Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps Reviews

I used to deploy it in the customer's environment and set the requirements. It's used for blocking downloads, for example, and is a security feature for data centers.

The solution is helping a lot. We get a lot of very detailed reporting on security that really shows what users are doing, including what they've opened, what else they're sharing, downloading, viewing, et cetera, as well as when they are logging in. It's a very detailed activity and reporting of my units.

The file policy and activity policy are very useful aspects of the solution.

I can get information, for example, data location, IP address, et cetera. I use it for getting information about what's happening in my environment with certain files. I can see, for example, which user is sharing files externally, and if they're downloading or might be downloading, the documents on their personal device, a corporate device, or if they are sharing any folders with the outside world.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The general usability of the solution is very straightforward.

We've had an issue where an in-session policy was not working. I want them to enhance the in-session policy. It's something I came across while adding the application into MCAS as I wanted to apply some MCAS policies on those applications.

I've been using the solution for about five years now. 

The solution is 99.99% stable.

The solution is extremely scalable. 

I've handled technical support for my customers. 

I've only really worked with this solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. I already have experience putting the solution into place and therefore I'm pretty adept at setting it up. The implementation simply requires understanding how the customer wants to use it and what they want to monitor. 

It's an ongoing deployment and I've been deploying the solution for almost six years now. 

I basically use authority to integrate all users and exchanges together. We have basically a Microsoft-oriented system.

When I deployed it, I applied it to around 4,000 users. I indirectly did it myself and it took around one month for me to integrate everything and to meet those policies to ensure they were in line and working as to my expectations and that I was getting the expected results that I wanted.

You only need one person to handle the deployment. Maybe two people.

We do not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant. 

I'm not acquainted with the licensing and pricing of the solution. 

I did not evaluate other options previously. 

I don't have a business relationship with Microsoft. I deploy the solution and I am managing MCAS for customers.

If a person has an Office-specific environment and they are looking for a solution, this is a good option. It's a good native application. Even if they were in a different cloud, I'd advise migration to a Microsoft environment. 

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our customers.

Our customers have applications that are running across different clouds or on different platforms. Microsoft Cloud App Security brings them together onto the same platform from a security standpoint. The application can run seamlessly across different clouds, which helps.

The most valuable feature is the seamless integration across different clouds.

If this solution were more robust then it would be much more useful.

The interface needs to be more user-friendly.

Cloud App Security should be more lightweight.

We have been working with Microsoft Cloud App Security for almost eight years.

I have not seen any trouble in terms of stability. We have not experienced bugs to this point in time.

We have had no problem with scalability.

I have not personally been in contact with technical support. The feedback that I have heard from the teams is more or less good.

I have experience with Netskope and I think that it has higher marks. It is more lightweight.

The initial setup is straightforward and absolutely fine.

This product is not expensive.

This is a product that I recommend.

Overall, it is a good product but the robustness should be improved.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use it for security alerts for any possible trouble for users. 

In terms of deployment, we have on-prem servers for now for one of the customers. We also have several customers on the Azure cloud.

I like the web GUI/the management interface. I also like the security of Microsoft. As compared to other manufacturers, it's less complex and easy to understand and work with.

There are some features, such as user navigation content filtering, that are disabled by default, and it probably makes sense to enable them by default.

I have been using this solution for about six months. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have 100 licenses for one company, and we probably have 1,000 licenses for another company.

I haven't used it yet.

The customer with 100 licenses used Sophos EDR. Microsoft Defender is more manageable. Sophos EDR is not a bad product. It is a complete product, but the Microsoft Defender is better.

It was more or less straightforward. 

It was implemented in-house.

It is a little bit expensive. When you want to have the complete package with Office 365, Defender, and everything else, it is expensive.

My advice would be to try it first and compare it with other solutions.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Our primary reason for implementing this product is to deal with spam email.

In general, this product helps to best secure our network.

It has features that help to improve our security posture that include better logging and better detection of threats. Since implementing it, we have been finding more malicious emails and files. Better logging allows us to find problems and take appropriate steps to lock them out.

We really like the fact that we have a single web-based pane of glass for administration. We can use our Azure Active Directory accounts to access it, and we don't need a local application.

The most valuable feature is the anti-spam capabilities.

Since implementing this solution, we have had more support calls regarding false positives. This means that we have had to do a little more work finding these issues, although it is getting better. It is just a matter of fine-tuning the system at this point.

The false positives we have experienced so far are rare and have come from customer-specific programs. I can't say that it would be easy for Microsoft to solve them. Fortunately, we have not had any false positives for known software.

