsoft Sentinel, giving SOC analysts centralized visibility into high-fidelity detections and faster context for investigation and triage. By unifying detection workflows, reducing alert noise, and improving prioritization, this integration supports more efficient threat detection and response while helping teams extend coverage across evolving attack techniques. BigID BigID integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to extend data security posture management (DSPM) insights into security operations workflows. The solution brings visibility into sensitive, regulated, and critical data across cloud, SaaS, and on‑premises environments, helping security teams understand where high‑risk data resides and how it may be exposed. By incorporating data‑centric risk context into Sentinel, this integration supports more informed investigation and prioritization, enabling organizations to reduce data‑related risk and align security operations with data protection and compliance objectives. Commvault Cloud Commvault Cloud integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to bring data protection and cyber‑resilience telemetry into security operations workflows. The connector ingests security‑relevant signals from Commvault Cloud—such as backup anomalies, malware and ransomware indicators, and other threat‑related events—into Sentinel, enabling centralized detection, investigation, and automated response. By correlating backup intelligence with broader Sentinel telemetry, this integration helps security teams reduce blind spots, validate the scope of incidents, and improve coordination between security and recovery operations. CyberArk Audit CyberArk Audit integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to centralize visibility into privileged identity and access activity. By streaming detailed audit logs - covering system events, user actions, and administrative activity - into Microsoft Sentinel, security teams can correlate identity-driven risks with broader security telemetry. This integration supports faster investigations, improved monitoring of privileged access, and more effective incident response through automated workflows and enriched context for SOC analysts. Cyera Cyera integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to extend AI-native data security posture management into security operations. The connector brings Cyera’s data context and actionable intelligence across multi-cloud, on-premises, and SaaS environments into Microsoft Sentinel, helping teams understand where sensitive data resides and how it is accessed, exposed, and used. Built on Sentinel’s modern framework, the integration feeds context-rich data risk signals into the Sentinel data lake, enabling more informed threat hunting, automation, and decision-making around data, user, and AI-related risk. TacitRed CrowdStrike IOC Automation Data443 TacitRed CS IOC Automation integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to streamline the operationalization of compromised credential intelligence. The solution uses Sentinel playbooks to automatically push TacitRed indicators of compromise into CrowdStrike via Sentinel playbooks, helping security teams turn identity-based threat intelligence into action. By automating IOC handling and reducing manual effort, this integration supports faster response to credential exposure and strengthens protection against account-driven attacks across the environment. TacitRed SentinelOne IOC Automation Data443 TacitRed SentinelOne IOC Automation integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to help operationalize identity-focused threat intelligence at the endpoint layer. The solution uses Sentinel playbooks to automatically consume TacitRed indicators and push curated indicators into SentinelOne via Sentinel playbooks and API-based enforcement, enabling faster enforcement of high-risk IOCs without manual handling. By automating the flow of compromised credential intelligence from Sentinel into EDR, this integration supports quicker response to identity-driven attacks and improves coordination between threat intelligence and endpoint protection workflows. TacitRed Threat Intelligence Data443 TacitRed Threat Intelligence integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide enhanced visibility into identity-based risks, including compromised credentials and high-risk user exposure. The solution ingests curated TacitRed intelligence directly into Sentinel, enriching incidents with context that helps SOC teams identify credential-driven threats earlier in the attack lifecycle. With built-in analytics, workbooks, and hunting queries, this integration supports proactive identity threat detection, faster triage, and more informed response across the SOC. Cyren Threat Intelligence Cyren Threat Intelligence integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to enhance detection of network-based threats using curated IP reputation and malware URL intelligence. The connector ingests Cyren threat feeds into Sentinel using the Codeless Connector Framework (CCF), transforming raw indicators into actionable insights, dashboards, and enriched investigations. By adding context to suspicious traffic and phishing infrastructure, this integration helps SOC teams improve alert accuracy, accelerate triage, and make more confident response decisions across their environments. TacitRed Defender Threat Intelligence