Microsoft Entra ID Protection Reviews

We have a lot of applications or workloads leveraging many services. For authentication and authorization, we use Entra Protection.

Multifactor authentication provides an additional layer of security. We also leverage federated identity capability, allowing us to authenticate through external ID providers.

The multifactor authentication feature is effective, providing an additional layer of security. The solution supports federated identity capability and managed identity, which helps prevent passwords from being kept in different applications.

There is a lot of confusion around the user interface. For new users, it can be difficult or confusing to understand the concepts of managed identity and role protection.

I have been working with Azure AD for three to four years.

The stability is usually high. However, there have been occasions where issues arise if Azure goes down.

The solution is highly scalable; I would rate it nine out of ten.

If you opt for paid technical support, it is satisfactory. However, without paid support, service on public forums can be improved.

Neutral

Setting up is straightforward, yet using it fully for business purposes can become complex.

With the high prices compared to other vendors, customers have shown interest in moving to other solutions.

Pricing for Microsoft products is slightly high, and it influences some customers to consider switching to other service providers.

I would recommend this solution to other people.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the solution for single sign-on.

As an end-user, I find the experience to be quite seamless. My main advantage is that I only need to manage one login and one two-factor authentication method to access all the necessary tools. I don't have to set up separate logins and authentication for each application.

As a user, the tool has improved my operational efficiency. Using it is a big advantage because the login is very stable, and I only need one login method. Normally, when I need to log in to multiple applications, I would have to manage separate passwords for each one, potentially changing them all every 30 days.

I only have to manage a single password and login method, which is much easier and faster for me. I don't have to set and update passwords across all my different applications repeatedly. For the company, it's also a big advantage that they only have to manage the login rather than across multiple applications.

I have been using the product for six to eight years. 

In terms of performance and stability, I haven't encountered any issues.The login process is quick, and I haven't experienced any failures or problems logging in. From my perspective as a user, the solution seems to work well, even for large organizations with thousands of users.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. I know a customer with 160,000 users who have no problem scaling it. We use it daily. 

I can't rate the technical support as I don't have direct contact with Microsoft support.

I've used PingID before, but the other customers I work with all use Microsoft Entra ID Protection, so that's what I use now.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use the product for various purposes, such as implementing conditional access policies and access reviews. These features are available with specific licenses, such as the E3 and E5 licenses, including privileged identity management features.

The platform's pricing and scalability need improvement. 

I have worked with Microsoft Entra ID for about two to three years.

The product is stable and does not exhibit significant glitches or performance issues.

The scalability features are good overall. Depending on the cloud environment and device synchronization, there might be occasional delays, such as updates taking from ten minutes to 45 minutes.

Although support services are generally good, there have been delays in some cases, such as issues with license management.

Positive

The deployment process is straightforward. It takes a few hours to complete. 

The product cost is on the expensive side. For example, a subscription for one user can cost around 4,000 to 5,000 INR per month, plus GST. There is potential for improvement in this area.

I rate the pricing a nine out of ten. 

The platform's conditional access features are satisfactory. For instance, I configured policies to require users to reauthenticate every eight hours and to restrict access through specific browsers.

Based on my limited use cases, the performance seems adequate. However, further testing would be necessary for a more extensive evaluation.

I rate it a nine out of ten. 

I enforce policies to manage the access of users, focusing on their activity, login positions, and security audit logs. It is always based on security and the enforcement of security policies.

The most valuable features are the API apps, which I use to connect to my cloud Protection. The management of the users and the security policies are also crucial. 

The ability to deploy software with Intune, which is integrated, is essential. These features ease the job of security analysts, providing a better vision of user activities and potential risks.

I have set up my Active Directory locally for the same domain. However, Entra ID lacks a function to synchronize from the cloud to the local directory. This is a significant issue since there is no write-back feature from the cloud to local, which would allow me to use my own credentials from the cloud tenant securely.

I have been using it since January 2024.

I rate this product a solid eight out of ten. The function for cloud-to-local synchronization should be implemented as it is crucial for better access management.

Our company uses the solution to provide identity protection services to customers. We currently have fifteen developers on our team. 

The solution provides good information security that includes sensitive labeling. 

The sign-in and audit logs work well. 

The reverse proxy feature provides additional security that is not available in other solutions such as SailPoint and Dell. 

Identity labeling and sensitivity needs improvement to be comparable to Dell. 

Password management needs to include a keyword mechanism that blocks or allows generic passwords. 

The auditor tool needs to include SIEM events in addition to sign-in and audit logs. Currently, we have to rely on third-party solutions for our log needs. 

The solution's models need to be centralized instead of having different names and separate platforms. We have to spend a lot of time integrating all the models with the IAM. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable and reliable.

The solution is scalable to a customer's needs. 

Technical support is very good.

I rate support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The initial setup is simple. Getting ready for implementation takes time because it requires internal meetings and planning. 

I rate setup an eight out of ten. 

We implemented the solution in-house with a team of twenty technicians. 

Ongoing maintenance is not an issue because we pre-tested all components before implementation. 

The pricing is competitive in the SMA segment and runs $5-$6 per user. 

I rate pricing an eight out of ten. 

We are currently researching applications that will replace our hybrid model and include SIEM management. 

We have looked at the capabilities of Dell and SailPoint. 

The solution needs to be better marketed to the SMA segment because they are not as aware of information security. 

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I use the solution to manage users, groups, access, and license. 

The tool is simple and you can find a lot of tutorials, and videos on YouTube that can help you. 

The solution's sync should be faster since it can take about 30 minutes to two hours to complete a simple sync. The tool needs to sync instantly. It also needs to improve scalability, support, and stability. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

I would rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. We encountered bugs while integrating with other Microsoft or MDM solutions. 

I would rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has 200 users.

Support takes longer than expected to revert back. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We mostly deal with identity management by different vendors. We are a partner of Microsoft, Oracle, and Symantec, among others, and we also deal with open-source solutions like Evolvium ID. We are dealing with Microsoft Identity Manager. They call it Microsoft Entra IntraID.

Microsoft Entra ID Protection has allowed us to manage partners and external users effectively, providing us with trust from these organizations. Access reviews are conducted to ensure that when partners leave their respective organizations, they are also cleaned up on our side.

The features we find most effective for identity security include access reviews, two-factor authentication, and modification.

Microsoft has room for improvement in simplifying their integration with third-party solutions and making the licensing model more understandable.

I have been working with Microsoft ID Protection for five to seven years.

Microsoft Entra ID Protection is stable, and we do not need any technical assistance.

The product is very scalable and works well.

I am very satisfied with the technical support. Microsoft has consolidated their support into one, which has been very effective. However, I have not needed to request any technical support from them.

Positive

We find mostly SailPoint used by big companies, however, we don't use SailPoint at the moment.

The interface is very good, and setting up is easy because it involves SaaS solutions where you click a button and it does everything. It's easy to configure, sign up, and integrate.

Microsoft has various pricing models. Some of them are bundled with the current price, such as E3 and E5. Understanding the pricing model requires familiarity with their fragmented model.

For identity management instead of Symantec, the recommended solutions depend on the environment, features, complexity, user types, and budget.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The solution helps us with authentication. 

I am impressed with the tool's compliance and authentication. 

The solution is not optimized to work with Mac devices on a granular level. They work seamlessly with Windows but have a lot to improve to work with Mac devices. It also needs to improve stability and scalability. 

I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

I would rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten.