We have users, groups, and applications, and the purpose of this product is authentication, authorization, and attestation. We use it for the services connected to those three "A"s. The use cases in all organizations are more or less the same, even if some side services differ. Azure AD is used for authentication and authorization. It's about managing identities and granting access to applications.
Solutions Owner at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Identity and access management help improve our security posture
Pros and Cons
- "Many of its features are valuable, including: facilitating application authentication, privileged access management, processes for attestation, and access reviews."
- "It has features that have definitely helped to improve our security posture."
- "When it comes to identity governance, the governance features in Azure AD are very focused on Microsoft products. I would like to see those governance and life cycle management features offered for non-Microsoft products connected to Azure AD."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
It has features that have definitely helped to improve our security posture. The identity and access management, at the end of the day, are about security. It also offers features like multi-factor authentication, Privileged Identity Management, and access review and attestation, and all of these are connected to security and typically help improve security posture.
What is most valuable?
Many of its features are valuable, including:
- facilitating application authentication
- privileged access management
- processes for attestation
- access reviews.
The multi-factor authentication, similar to when you use your mobile banking application when you want to do a transaction, doesn't rely only on your username and password. It triggers a second factor, like an SMS to your mobile. It requires another factor for authentication. This is one of the standard services Microsoft offers with Azure AD Directory.
Privileged identity management is also a standard feature of Azure AD for privileged accounts. We make sure we do privileged role activation when it's needed so that we do not have sensitive roles active every day.
What needs improvement?
A lot of aspects can be improved and Microsoft is constantly improving it. If I compare Azure AD today with what it was like five years ago, or even three years ago, a lot of areas have been improved, and from different angles. There have been improvements that offer more security and there have been some improvements in the efficiency domain. Azure AD is not a small product. It's not, say, Acrobat Reader, where I could say, "Okay, if these two features are added, it will be a perfect product." Azure is a vast platform.
But if we look at multi-factor authentication, can it be improved? Yes. Perhaps it could cope with the newest authentication protocols or offer new methods for second or third factors.
I'm also willing to go towards passwordless authentication. I don't want anyone to have passwords. I want them to authenticate using other methods, like maybe biometrics via your fingerprint or your face or a gesture. These things, together with the smart card you have, could mean no more passwords. The trends are moving in that direction.
When it comes to identity governance, the governance features in Azure AD are very focused on Microsoft products. I would like to see those governance and life cycle management features offered for non-Microsoft products connected to Azure AD. Currently, those aspects are not covered. Microsoft has started to introduce Identity Governance tools in Azure AD, and I know they are improving on them. For me, this is one of the interesting areas to explore further—and I'm looking to see what more Microsoft offers. Once they improve these areas, organizations will start to utilize Microsoft more because, in that domain, Microsoft is a bit behind. Right now, we need third-party tools to complete the circle.
In addition, sometimes meeting the principle of least privilege is not easy because the roles are not very granular. That means that if you are an administrator you need to do small things connected to resetting passwords and updating certain attributes. Sometimes I have to grant access for the purposes of user management, but it includes more access than they need. Role granularity is something that can be improved, and they are improving it.
Again, if I compare Azure AD today to what it was like three years ago, there have been a lot of improvements in all these domains. But we could also pick any of these specific feature domains in Azure AD and have in-depth discussions about what could be improved, and how.
Buyer's Guide
Microsoft Entra ID
September 2026
Learn what your peers think about Microsoft Entra ID. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2026.
914,351 professionals have used our research since 2012.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using Azure Active Directory for more than five years.`
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Azure AD is very scalable. The only concern is around role-based access control limitations at the subscription level. That is something Microsoft is improving on. Currently, per subscription, you can have a maximum 2,000 role assignments. Sometimes big organizations hit the limit and need to implement workarounds to resolve that limitation. But that is something Microsoft has already confirmed it is improving. That is a limitation of the Azure platform, it's not specific to my organization. A smaller organization may never hit the limit, but bigger organizations do.
Apart from that, their application integrations, the service, MFA, and everything else, are quite scalable. It is moving in the right direction.
How was the initial setup?
Setting up Azure AD, is about moving toward the cloud journey. I cannot say setting up Azure AD is easy, but on the other hand, organizations are not moving to the cloud in one go. It's not all or nothing, that you have it or you don't have it. It depends on which services you are receiving from Azure AD. Some organizations, like ours, start with a limited number of services.
You usually start with syncing your identities to the cloud so that you can offer your employees certain cloud services. You want to enable them to use certain SaaS applications, where they are relying on a cloud identity, and that's why you need to have your accounts in the cloud. Without that, you cannot grant them access.
Later, you may offer the ability for business partners to use and benefit from certain cloud applications, and gradually the use cases increase. For example, someone may become a privileged user to take responsibility for an application and manage it. When that happens you start to think about what other features in the Azure platform you can offer to do administration in a more secure way. Or, once you have thousands of users benefiting from cloud applications, how can you make sure that you protect their assets and their data? That leads you to start implementing other security features, such as multi-factor authentication. Over time, you may have users benefiting from Office 365 and they need to collaborate by using Teams and SharePoint. Again, you start to build something else around that.
Whether large or small, organizations are on a journey, where they start from on-premises with servers and all these server rooms and applications in the organization. They then shift workloads to the cloud. That process is still ongoing in my organization and in many organizations. Ten years ago, workloads were all on-premises. Five years ago, maybe 90 percent were on-premises. Today it might be 50 percent cloud and 50 percent on-premises. There is value from the cloud: elasticity and flexibility, even for big organizations. A server on-premises is a different story compared to having it on the cloud. If I need to upgrade a server on the cloud, it takes five minutes. If it's on-premises, I need to order hardware and then change the hardware. The usage of Azure Active Directory is due to the evolution of the cloud.
