Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Microsoft Entra Permissions Management vs Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Entra Permissions...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
29th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (4th)
Microsoft Purview Insider R...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
30th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Insider Risk Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra Permissions Management is 0.5%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Sameer Bhat - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides resource-based access and security, but time-bound access can be a problem
Entra ID is the core of the identity management that we have. This is the key product that we are using. I am currently also looking into Entra Private Access because we are planning to deploy about 50,000 desktops into Azure and use Azure Virtual Desktop. We would like to give access to the users from the desktop to on-premises applications. I learned that Entra Private Access is a good solution. That is not yet GA, but that is what we are looking for. Entra provides a single pane of glass for managing user access, but because our company also integrates with Nebula API, only administrators use Entra's pane. A normal person who wants to get onboarded can do self-service using Nebula. The features for whitelisting and other things are definitely there. That is what we use specifically. Application IDs, enterprise applications, and all those things are already there, so we have more efficiency. There is also security because we usually do not allow user identities to get direct access to Azure resources. Usually, we use the service principles from Entra ID, so this way, it increases security. Entra has helped to save time for our IT administrators. We tend to automate a lot of things. We can do automation using Graph APIs and save time. It is hard to quantify the time savings, but there has been a medium amount of time savings. Entra has helped to save our organization money. We care about security and risk more than money, but it also saves money. We are premium customers, and because we have a commit-to-consume contract with Microsoft of multi-million dollars, the money does not come into it because we have to consume those resources.
DC
The solution's graphing is highly specific and useful
Implementing policies in the solution isn't easy, and it takes time. For example, you need to use some secrets in Windows or Mac to execute your policies, and you can assign these policies with Microsoft Intune. However, when you execute a policy, you still need to wait up to two days to see alerts. Some of our customers aren't happy because they didn't expect it to take so long. They're satisfied once it starts working because they see the alerts and graphs. The user interface also isn't user-friendly. When we introduce Insider Risk Management to our clients, they often find it difficult to understand. There is too much information, and the UI is not scalable. Also, entry-level IT technicians are not always interested in learning something new. It should be clearer and easier to understand. Microsoft is still working on machine learning and AI components. They're constantly updating the product. However, from my experience, most of my customers are not ready or able to use the AI solution. They are creating some project plans and specific policies. They don't want to see dozens of alerts when they use Microsoft's recommendations or the AI-based solution.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution integrates well with our infrastructure and other systems without any issues."
"Multifactor authentication is valuable."
"Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management was helpful in performing investigations after alerts were received."
"The best thing about Purview is that it's easy to integrate with our day-to-day environment. We have Active Directory, and Word and Excel. Using a third-party vendor and trying to integrate with our existing environment would be much more challenging."
"Insider Risk Management's graphing is highly specific and useful. You can see the last six months of data for the Microsoft tenant. You can easily find what you need. For example, you can filter for alerts about devices, emails, etc."
 

Cons

"We use a third-party API called Nebula API to integrate the account for authorization. The time-bound access area in Entra can be a problem. It can be improved in terms of the granularity of the permissions."
"The solution's pricing and support services need improvement."
"The reporting capabilities sometimes leave a little to be desired. It could be improved in terms of producing reports to provide information to the C-suite or others."
"For certain things, you need to install an agent. I understand it's for integrity, but if there could be a clientless solution for certain aspects, it would make life easier."
"The user interface also isn't user-friendly. When we introduce Insider Risk Management to our clients, they often find it difficult to understand. There is too much information, and the UI is not scalable. Also, entry-level IT technicians are not always interested in learning something new. It should be clearer and easier to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are a Fortune 500 company, so we always negotiate with Microsoft."
"The product cost is in the mid to high range."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
29%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Entra Permissions Management?
The product cost is in the mid to high range. You need to have a good budget to implement it, so it is considered fairly expensive for our market. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Entra Permissions Management?
The solution's pricing and support services need improvement.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
The reporting capabilities sometimes leave a little to be desired. It could be improved in terms of producing reports to provide information to the C-suite or others.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
The primary use case for Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management was data loss prevention. This was my main objective.
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
I would recommend Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management to others. I would rate the overall solution as a nine.
 

Also Known As

CloudKnox Permissions Management
Microsoft Insider Risk Management
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Entra Permissions Management vs. Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.