In the future, I would like to see more plug-and-play capabilities that use AI to tell you what needs to be done. It would be helpful if it scanned our devices and made security suggestions, on a configuration basis. For example, it could make more suggestions that include specific points, or offer to have something configured in the standard way.

We have been using Microsoft Cloud App Security for approximately three months.

Stability-wise, so far, I'm satisfied and it works well. We haven't had any issues that I attribute to Microsoft. There were a couple of days where we had problems logging on but I think that it was related to an issue with SolarWinds. My understanding is that some sites were shut down and a lot of companies had the same problem.

At this point, we have not had the need to scale up or scale down. We have approximately 250 devices that we are protecting.

We have not needed to contact technical support.

We were using F-Secure before implementing Microsoft Cloud App Security, and we are still using it. In fact, it is just another layer of protection. If in the future we see that the Microsoft product is good enough, then we might stop using F-Secure. However, that is not the plan at the moment.

The main reason that we chose this product is for its good compatibility with Office 365 and Azure Active Directory.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. There were some Azure Active Directory options that we needed to tweak before we got everything running properly.

Our deployment took approximately one month to complete. Part of this time was spent adjusting for false positives.

We followed a step-by-step process for deployment where we started with the computers in our location, then moving to other devices. After our location was complete, we moved to other offices.

We set it up with the help of an external consultant. The company sold us the product, set it up, and we use it. We have an ongoing support contract with them. Our experience with them was good and the consultant's knowledge of Microsoft products was very good. They are a Microsoft partner.

We are still learning the product and over time, we are getting more versed in it. There are two of us, myself and my colleague, responsible for the maintenance. We are both system administrators.

The pricing is a little bit high but right now, we are okay with it because of the compatibility with Office 365, Teams, and Azure AD. These features make it worth the cost.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this one.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to get assistance with deployment from somebody who can help you. Don't do it by yourself, if you're not a reseller for it. As a company, get somebody who has experience with the product.

In summary, we have just begun using this product but so far, it works well and we are satisfied with it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have an educational institution and we are using this solution to personally teach our students these applications.

The most valuable feature is the ease of management. It's important. The management is cloud-based and we can work inside or outside on public networks.

Generally, the pricing can always be improved along with the management system.

We are using new Apple products increasingly in our company, such as iPads and Mac computers. The integration with Apple products would be good. They have started with some implementation using Microsoft Softbox from Apple products in there.

I have been using this solution for two years.

We are using the Microsoft 365 Version. It is a hybrid Azure Active Directory.

They have an in-tune modified in this platform that we are using.

We have plans to increase our usage.

We have 1000 students at the moment, but not all of them are using this solution right now. In total, we have between 300 and 500 users.

We have an educational licensing agreement. It's a customer agreement for multiple years.

We have experience with Microsoft products, Windows Server Data Centers, Microsoft Office 365, and they have a new branch called M365 products, Cloud systems, and Branch Management systems.

We are working on implementing the MDM system and we are looking for alternatives.

We are using an Apple-based system as well as Microsoft.

Generally, there is always room for improvement. It can always be better.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

It's used for data governance and security. It's a cloud security tool providing very good discovery around whatever is happening in your organization, such as what users are doing on the internet and how data is flowing out of your organization. It is then used to put controls around what information can go out, who downloads what, and how much they can download. It helps put controls around these types of things to create secure collaboration between your organization and its partners, customers, and vendors.

It's a SaaS platform. It's not like hardware or software where you install new updates or new versions. It's controlled by Microsoft in the backend.

They have made built-in templates. If you integrate your AWS account with Microsoft MCAS, using the predefined templates it will scan all the functionalities that are available or accessible after the integration. It will then provide security posture recommendations around issues such as how many buckets you have publicly available, what data is not encrypted, what is publicly available and insecure, and which devices are not backed up. It helps you to understand your security posture and to enhance it.

And when it comes to secure collaboration, if you have information that you have already restricted and you don't want it to be shared outside of your organization, with the help of MCAS session policies you can put controls around it. It's integrated with storage solutions and you can put the controls around things using labels such "classified," "restricted," or "confidential."

Another scenario where MCAS is helpful is when people are leaving your organization soon. It can happen that they hide and start downloading certain documents and files. MCAS can help identify mass downloads or mass uploads and what the user is doing. That kind of detailed analysis is available to senior management or the security team so that they can take whatever steps are necessary.

There are a lot of features with benefits, including

• discovery 
• investigation
• putting controls around things.

You can't say that you like the investigation part but not the discovery. Everything is correlated; that's how the tool works. Once the discovery of everything you feed into it is done, it gives you a nice dashboard. You can then plan what needs to be controlled and governed, and what should not be accessible in your environment.

