Hunting for MFA manipulations in Entra ID tenants using KQL
The following article, Hunting for MFA manipulations in Entra ID tenants using KQL proved to be an invaluable resource in my search for an automated way to notify users of MFA modifications. I've adapted the KQL query to function within Defender Advanced Hunting or Azure Entra, my objective is to establish an alert that directly E-Mails the affected user, informing them of the MFA change and advising them to contact security if they did not initiate it. While the query runs correctly under Defender Advanced Hunting, I'm currently unable to create a workable custom alert because no "ReportId" is being captured. Despite consulting with Copilot, Gemini, CDW Support, and Microsoft Support, no workable solution has been achieved. Any insight would be greatly appreciated - Thank You! //Advanced Hunting query to parse modified: //StrongAuthenticationUserDetails (SAUD) //StrongAuthenticationMethod (SAM) let SearchWindow = 1h; let AuthenticationMethods = dynamic(["TwoWayVoiceMobile","TwoWaySms","TwoWayVoiceOffice","TwoWayVoiceOtherMobile","TwoWaySmsOtherMobile","OneWaySms","PhoneAppNotification","PhoneAppOTP"]); let AuthenticationMethodChanges = CloudAppEvents | where ActionType == "Update user." and RawEventData contains "StrongAuthenticationMethod" | extend Target = tostring(RawEventData.ObjectId) | extend Actor = tostring(RawEventData.UserId) | mv-expand ModifiedProperties = parse_json(RawEventData.ModifiedProperties) | where ModifiedProperties.Name == "StrongAuthenticationMethod" | project Timestamp,Actor,Target,ModifiedProperties,RawEventData,ReportId; let OldValues = AuthenticationMethodChanges | extend OldValue = parse_json(tostring(ModifiedProperties.OldValue)) | mv-apply OldValue on (extend Old_MethodType=tostring(OldValue.MethodType),Old_Default=tostring(OldValue.Default) | sort by Old_MethodType); let NewValues = AuthenticationMethodChanges | extend NewValue = parse_json(tostring(ModifiedProperties.NewValue)) | mv-apply NewValue on (extend New_MethodType=tostring(NewValue.MethodType),New_Default=tostring(NewValue.Default) | sort by New_MethodType); let RemovedMethods = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | join kind=leftouter NewValues on ReportId,$left.Old_MethodType==$right.New_MethodType | where Old_MethodType != New_MethodType | extend Action = strcat("Removed (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(Old_MethodType)], ") from Authentication Methods.") | extend ChangedValue = "Method Removed"; let AddedMethods = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner NewValues on ReportId | join kind=leftouter OldValues on ReportId,$left.New_MethodType==$right.Old_MethodType | where Old_MethodType != New_MethodType | extend Action = strcat("Added (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)], ") as Authentication Method.") | extend ChangedValue = "Method Added"; let DefaultMethodChanges = AuthenticationMethodChanges | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | join kind=inner NewValues on ReportId | where Old_Default != New_Default and Old_MethodType == New_MethodType and New_Default == "true" | join kind=inner OldValues on ReportId | where Old_Default1 == "true" and Old_MethodType1 != New_MethodType | extend Old_MethodType = Old_MethodType1 | extend Action = strcat("Default Authentication Method was changed to (" , AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)], ").") | extend ChangedValue = "Default Method"; let AuthenticationMethodReport = union RemovedMethods,AddedMethods,DefaultMethodChanges | project Timestamp,Action,Actor,Target,ChangedValue,OldValue=case(isempty(Old_MethodType), "",strcat(Old_MethodType,": ", AuthenticationMethods[toint(Old_MethodType)])),NewValue=case(isempty( New_MethodType),"", strcat(New_MethodType,": ", AuthenticationMethods[toint(New_MethodType)])); let AuthenticationDetailsChanges = CloudAppEvents | where ActionType == "Update user." and RawEventData contains "StrongAuthenticationUserDetails" | extend Target = tostring(RawEventData.ObjectId) | extend Actor = tostring(RawEventData.UserId) | extend ReportId= tostring(RawEventData.ReportId) | mvexpand ModifiedProperties = parse_json(RawEventData.ModifiedProperties) | where ModifiedProperties.Name == "StrongAuthenticationUserDetails" | extend NewValue = parse_json(replace_string(replace_string(tostring(ModifiedProperties.NewValue),"[",""),"]","")) | extend OldValue = parse_json(replace_string(replace_string(tostring(ModifiedProperties.OldValue),"[",""),"]","")) | mv-expand NewValue | mv-expand OldValue | where (tostring( bag_keys(OldValue)) == tostring(bag_keys(NewValue))) or (isempty(OldValue) and tostring(NewValue) !contains ":null") or (isempty(NewValue) and tostring(OldValue) !contains ":null") | extend ChangedValue = tostring(bag_keys(NewValue)[0]) | extend OldValue = tostring(parse_json(OldValue)[ChangedValue]) | extend NewValue = tostring(parse_json(NewValue)[ChangedValue]) | extend OldValue = case(ChangedValue == "PhoneNumber" or ChangedValue == "AlternativePhoneNumber", replace_strings(OldValue,dynamic([' ','(',')']), dynamic(['','',''])), OldValue ) | extend NewValue = case(ChangedValue == "PhoneNumber" or ChangedValue == "AlternativePhoneNumber", replace_strings(NewValue,dynamic([' ','(',')']), dynamic(['','',''])), NewValue ) | where tostring(OldValue) != tostring(NewValue) | extend Action = case(isempty(OldValue), strcat("Added new ",ChangedValue, " to Strong Authentication."),isempty(NewValue),strcat("Removed existing ",ChangedValue, " from Strong Authentication."),strcat("Changed ",ChangedValue," in Strong Authentication.")); union AuthenticationMethodReport, AuthenticationDetailsChanges | extend AccountUpn = Target | where Timestamp > ago(SearchWindow) //| summarize count() by Timestamp, Action, Actor, Target, ChangedValue, OldValue, NewValue, ReportId, AccountDisplayName, AccountId, AccountUpn | summarize arg_max(Timestamp, *) by Action | project Timestamp, Action, Actor, Target, ChangedValue, OldValue, NewValue, ReportId, AccountDisplayName, AccountId, AccountUpn | sort by Timestamp desc
How much time does it takes to update secure score on Defender portal?
