microsoft purview
82 TopicsSharing: PDF readers that support Purview labels
As I was researching on Adobe Acrobat reader and Sensitivity labels, I decided to check if the common alternative PDF readers out there are able to support Purview MIP Sensitivity labels. There is already a published documentation on this for SharePoint-Compatible PDF readers that supports Microsoft IRM: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/purview/sp-compatible-pdf-readers-for-irm (last updated Nov-2023) but I wanted to see if these same PDF readers supports the ability for end-users to use/ select labels similar to that of Adobe Acrobat As of 11-June-2025; atleast one of them clearly do: Nitro PDF: Yes. Documentation shows that users can see and use the sensitivity labels. PDF -X.change Editor: Yes. Documentation show that users can see and use the sensitivity labels. (check the official website, I can't hyperlink it because the site is blocked. FOX PDF editor: No. Documentation only states RMS and not clear if it show Purview labels. This is for F.O.X.I.T editor (spelled without the ".") but for some reason there is a community ban on that word and it won't allow me to post the full name PDFescape: No. Sumatra PDF: No Okular: No If there are other PDF readers that I've missed, I encourage you list it down in the comment below. Would love to grow this list.795Views4likes3CommentsCan´t Sign confidential documents
Hello, I have a problem. I want to send confidential contracts to customers for signing with Adobe DocuSign. This contracts have a label "confidential" from purview and are encrypted. But now the customer cant sign the contract with DocuSign because of the encryption. Is there a way that they can sign the document? We must encrypt the documents because compliance reasons and ISMS. Thank you.45Views2likes0CommentsWorkaround Enabling Purview Data Quality & Profiling for Cross-Tenant Microsoft Fabric Assets
The Challenge: Cross-Tenant Data Quality Blockers Like many of you, I have been managing a complex architecture where Microsoft Purview sits in Tenant A and Microsoft Fabric resides in Tenant B. While we can achieve basic metadata scanning (with some configuration), I hit a hard wall when trying to enable Data Quality (DQ) scanning. Purview's native Data Quality scan for Fabric currently faces limitations in cross-tenant scenarios, preventing us from running Profiling or applying DQ Rules directly on the remote Delta tables. The Experiment: "Governance Staging" Architecture rather than waiting for a native API fix, I conducted an experiment to bridge this gap using a "Data Staging" approach. The goal was to bring the data's "physicality" into the same tenant as Purview to unlock the full DQ engine. The Solution Steps: Data Movement (Tenant B to Tenant A): Inside the Fabric Workspace (Tenant B), I created a Fabric Data Pipeline. I used this to export the critical Delta Tables as Parquet files to an ADLS Gen2 account located in Tenant A (the same tenant as Purview). Note: You can schedule this to run daily to keep the "Governance Copy" fresh. Native Scanning (Tenant A): I registered this ADLS Gen2 account as a source in Purview. Because both Purview and the ADLS account are in the same tenant, the scan was seamless, instantaneous, and required no complex authentication hurdles. Activating Data Quality: Once the Parquet files were scanned, I attached these assets to a Data Product in the Purview Data Governance portal. The Results: The results were immediate and successful. Because the data now resides on a fully supported, same-tenant ADLS Gen2 surface: ✅ Data Profiling: I could instantly see column statistics, null distributions, and value patterns. ✅ DQ Rules: I was able to apply custom logic and business rules to the data. ✅ Scans: The DQ scan ran successfully, generating a Data Quality Score for our Fabric data. Conclusion: While we await native cross-tenant "Live View" support for DQ in Fabric, this workaround works today. It allows you to leverage the full power of Microsoft Purview's Data Quality engine immediately. If you are blocked by tenant boundaries, I highly recommend setting up a lightweight "Governance Staging" container in your primary tenant. Has anyone else experimented with similar staging patterns for Governance? Let's discuss below.Solved158Views2likes3CommentsManaging Multi-Tenant Azure/365: Workarounds for Cross-Tenant Limitations in Purview and Fabric
I am working in a Microsoft Azure/365 multi-tenant setting due to some constraints. I am using Purview (Tenant1) and Fabric (Tenant2), M365 in (Tenant 2). I'm facing issues with various solutions due to cross tenant limitation for eg: Data Quality Connection, Metadata ingestion, lineage, etc. To overcome this I am exploring various workarounds. Key Question: 1. Are there proven workarounds or solutions to manage data estate in this scenario? (Can't merge /migrate tenants)211Views2likes1CommentMicrosoft Purview - Structured Database Management, Governance, Security and Protection
Since Microsoft Purview is a Data Governance and Data Security platform, I need to integrate Microsoft Purview with both structured and non-structured databases hosted in the public cloud and on-premises. The goal is to leverage Microsoft Purview to manage user roles and permissions, enforce data loss prevention policies and rules (e.g., statement-based rules), mask specific columns to restrict certain users from viewing actual data, implement field-level encryption for database fields, and, most importantly, ensure data quality and integrity by preventing unauthorized direct modifications. I am uncertain about the current capabilities of Microsoft Purview to meet the mentioned requirements. I believe that some features may already be available, while others might not be supported yet.215Views2likes4CommentsTest DLP Policy: On-Prem
