Blocking/Disabling SMS, RCS and iMessage services on a device
Hi all, I'm trying to gather more information on Intune capabilities around blocking or disabling various text messaging services on mobile devices. I have done some research and here are my current understandings: SMS Android: This can be disabled on Samsung Knox Only devices. Not 100% if this means devices that are enrolled via Samsung's Knox enrollment, but that's what it sounds like. iOS: Did not find any capabilities here. iMessage: Android: N/A iOS: This can be disabled on iOS ADE enrollment device, no other types of enrollment support this for iOS. RCS: Android: Need to utilize OEMConfig profiles, which means it's vendor specific. Don't have any details here so not sure which OEMs support this for Android. iOS: N/A Any further information on this would be very appreciated. Thanks, Durango2k13
Account Protection Policy Unable to Save
I am trying to configure an Account Protection policy to allow but not enforce Windows Hello for Business in my org's tenant. If I configure any of the device- or user-settings, the policy throws an error when trying to save. Two errors actually, both pretty generic. This has been persisting for the last 24hrs. Does anyone know what may be the culprit here?
Intune partner compliance onboarding
Hello, We develop a MDM solution and we would like to become device compliance partner to offer our customers conditionnal access functionality. After filling twice (the first time almost two month ago) the form "Intune partner compliance onboarding request" whose link is available on this page https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/intune/device-security/compliance/third-party-partners, we didn't get any reply to our request. Would you know if there is any other way to integrate this partnership ? Any contact or anything to get some news about our request ? Thank you for your help. Best regards,RemoteHelp.exe reports FileVersion 10.4.10008.1000 while the product version is 5.2.1037.0
Problem 1 - File Version Because RemoteHelp.exe reports FileVersion 10.4.10008.1000 while the product version is 5.2.1037.0, this makes Intune detection, packaging, inventory reporting, and supersedence unnecessarily difficult. Remote Help publishes release versions such as 5.2.1037.0, but the primary executable reports a different FileVersion (10.4.10008.1000). This prevents administrators from using standard file-version detection methods in Intune, Configuration Manager, and software inventory solutions. Administrators must instead enumerate uninstall registry entries and distinguish between the Burn bundle and MSI entries. Aligning the executable FileVersion/ProductVersion with the published release version would significantly simplify enterprise application management. Remote Help combines both common enterprise packaging mistakes: The executable version doesn't match the advertised product version. The installer creates two uninstall entries with the same DisplayName. Neither issue is fatal, but together they make what should be a trivial Intune detection rule far more complicated than it needs to be. From an enterprise management perspective, this causes several problems: Application detection scripts become more complicated. Supersedence rules are harder to create. Administrators waste time investigating apparent version mismatches. Software inventory reports show different versions depending on which source is queried. Automated packaging systems cannot simply use file versioning. Documentation has to explicitly state "do not use the EXE version". Problem 2 - Duplicate Uninstall entries The Burn bootstrapper situation makes it even more confusing because there are two uninstall entries, both called Remote Help, both reporting version 5.2.1037.0, but representing two different installer components. This isn't unique to Remote Help unfortunately. Microsoft has a history of doing similar things with: Company Portal Teams (various generations) Edge WebView2 Visual Studio bootstrapper installers Azure VPN Client Some Defender components where the executable version represents the underlying codebase rather than the product release version that administrators actually deploy. The file version should be treated as an API contract with administrators. Once an application is broadly managed by enterprises, changing versioning schemes or exposing an internal build number instead of the published product version makes lifecycle management considerably harder than it needs to be. Problem 3 - Unversioned download URL The URL to download the latest version https://aka.ms/downloadremotehelp is only a redirect link, not a versioned artefact. The download URL itself does not expose any metadata about: The current Remote Help version The release date When the installer was last updated Previous versions A changelog Microsoft's documentation simply points administrators to the download link for installation. When you download the 'latest version' you always receive whatever Microsoft currently considers the latest installer, but the URL itself provides no version information. For enterprise deployment scenarios, the ideal solution would be one of: A "What's New" page with version history. A release notes page containing: Version Release date Changes Versioned download URLs, for example: RemoteHelp-5.2.1037.0.exe RemoteHelp-5.2.1037.0.msi Solution? Please can these three problems be resolved to ease some of the unnecessary burden placed on Intune Administrators?
AD Minimization: How ready are organizations for the journey?
Microsoft's direction around Active Directory minimization is an interesting and important part of the broader cloud transformation journey. Moving more identity and device management toward Microsoft Entra ID can help organizations gradually reduce their dependency on traditional on-premises Active Directory and move towards a more cloud-first environment. What I particularly like about Microsoft's approach is that this is positioned as a journey rather than something that needs to happen overnight. For many organizations, Active Directory has been part of the environment for 20+ years. Over that time, a lot of dependencies may have been built around it, such as: Legacy applications, Group Policies, Domain-joined Windows devices, LDAP, Kerberos or NTLM dependencies, File servers and other infrastructure, Scripts and operational processes linked to AD. Moving new users, applications and devices towards a cloud-first approach is one part of the journey. The more interesting challenge is how organizations modernize the existing environment while minimizing disruption to users and day-to-day operations. This is where I think Microsoft's phased approach makes a lot of sense. Organizations can gradually identify and reduce AD dependencies while continuing to modernize identity, endpoint management and applications at a pace that works for their environment. I would be interested to hear from others who are already working towards AD minimization. Where is your organization in this journey today? Are you already actively reducing your dependency on on-premises AD? And what has been the biggest area to address so far, legacy applications, Group Policy, existing Windows devices, authentication dependencies, or something else? It would also be interesting to hear which Microsoft technologies or approaches have helped you most during this transition.
Problems identifying managed iOS devices when using APP
Hello, As the title says i am having a hard time getting this to work. We have been using APP for a long time, but it has not been necessary for us to have different policies for managed (we only use iOS) and unmanaged devices (all mobile device types). Now i want to remove APP from managed devices all together, and only enforce this on unmanaged devices (BYOD) Please see attached image of how it is configured today. I also have an CA policy which requires APP when using MS apps, where i have added and "Filter for devices" exclude with following syntax: device.enrollmentProfileName -contains "iOS standard profile" (which cover our enrollment profiles, both are fully managed) When enrolling a managed device, APP still is enforced. Does anyone have any tips? I wanted to try here before submitting a ticket to MS. As far as i have found out , the app.devicemanagmenttype is the only rule that can be used to filter managed devices when used with APP.
Intune Graph API deviceStatuses missing device shown in portal
Hello, I am retrieving device status for an Intune configuration profile using Microsoft Graph API. API request: GET https://graph.microsoft.com/beta/deviceManagement/deviceConfigurations/{policyId}/deviceStatuses Issue: In the Intune portal, a device shows Success status for the configuration profile under: Devices → Configuration profiles → Device status However, when retrieving the same data using the Graph API endpoint above, that device does not appear in the API response. Observations: In the Intune portal, the policy shows one device with Success status. But the Graph API response returns different devices and does not include the device visible in the portal. Example response (sanitized): deviceDisplayName: Device-A status: unknown deviceDisplayName: Device-B status: unknown Questions: Why would a device appear in the Intune portal device status but not in the Graph API deviceStatuses response? Is there a delay in data synchronization between the Intune portal and Graph API? Is there another Graph endpoint recommended for retrieving all device configuration status results? Additional details: Graph API version: beta Permission used: DeviceManagementConfiguration.Read.All Tested using Graph Explorer Any insights would be appreciated.