Hi Folks, I have marked some of the recommended actions on secure score as "third party" or "alternate mitigation". Even after 10 hours I can see action is still marked as "to be addressed". How much time does it take for changes to show up there? And also, how much time will it take to get this add up to my cumulative secure score?Newsletter for updates - as per customer request
one of my colleague asked a question and i couldn't help him maybe here you ll be able to clarify <::One of my customers mentioned, that they want to be proactively informed about security incidents and news around the topic security from Microsoft, as they have critical infrastructure. Does anyone know, which newsletter that customer could register for?::>Secure Score - resolved through alternate mitigation
On recommended actions I set the implementation as "resolved through alternate mitigation" also adding in the notes the alternative used to mitigate Microsoft's advice; when I save and re-enter however I find "to address" configured. Should I just wait until tomorrow or is this anomalous?New blog post | Entra Identity Governance with Entra Verified ID
I’m excited to announce the integration of Entra Identity Governance Entitlement Management with a very cool technology we recently introduced, Microsoft Entra Verified ID! If you think about what you need to onboard new users including employees, contractors, partners, or other business guests, it often includes verifying identity information and credentials. This process can be tedious and time-consuming, requiring users to fill out redundant online forms or paperwork, ultimately delaying hiring timelines and ramp-up periods. Entra Identity Governance with Entra Verified ID – Higher Fidelity Access Rights + Faster Onboarding - Microsoft Community Hub
Secure Score - Resolve unsecure account attributes
We are working through our Secure Score and I have some questions about a few items in the Resolve unsecure account attributes action. We have the default Internet Guest Account and Launch IIS Process Account disabled in our primary domain. And we have the default Internet Guest Account and Launch IIS Process Account disabled in a secondary domain in our forest. Secure Score does not show any recommended actions for the Internet Guest Account and Launch IIS Process Account in our primary domain. But it shows we need to remove the password not required flag in our secondary domain. Comparing all four accounts in onprem AD, they all have the same settings. Is there any reason why those accounts in our secondary domain show up in Secure Score as having action items when the ones in our primary domain don't? Since they all have the same settings, they should all have the same action or lack or action.
AATP Sensor Not Starting on DC
Hi All, I have deployed two sensors to both of my DC's. After deployment, the AATPSensor service is stuck at "Starting". I have the Microsoft.Tri.Sensor-Errors.log file accessible if someone could help make sense of the potential error. I have confirmed LDAP is open, and that the power settings are set to High performance. Thank you
New Blog Post | Microsoft Defender Weekly Wrap - Issue #55
Original Post: Microsoft Defender Weekly Wrap - Issue #55 | Revue (getrevue.co) Happy Friday all! I hope the week was good for you. I spent the first part of the week in Redmond doing some customer stuff. It was a whirlwind trip. Landed on Sunday, worked on Monday, then traveled back to the home office on Tuesday. And it clearly wasn’t enough time to settle into the time change, so I’ve been trying to recoup my energy for the remainder of the week. … The folks managing the Defender for DevOps features are asking for your help. Pull Request Annotations in Defender for DevOps Defender for DevOps exposes security findings as annotations in Pull Requests (PR). Security operators can enable PR annotations in Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Any exposed issues can then be remedied by developers. This process can prevent and fix potential security vulnerabilities and misconfigurations before they enter the production stage. Defender for DevOps annotates the vulnerabilities within the differences in the file rather than all the vulnerabilities detected across the entire file. Developers are able to see annotations in their source code management systems and Security operators can see any unresolved findings in Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Survey link: https://rodtrent.com/zzb … This week, here’s something special. Microsoft Security Operations Analyst Blueprint Survey Want to help drive the updates to the SC-200 exam? Your feedback will be used to determine which skills and abilities may be assessed in the Microsoft Security Operations Analyst certification exam. Please complete and submit your responses by December 14, 2022. Survey link: https://rodtrent.com/4t3 … I have one more trip, and one more major thing to do before taking off for the remainder of the year for the holidays. The last couple weeks after Thanksgiving have been busier than I remember in years past, so I’m truly looking forward to the time off. Talk soon. -Rod