We have DLP policies based on SIT and it is working well for various locations such as Sharepoint, Exchange and Endpoint devices. But the DLP policy for On-Prem Nas shares is not matching when used with Microsoft Information Protection Scanner. DLP Rule: Conditions Content contains any of these sensitive info types: Credit Card Number U.S. Bank Account Number U.S. Driver's License Number U.S. Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) U.S. Social Security Number (SSN) The policy is visible to the Scanner and it is being logged as being executed MSIP.Lib MSIP.Scanner (30548) Executing policy: Data Discovery On-Prem, policyId: 85........................ and the MIP reports are listing files with these SITs The results Information Type Name - Credit Card Number U.S. Social Security Number (SSN) U.S. Bank Account Number Action - Classified Dlp Mode -- Test Dlp Status -- Skipped Dlp Comment -- No match There is no other information in logs. Why is the DLP policy not matching and how can I test the policy ? thanks72Views1like1CommentPurview Unified Catalogue Gov Domains Numeric Prefixing
Has Anyone Tried Numeric Prefixing for Governance Domains in Purview? Context: We introduced a structured numeric prefixing system for governance domains in Microsoft Purview to make hierarchical sorting more intuitive. What we did: Parent domains use a base prefix ending in .00 (e.g., 02.00 Group). Child domains are numbered sequentially (e.g., 02.01 Directorate, 02.01.01 Team). Why: Purview sorts domains alphabetically, which caused child domains (e.g., 02.01) to appear above their parent (02 Group). Adding .00 ensures parents always sort before children, creating a clear hierarchy. How it works: All already have 01.00- Top-level groups: 02.00 Directorates: 02.01, 02.02 Teams/Units: 02.01.01 This approach guarantees correct sorting, clear hierarchy, and scalability for future additions? Question for the community: Has anyone else implemented a similar numeric prefixing approach in Purview? Do you think this is a good idea for maintaining clarity and scalability? Any alternative strategies you’ve found effective?Solved64Views1like1CommentCross-Tenant Purview Scan of Fabric Lakehouse fails to ingest Sub-items (Delta Tables)
Environment: Tenant 1 (Consumer): Azure Purview (Microsoft Purview Data Map). Tenant 2 (Provider): Microsoft Fabric (Capacity + Workspaces). Architecture: Purview in Tenant 1 is scanning Fabric in Tenant 2 via the "Fabric" Data Source using Azure Auto-Resolve Integration Runtime. The Issue: I can successfully scan and see Item-level metadata (e.g., Workspace Name, Lakehouse Name). However, I am getting Zero sub-item visibility. No Delta Tables, no Columns, and no sub-item lineage are being ingested into Purview. Configuration Verified: Service Principal (SPN): Created an App Registration in Tenant 2 (Fabric Tenant). Permissions: The SPN is a Member (and I tested Admin) of the target Fabric Workspace. Fabric Admin Settings (Tenant 2): Allow service principals to use read-only admin APIs: Enabled for the SPN's Security Group. Enhance admin APIs responses with detailed metadata: Enabled. Enhance admin APIs responses with DAX and mashup expressions: Enabled. My Specific Questions for the Product Team / MVPs/Members: Authentication Flow: For sub-item ingestion (Delta Tables) to work cross-tenant, is it sufficient for the SPN to be a standard App Registration in Tenant 2 (Provider), or does Fabric require the "Cross-Tenant Access" (Guest User) flow where a shadow SPN is created via the specific trusted external tenants configuration? API Limitation: Is the "Enhanced Metadata" API payload (metadata/subartifacts) restricted to Same-Tenant calls only during the current Preview? I suspect the API is returning a standard payload instead of the enhanced one due to the cross-tenant boundary. Workaround: Has anyone successfully forced ingestion of Delta Tables cross-tenant by using the Apache Atlas REST API to manually inject the schema entities, or is there a specific hidden toggle in the Fabric Admin Portal (perhaps specifically for "External Principals") that I am missing?116Views1like1CommentPurview YouTube Show and Podcast
I am a Microsoft MVP who co-hosts All Things M365 Compliance with Ryan John Murphy from Microsoft. The show focuses on Microsoft 365 compliance, data security, and governance. Our episodes cover: Microsoft Purview features and updates Practical guidance for improving compliance posture Real-world scenarios and expert discussions Recent episodes include: Mastering Records Management in Microsoft Purview: A Practical Guide for AI-Ready Governance Teams Private Channel Messages: Compliance Action Required by 20 Sept 2025 Microsoft Purview DLP: Best Practices for Successful Implementation Shadow AI, Culture Change, and Compliance: Securing the Future with Rafah Knight 📺 Watch on YouTube: All Things M365 Compliance - YouTube 🎧 Listen on your favourite podcast platform: All Things M365 Compliance | Podcast on Spotify If you’re responsible for compliance, governance, or security in Microsoft 365, this is for you. 👉 Subscribe to stay up to date – and let us know in the comments what topics you’d like us to cover in future episodes!85Views1like0Comments