It's quite well integrated with all Microsoft services, like Information Protection, Azure Portal, and Azure IoT, among other things. There are also integrations with AWS and Salesforce.

Although they are already doing it, I would like to see more integration with market leaders like Slack.

Another area that can be improved is to provide more reporting functionality. Currently, reporting is not very straightforward and it needs to be enhanced. Specific reports are not included and you need to run a query, drill down, and then export it and share it. I would love to have reports with more fine-tuning or granularity, and more predefined reports.

We have been using Microsoft Cloud App Security for at least the last two and a half years. We are a Microsoft partner. We do everything for their products, from design to implementation.

It's stable. It's more stable than other Microsoft services. In my two and a half years of experience with MCAS, there have only been two times that it went down and was not accessible to us. The services, policies, and controls were there. It was just that we were not able to access them. 

Whatever Microsoft has committed to in terms of stability, "99 point something," is pretty much true.

It's a SaaS solution so the scalability depends purely on the organization: How many applications do they want to integrate with it and do they have the corporate licenses? MCAS itself is scalable. You don't need to deal with servers, or RAM, or finding a new data center. Scaling it is purely up to you and depends on how much data you want to feed it and on the use cases you want to use it for.

I use Microsoft tech support at the highest levels. The experience with their tech support, as a partner, purely depends on what kind of contract you have and what kind of a relationship you have. If you have a very good relationship, you get responses when you need them. But when you talk about bugs or you are asking for a feature, you have to wait for their product life cycle. Overall, their support is good. Not average, but not excellent.

Neutral

The initial setup of Cloud App Security is quite straightforward. It's not complex. Microsoft's documentation around it is absolutely great. It guides you through the settings you need to configure and whatever apps you need to integrate. There is no difficulty in getting it up and running. It is more seamless than any other solution. It is even easier to run on Windows machines because the documentation is very good. They have very clearly described what needs to be done.

Once you have all the requirements, like your user account and license, a person can configure it in a day because it's a SaaS solution. But the time it will take depends on the fine-tuning, and that is determined by why you are using MCAS. That's the important part. If you're looking at user behavior, or if you're looking at data, or if you're looking at infrastructure security posture, each of these will affect the time it takes. If it's just for shadow IT, it will take one or two days to configure. If you're integrating it with AWS to help with your security posture, it will take three or four days.

One engineer who has prior experience is more than enough, but having two guys for setup might be better.

Day-to-day maintenance, again, depends on how you are going to utilize it. If you already have a SOC running with four or five people in it and your environment is small to medium in size, five people can use this tool and get value out of it. If you are talking about an organization like Walmart or Microsoft or a multinational company that has users across regions, you will need more people to support it. MCAS is a tool. It will have the data, but you will need to use it.

I'm not involved with the cost side of the solution so I don't know how much has been invested in MCAS. But where it's adding value is around the controls. I'm sure there are savings in that regard.

I have not implemented any other solutions, but I looked into Zscaler cloud security. Because Zscaler is an independent company, it doesn't have that many solutions with Microsoft. A cloud app security solution should have native products as well as integration with many other products. On that point, Microsoft is way ahead. For example, 80 percent of the world is using Office 365 for email services and 60 percent are using SharePoint for information sharing. Because these tools are Windows products, the controls become easy to implement.

My advice is to use it to its fullest capabilities. It has a lot of features and it is being enhanced daily. It's a full engine that you can use to discover all your assets in the cloud, whether they are on a public cloud or a private cloud. Every month or every quarter, look at what's new and how you can leverage it. You're already paying for those enhancements so use them, fine-tune them, and optimize them. The tool has a lot of capabilities. A lot of people only utilize it for information protection or tracking user activity or for their cloud-based security posture. Use it all. There's a lot in it.

MCAS is not a tool that interacts with end-users because there is no client. They don't know that MCAS is in the picture, so it doesn't impact the end-user.

The biggest lesson I would take from the use of Microsoft Cloud App Security is that you are being monitored. Do not use your professional device for personal use because there are more eyes and controls around.

In addition, the way you use MCAS is that you discover and then you put the controls in place to govern things. That's how any other security tool works. You first put it in learning mode to see what will happen. For example, If I put in this or that control, how much will it impact my end-users? In those terms, MCAS has been really nice.

If you have a lot in the Microsoft environment or AWS or Google Cloud, it's going to help you a lot.

