Microsoft Security Product Reviews on TrustRadius: Give product feedback & get rewarded!
We love hearing more about our customers’ experience with our products! We’re currently working on growing our product reviews of Microsoft Security products on TrustRadius. We would love for you to participate and share your thoughts, feedback, and experiences using Microsoft Security products to help others in their buying process. To provide feedback on the capabilities of the Microsoft Security products, please click on the link below. You will need to first log in to your TrustRadius account or take 30 seconds to create a free account. Here are some Guidelines and Tips for Reviewers & About TrustRadius Reviews - Frequently Asked Questions Once you have completed your review, you will receive a $25 USD (or local currency equivalent) digital gift card via email as a thank-you from TrustRadius for each in-depth review that you publish. Microsoft Entra ID Microsoft 365 Defender Microsoft Sentinel Microsoft Defender for Cloud Microsoft Defender for Endpoint The offer is good only for those customers who submit a product review on the above-mentioned site. Limit one per person The offer is non-transferable and cannot be combined with any other offer. This offer runs through December 31, 2023, or while supplies last, and is not redeemable for cash. Taxes, if any, are the sole responsibility of the recipient. Any gift returned as non-deliverable will not be re-sent. Microsoft reserves the right to cancel, change, or suspend this offer at any time without notice. This offer does not apply to customers in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Region of Crimea, Russia, and China Customers, Microsoft partners and MVPs are eligible to participate. Please see Microsoft Privacy Statement and TrustRadius Privacy Policy for more information.
Insider Builds
I have been an avid Microsoft user for many years with only a couple of small issues every now and again. The 6 weeks have been unbelievably stressful and disheartening. I thought trying samples of New Insider builds and enlisting in Azure for some up to date training for myself to help with what I wanted to roll out for my business. This has been the worst experience i have ever been apart of. I now have multiple computers and hardware in disarray but more importantly the loss of time and patience is paramount . I have come to realise the repetitive responses and requests for data collection on feedback or issues is one-sided The amount of user data submissions is not the issue though. It is the assistance from Microsoft regarding issue via portals, help-desk etc. The inclusion of many backend functions for the purpose of better user experience is heavily flawed. Unless end-user inadvertently has or encounters issues in there OS life is good. Heavily automated program tiggers sit through all OS builds for example. One drive. Regardless whether this is declined or removed it will always be running in the background. If you system had been compromised this is a perfect place for root-kit other Malware to spread. Xcopy: A Microsoft background function which has the ability clone and copy 99% of drivers of operating info structure. Can be controlled by ghost script directives or embedded dll to aid malware. Anti-virus or defender find difficulties identifying or distinguishing authentic and re-pro-ducted data. In time this type of incursion can mimic a vast amount of OS functionality. Microsoft OS validity. I have trailed numerous builds with all sharing this characteristic. Invalid or expired software and driver certificates & TPM flaws even after a full clean reset and TPM turned off in bios. Inevitably this can introduce compromised software without end-user knowledge. The impact leads to unauthorised access in many elements of the OS platform especially data access and embedded .dll which can run inline or above elevated authorisation. A lot of this is undetectable. Once embedded in OS and bios this is impossible to clean without expert assistance and can be very costly. For the most part the inclusion of new AI functionality across the OS platform is very welcomed. Unfortunately there are a large amount of bugs to be ironed out especially in the platform navigation. Advice provided via OS AI can be mis-leading or incorrect. .
RSS feeds to security blogs?
Hello, After the update of blogs here i no longer see any RSS feeds or links. Where can those RSS feed be found now? It was the only newsfeed where blogs could be aggregated. perhaps im just blind :) but i cant find the new RSS feeds. Thank you! Previously (before this weeks update) the links to those RSS feed was as follows: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSecurityandCompliance https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Identity https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=CoreInfrastructureandSecurityBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=AzureNetworkSecurityBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=IdentityStandards https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftThreatProtectionBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderCloudBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderATPBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderIoTBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=DefenderExternalAttackSurfaceMgmtBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Vulnerability-Management https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=DefenderThreatIntelligence https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSecurityExperts https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=Microsoft-Security-Baselines https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftSentinelBlog https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/gxcuf89792/rss/board?board.id=MicrosoftDefenderforOffice365Blog
Auto-labelling in Purview-Which license or alternatives can be used rather than E5 ?
We are considering adopting Purview for Information Protection and DLP, but we are currently on E3 licenses. Given the extensive size of our SharePoint environment, auto-labelling is crucial for applying sensitivity labels to content across wide scopes automatically. My question is, are there any alternatives to upgrading licenses to E5 or adding the Compliance Add-on? Upgrading several thousand users to E5 or the Compliance Add-on requires significant justification, and I am wondering if there are other interim solutions we could leverage for a period of one year. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Thank you! KevSecure Score - Enable conditional access policies to block legacy authentication.
Hi all, it reports me to block legacy authentications for all users, however I have already done so by configuring conditional access; does anyone else have the same report despite the fact that we have already implemented blocking?Partners cannot access Security and Compliance Center
Partners haven't been able to access the Security and Compliance center on behalf of their clients for almost 18 months now. Last we heard on this was fromScott Landryback in July of 2019, but it's been silence since then. Is anyone on the Security and Compliance team working with the Microsoft Partner Center team on this?? This is the one item that's keeping us from being able to exclusively work from ourDelegated Admin accounts. As it stands now we still have to share a generic global admin account with all our employees just so they can manage certain aspects of our client's Office 365 subscription. https://office365.uservoice.com/forums/289138-office-365-security-compliance/suggestions/34423372-allow-partners-to-access-the-security-and-complian
WAF custom rule for bock others cookie and permit only a specific cookie name and value
Hello all, I need to create a custom WAF rule that only allows traffic for a specific request URI (/example-path) if it contains a particular cookie, Cookie=abc123, and blocks all other requests. Additionally, could someone clarify the difference between configuring the policy this way: RequestHeaders['Cookie'], Operator=DoesNotEqual, Values="Cookie=abc123" RequestCookie, Values="CookieName", Operator=Equal, valueOfTheCookie="abc123" I hope I explained myself clearly. Thanks in advance for your responses!
Unable to Restrict Sensitive Data Access by Microsoft Edge via Endpoint DLP Policy
Hello everyone, I've been running into a peculiar issue where actions we have configured to be blocked via our Endpoint DLP policies do not apply to the Microsoft Edge browser. Currently, we have a DLP policy configured to block attempts to access protected files by a list of restricted apps. Our restricted apps include "firefox.exe", "chrome.exe", "msedge.exe" and "msedgewebview2.exe". When the sensitive content is accessed by either Chrome or Firefox, the DLP policy works correctly (Block with override), but the policy completely refuses to work in any scenario that involves Edge. The data we are using as an example is able to be accessed by the Edge executables without restriction. Has anyone else run into this issue? It's strange to me that for some reason Edge is just completely exempt from the DLP policy actions we have implemented. Thank you!New Blog | Microsoft Ignite Sold Out? Not for Security Professionals! Secure Your Spot
ByOlivia Daniels Attention security professionals! Microsoft Ignite 2024 is just around the corner, taking place from Monday, November 18, 2024, through Friday, November 22, 2024, in Chicago, Illinois. This is your chance to dive deep into the latest advancements in AI and security to help you build a security-first culture within your organization. General in-person passes are sold out, but don't worry—you can still purchase a pass using Microsoft Security’s RSVP code Read the full post here:Microsoft Ignite Sold Out? Not for Security Professionals! Secure Your Spot
Codesigning with ECC certificate (rather than RSA) - works with SmartScreen?
Hello, Newbie here at the MS tech community, hope I'm posting this in the right spot. I have a seemingly straightforward question that I haven't found an answer to yet: Does Defender Smartscreen work with code signing certificates that use an ECC algorithm, instead of an RSA algorithm? The story here is:I recently purchased an EV code signing certificate from Sectigo.Followingdirections provided by Sectigo, I had secured my EV certificate on a Yubikey. For this, I had to choose one of the ECC algorithms, not RSA. Then I used this certificate to code sign a new build of one of my apps. When a user runs an application that has been signed with an EV certificate, they should not see the SmartScreen warning message that “Running this app might put your PC at risk” (like in the attached screenshot). However, I am getting that SmartScreen warning with it, every time. I submitted the signed app to Microsoft's online malware analysis tool. The analysts there wrote back that"the files submitted are now determined as clean” and that “the application has since established reputation and attempting to download or run the application should no longer show any warnings." Sadly, on my Windows 10 and Windows 11 systems, it is still showing the SmartScreen warning.(To be clear, I have never "clicked through" the warnings for it, and told it "run anyway", for testing purposes.) Other software devs I have spoken with, who are using certificates with RSA crypto, have not had this problem. So I am left wondering if that difference is the issue. Thank you, Leigh