Data443 TacitRed Defender Threat Intelligence integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to surface early indicators of credential exposure and identity-driven risk. The solution automatically ingests compromised credential intelligence from TacitRed into Sentinel and can support synchronization of validated indicators with Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence through Sentinel workflows, helping SOC teams detect account compromise before abuse occurs. By enriching Sentinel incidents with actionable identity context, this integration supports faster triage, proactive remediation, and stronger protection against credential-based attacks. Datawiza Access Proxy (DAP) Datawiza Access Proxy integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide centralized visibility into application access and authentication activity. By streaming access and MFA logs from Datawiza into Sentinel, security teams can correlate identity and session-level events with broader security telemetry. This integration supports detection of anomalous access patterns, faster investigation through session traceability, and more effective response using Sentinel automation, helping organizations strengthen Zero Trust controls and meet auditing and compliance requirements. Endace Endace integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide deep network visibility by providing always-on, packet-level evidence. The connector enables one-click pivoting from Sentinel alerts directly to recorded packet data captured by EndaceProbes. This helps SOC and NetOps teams reconstruct events and validate threats with confidence. By combining Sentinel’s AI-driven analytics with Endace’s always-on, full-packet capture across on-premises, hybrid, and cloud environments, this integration supports faster investigations, improved forensic accuracy, and more decisive incident response. Feedly Feedly integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to ingest curated threat intelligence directly into security operations workflows. The connector automatically imports Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) from Feedly Team Boards and folders into Sentinel, enriching detections and investigations with context from the original intelligence articles. By bringing analyst‑curated threat intelligence into Sentinel in a structured, automated way, this integration helps security teams stay current on emerging threats and reduce the manual effort required to operationalize external intelligence. Gigamon Gigamon integrates with Microsoft Sentinel through a new connector that provides access to Gigamon Application Metadata Intelligence (AMI), delivering high-fidelity network-derived telemetry with rich application metadata from inspected traffic directly into Sentinel. This added context helps security teams detect suspicious activity, encrypted threats, and lateral movement faster and with greater precision. By enriching analytics without requiring full packet ingestion, organizations can reduce noise, manage SIEM costs, and extend visibility across hybrid cloud infrastructure. Halcyon Halcyon integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide purpose-built ransomware detection and automated containment across the Microsoft security ecosystem. The connector surfaces Halcyon ransomware alerts directly within Sentinel, enabling SOC teams to correlate ransomware behavior with Microsoft Defender and broader Microsoft telemetry. By supporting Sentinel analytics and automation workflows, this integration helps organizations detect ransomware earlier, investigate faster using native Sentinel tools, and isolate affected endpoints to prevent lateral spread and reinfection. Illumio The Illumio platform identifies and contains threats across hybrid multi-cloud environments. By integrating AI-driven insights with Microsoft Sentinel and Microsoft Graph, Illumio Insights enables SOC analysts to visualize attack paths, prioritize high-risk activity, and investigate threats with greater precision. Illumio Segmentation secures critical assets, workloads, and devices and then publishes segmentation policy back into Microsoft Sentinel to ensure compliance monitoring. Joe Sandbox Joe Sandbox integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to enrich incidents with dynamic malware and URL analysis. The connector ingests Joe Sandbox threat intelligence and automatically detonates suspicious files and URLs associated with Sentinel incidents, returning behavioral and contextual analysis results directly into investigation workflows. By adding sandbox-driven insights to indicators, alerts, and incident comments, this integration helps SOC teams validate threats faster, reduce false positives, and improve response decisions using deeper visibility into malicious behavior. Keeper Security The Keeper Security integration with Microsoft Sentinel brings advanced password and secrets management telemetry into your SIEM environment. By streaming audit logs and privileged access events from Keeper into Sentinel, security teams gain centralized visibility into credential usage and potential misuse. The connector supports custom queries and automated playbooks, helping organizations accelerate investigations, enforce Zero Trust principles, and strengthen identity security across hybrid environments. Lookout Mobile Threat Defense (MTD) Lookout Mobile Threat Defense integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to extend SOC visibility to mobile endpoints across Android, iOS, and Chrome OS. The connector streams device, threat, and audit telemetry from Lookout into Sentinel, enabling security teams to correlate mobile risk signals such as phishing, malicious apps, and device compromise, with broader enterprise security data. By incorporating mobile threat intelligence into Sentinel analytics, dashboards, and alerts, this integration helps organizations detect mobile driven attacks earlier and strengthen protection for an increasingly mobile workforce. Miro Miro integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide centralized visibility into collaboration activity across Miro workspaces. The connector ingests organization-wide audit logs and content activity logs into Sentinel, enabling security teams to monitor authentication events, administrative actions, and content changes alongside other enterprise signals. By bringing Miro collaboration telemetry into Sentinel analytics and dashboards, this integration helps organizations detect suspicious access patterns, support compliance and eDiscovery needs, and maintain stronger oversight of collaborative environments without disrupting productivity. Obsidian Activity Threat The Obsidian Threat and Activity Feed for Microsoft Sentinel delivers deep visibility into SaaS and AI applications, helping security teams detect account compromise and insider threats. By streaming user behavior and configuration data into Sentinel, organizations can correlate application risks with enterprise telemetry for faster investigations. Prebuilt analytics and dashboards enable proactive monitoring, while automated playbooks simplify response workflows, strengthening security posture across critical cloud apps. OneTrust for Purview DSPM OneTrust integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to bring privacy, compliance, and data governance signals into security operations workflows. The connector enriches Sentinel with privacy relevant events and risk indicators from OneTrust, helping organizations detect sensitive data exposure, oversharing, and compliance risks across cloud and non-Microsoft data sources. By unifying privacy intelligence with Sentinel analytics and automation, this integration enables security and privacy teams to respond more quickly to data risk events and support responsible data use and AI-ready governance. Pathlock Pathlock integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to bring SAP-specific threat detection and response signals into centralized security operations. The connector forwards security-relevant SAP events into Sentinel, enabling SOC teams to correlate SAP activity with broader enterprise telemetry and investigate threats using familiar SIEM workflows. By enriching Sentinel with SAP security context and focused detection logic, this integration helps organizations improve visibility into SAP landscapes, reduce noise, and accelerate detection and response for risks affecting critical business systems. Quokka Q-scout Quokka Q-scout integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to centralize mobile application risk intelligence across Microsoft Intune-managed devices. The connector automatically ingests app inventories from Intune, analyzes them using Quokka’s mobile app vetting engines, and streams security, privacy, and compliance risk findings into Sentinel. By surfacing app-level risks through Sentinel analytics and alerts, this integration helps security teams identify malicious or high-risk mobile apps, prioritize remediation, and strengthen mobile security posture without deploying agents or disrupting users. Semperis Lightning Semperis Lightning integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to deliver deep visibility into identity‑centric risk across Active Directory and Microsoft Entra environments. The connector ingests identity security telemetry such as indicators of exposure, Tier 0 assets, and attack path insights into Sentinel, enabling security teams to correlate identity risks with broader security signals. By bringing rich identity context into Sentinel analytics, hunting, and investigations, this integration helps organizations detect, prioritize, and respond to identity‑driven attacks more effectively across hybrid identity infrastructures. Synqly Synqly integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to simplify and scale security integrations through a unified API approach. The connector enables organizations and security vendors to establish a bi‑directional connection with Sentinel without relying on brittle, point‑to‑point integrations. By abstracting common integration challenges such as authentication handling, retries, and schema changes, Synqly helps teams orchestrate security data flows into and out of Sentinel more reliably, supporting faster onboarding of new data sources and more maintainable integrations at scale. Versasec vSEC:CMS Versasec vSEC:CMS integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide centralized visibility into credential lifecycle and system health events. The connector securely streams vSEC:CMS and vSEC:CLOUD alerts and status data into Sentinel using the Codeless Connector Framework (CCF), transforming credential management activity into correlation-ready security signals. By bringing smart card, token, and passkey management telemetry into Sentinel, this integration helps security teams monitor authentication infrastructure health, investigate credential-related incidents, and unify identity security operations within their SIEM workflows. VirtualMetric DataStream VirtualMetric DataStream integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to optimize how security telemetry is collected, normalized, and routed across the Microsoft security ecosystem. Acting as a high-performance telemetry pipeline, DataStream intelligently filters and enriches logs, sending high-value security data to Sentinel while routing less-critical data to Sentinel data lake or Azure Blob Storage for cost-effective retention. By reducing noise upstream and standardizing logs to Sentinel ready schemas, this integration helps organizations control ingestion costs, improve detection quality, and streamline threat hunting and compliance workflows. VMRay VMRay integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to enrich SIEM and SOAR workflows with automated sandbox analysis and high-fidelity, behavior-based threat intelligence. The connector enables suspicious files and phishing URLs to be submitted directly from Sentinel to VMRay for dynamic analysis, while validated, high-confidence indicators of compromise (IOCs) are streamed back into Sentinel’s Threat Intelligence repository for correlation and detection. By adding detailed attack-chain visibility and enriched incident context, this integration helps SOC teams reduce investigation time, improve detection accuracy, and strengthen automated response workflows across Sentinel environments. XBOW XBOW integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to bring autonomous penetration testing insights directly into security operations workflows. The connector ingests automated penetration test findings from the XBOW platform into Sentinel, enabling security teams to analyze validated exploit activity alongside alerts, incidents, and other security telemetry. By correlating offensive testing results with Sentinel detections, this integration helps organizations identify monitoring gaps, validate detection coverage, and strengthen defensive controls using real‑world, continuously generated attack evidence. Zero Networks Segment Audit Zero Networks Segment integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to provide visibility into micro-segmentation and access-control activity across the network. The connector can collect audit logs or activities from Zero Networks Segment, enabling security teams to monitor policy changes, administrative actions, and access events related to MFA-based network segmentation. By bringing segmentation audit telemetry into Sentinel, this integration supports compliance monitoring, investigation of suspicious changes, and faster detection of attempts to bypass lateral-movement controls within enterprise environments. Zscaler Internet Access (ZIA) Zscaler Internet Access integrates with Microsoft Sentinel to centralize cloud security telemetry from web and firewall traffic. The connector enables ZIA logs to be ingested into Sentinel, allowing security teams to correlate Zscaler Internet Access signals with other enterprise data for improved threat detection, investigation, and response. By bringing ZIA web, firewall, and security events into Sentinel analytics and hunting workflows, this integration helps organizations gain broader visibility into internet-based threats and strengthen Zero Trust security operations. In addition to these solutions from our third-party partners, we are also excited to announce the following connector published by the Microsoft Sentinel team: GitHub Enterprise Audit Logs Microsoft’s Sentinel Promise For Customers Every connector in the Microsoft Sentinel ecosystem is built to work out of the box. In the unlikely event a customer encounters any issue with a connector, the App Assure team stands ready to assist. For Software Developers Software partners in need of assistance in creating or updating a Sentinel solution can also leverage Microsoft’s Sentinel Promise to support our shared customers. For developers seeking to build agentic experiences utilizing Sentinel data lake, we are excited to announce the launch of our Sentinel Advisory Service to guide developers across their Sentinel journey. Customers and developers alike can reach out to us via our intake form. Learn More Microsoft Sentinel data lake Microsoft Sentinel data lake: Unify signals, cut costs, and power agentic AI Introducing Microsoft Sentinel data lake What is Microsoft Sentinel data lake Unlocking Developer Innovation with Microsoft Sentinel data lake Microsoft Sentinel Codeless Connector Framework (CCF) Create a codeless connector for Microsoft Sentinel Public Preview Announcement: Microsoft Sentinel CCF Push What’s New in Microsoft Sentinel Monthly Blog Microsoft App Assure App Assure home page App Assure services App Assure blog App Assure Request Assistance Form App Assure Sentinel Advisory Services announcement App Assure’s promise: Migrate to Sentinel with confidence App Assure’s Sentinel promise now extends to Microsoft Sentinel data lake Ignite 2025 new Microsoft Sentinel connectors announcement Microsoft Security Microsoft’s Secure Future Initiative Microsoft Unified SecOps Editor's Note - April 7th, 2026: This blog was updated to include connector descriptions for BigID, Commvault, Semperis, and XBOW.