We use it to protect our organization's data. It has the ability to create and can copy-paste for the end-user. You can take a screenshot from your mobile devices and download some confidential things. After creating the policy you can be assured that a user's data is being protected

We give devices access within a particular device that the user is accessing. We are also certain that there is no chance of scamming or that an email account can be hacked.

We also create a password policy. Whenever the end-user wants to download anything or wants to access anything there has to be some security. It secures the customer's data in their organization. 

All of the features are valuable because all of the features are related. 

I would like for it to be available on Mac and for it to support all of the features of Microsoft financing products. It is really for Windows.

I have been using Microsoft Cloud App Security for the last three years. 

The stability is good. 

It is very easy to expand it and it is also very easy to manage because it has a centralized dashboard. You can see all of our teams and activate the software. Any person can export a report. It's very easy to access for me.

Our clients are enterprise-size. 

Support is very good. If we have any problems, Microsoft will drop us an email and suggest that the server cannot be accessed due to some maintenance.

The initial setup is straightforward. You only need to set up the policies. The devices need to be compliant and particular applications have to be protected. 

It generally requires two staff members to deploy but it depends on the management. It depends if the IT staff or the customers understand the process. The only difficult part is pairing it to a mobile device. To my understanding, it's the only part that the IT staff has to handle. 

Setting up the policy is easy and then it's easy to replicate the policy. It takes maximum two hours. 

Customers are looking to protect their data and to protect their organization's files. For this, we offer them a package but the price is very high. This particular product, the Indian product, is running very well in the US and UK. 

It is certainly a good product. It is important to get a cloud-based product so that if you want to manage it remotely, you can work on a PC that is ready for that mission then.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

The use case is for getting visibility over cloud applications that our users are consuming, how they consume it, and using the protection which comes with Cloud App Security with that visibility. It provides monitoring and visibility into cloud apps that our users are using and has ;a layer of security wrapped around that. It identifies malicious activity, if it's occurring, and provides overall protection of our company data from things like data exfiltration and all the other integrations that it has with other Microsoft security products.

It is protecting approximately 800 users. We have four other sources feeding into it from other products that we use. We have several thousand applications for which we get reports and visibility.

It is one of our core tools for monitoring and managing our security posture. In the future, I don't see that changing much. At this stage, I think we are at a good level of how we are using it.

It has helped identify areas where we should improve, make changes to improve, the reason why we should make a change, and the impact of making the change. So, it helps drive us to make changes and see the benefits of those changes.

We have become more aware of what services our users are using, how often they are using them, and what data is being sent out of the organization and to which services. So, it is really a lot about visibility and helping us make decisions based on that. It drives some of our policy decisions for adding extra security controls.

It has all been very seamless to our users. It indirectly positively impacts them because we are keeping them more secure. No one has been saying, "Because we are using this product, it is slowing me down or causing me problems." As standard users, they wouldn't really need to know that this solution exists. They just rely on us to keep them safe.

• Helps us have a view into our overall security posture and how we can improve it. 
  
• The ability to perform investigations is very useful. 
• Identifying the number of applications, particularly connected via OAuth. 
• Has great, general overall visibility of who is using what and how. 
• We are using it as an indicator for any indicators of compromise that might be coming up.

Identity security posture points out a preset number of security posture improvements, or areas of focus, and whether they are being met. It also points out what changes need to be made in order to meet them. Therefore, we can have better security posture.

There is a feature called security configuration. This is across the whole Microsoft set of products regarding what changes can be done. Specifically within a product, we use it to improve the security posture by making changes.

They should continue integration with all other Microsoft security-related products. The integration with all the other products is still ongoing. However, the solution has already begun scaling to meet the needs of getting visibility through from other products as well.

About three years.

The stability has been fantastic. I have no complaints at all. It has been 100%.

The scalability is really good. It has improved while I have been using it. It definitely appears to be able to scale easily and well. 

The technical support is very good. They are responsive, knowledgeable, and skilled. We have great communication with them.

This is the only CASB product that I have ever used.

Anecdotally, I believe the initial setup is quite straightforward.

According to the person who originally set up the solution in our organization, but has since left, it was originally straightforward to set up.

My colleague and I share the day-to-day maintenance for one person. It needs only a few hours a day to get a lot out of it. 

We have seen ROI. Its main capabilities are:

• The protection that it gives.
• Visibility
• The protection for cloud products. 
• It helps with the improvement of our overall security posture.

Make full use of all the options available and focus a lot on policies. There are a lot of policies and alerts available which might not be used to their fullest extent. 

We are pretty happy with how it all works and fits together.

I would rate this solution as a solid nine (out of 10). The product is constantly improving. It has a low amount of false positives, i.e., true alerts identified as requiring attention.