The bottom line is that the implementation is gradual. It's not difficult or easy, although we started with things that were easy to adopt, and then we continued the journey.
The staff required for maintenance of Azure AD depends on how you organize your support. Some organizations outsource their end-user support to other companies, while other organizations staff that completely internally. It can also depend on the users. Is your organization a global organization or a small, local organization? For us, to make sure we maintain the support and availability and all the services we need, including change management, we need at least 15 to 20 resources for a global application with more than 20,000 users, to maintain the platform.
What about the implementation team?
We worked with a lot of consultants for Azure AD. There are many features and no one expert or professional can help with all aspects. Organizations, during their journeys, have to work with different partners and integrators. It may be that there is a specific application you need to integrate with Azure AD and you need some skills there. It may be that you want to better manage Azure resources, so you would talk to a different type of resource. You may want to increase your identity security scores, depending on how you configure Azure AD, and for that, you would need to talk to an Azure security expert. I think this applies to all big enterprises. We need different skills to better utilize Azure, including Azure AD, and to do processes in a more secure way.
We have Microsoft Professional Services. That's the primary source for many organizations that are utilizing Microsoft services. If you have an enterprise agreement or a unified agreement with Microsoft, they offer you consulting services. Of course, you have to pay for Professional Services, but we get value there. The number-one consulting and integration support provider is Microsoft.
They also work with certified partners like Accenture or Avanade. These organizations are connected with Microsoft and they offer consultancy services to enterprises like ours. Depending on the subject, we may use services from any of these providers. We usually go with Microsoft-certified partners.
What other advice do I have?
Multi-factor authentication means you need to do an extra step, but that is normal because the attack surface is wider. We want to make sure you are who you say you are. That extra step impacts the end-user experience, but it's needed. The way authentication happens today is far different from 10 years ago. It may result in some added difficulty, but it is there to protect employees, organizations, customers, business partners, IT assets, data, et cetera.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Technology Security Specialist at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Offers good security features for controlling access to your resources, and easily integrates with Microsoft solutions and on-premise resources
Pros and Cons
- "It can be used to grant access at a granular level. It provides secure access and many ways to offer security to your user resources. It provides a good level of security for any access on Azure. It gives you options like multi-factor authentication where apart from your password, you can use other factors for authentication, such as a code is sent to your phone or the authenticator app that you can use login."
- "I would highly recommend this solution."
- "Its integration with open-source applications can be improved. I know that they are working on open-source authentication methods for integration with open-source applications, but they can make it more open."
- "It can be a bit expensive for an organization. There should be a better pricing plan for the license."
What is our primary use case?
There are a number of use cases. You can use it as a central point of authentication for giving access to most of your cloud and on-prem resources. For example, you can use Azure AD to give access to a Microsoft 365 application, such as Outlook or Microsoft Teams.
What is most valuable?
It is quite stable. Being a Microsoft product, it easily integrates with most of the Microsoft solutions. It is very easy to integrate with most of the Microsoft solutions, such as Windows, Microsoft Office, etc. If you have your own internal web applications or you want to integrate with other solutions from other providers, such as AWS or Google, you can link those to Azure AD. If you want to integrate with on-prem resources, you can use your Azure AD on the cloud as the authentication point to give people access to the resources and so on.
It can be used to grant access at a granular level. It provides secure access and many ways to offer security to your user resources. It provides a good level of security for any access on Azure. It gives you options like multi-factor authentication where apart from your password, you can use other factors for authentication, such as a code is sent to your phone or the authenticator app that you can use login.
It even offers the next level of access management, which gives a password for authentication, and you just use the authenticator app to log in. It enables you to configure things like identity risk awareness to detect if someone logs in from a suspicious location from where they don't normally log in. So, it provides a good level of security features for controlling access to your resources.
What needs improvement?
Its integration with open-source applications can be improved. I know that they are working on open-source authentication methods for integration with open-source applications, but they can make it more open.
It can be a bit expensive for an organization. There should be a better pricing plan for the license.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for about four years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is quite stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is scalable. In my current organization, we have about 6,000 users on Azure Active Directory.
How are customer service and support?
We are satisfied with their support. They provide different levels of support. They have Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 engineers, and the response time depends on the kind of agreement you have. Some agreements will guarantee you a faster response time 24/7, such as within four hours, so it all depends on your license.
How was the initial setup?
Considering that it runs on the cloud, the setup is quite easy unless you're doing integration with your on-prem Active Directory. For integration with your on-prem Active Directory, you need someone who is technically competent, and then it would be rather straightforward. They do provide engineers who can assist in that deployment, and they also do knowledge transfer to enable you to proceed with the deployment.
The initial deployment of the product usually takes about three months because you have to ensure all the prerequisites have been met. So, if it is a project for a big organization, we can do it in probably three months. If it is something simple, then it doesn't take much time because the only thing that you're doing is to plug into it. It is already running because it is a cloud service. So, the deployment comes in only if you're integrating it with your on-prem resources and, of course, with other applications. Otherwise, it is very straightforward. It is a cloud service, so it is just plug-and-play.
What about the implementation team?
For deployment, we work with Microsoft. We work with them directly, but for enhancements, we use Microsoft partners.
For maintenance, we have a team of about five engineers who run it. Internally, we have about two engineers and a manager in charge, and then we have two engineers in our infrastructure team. It is not that intensive in terms of day-to-day management because it is a cloud service, so everything is running from Microsoft Azure servers. Therefore, the day-to-day administration is not that much.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It can be a bit expensive for organizations, but they do have different pricing models. Their free tier can be used on a personal level, but for an organization, the licenses might be a bit expensive. In general, the licenses can become cheaper, which will make it accessible for more people.
Currently, where I am working, we use an enterprise agreement. The license is renewed after every two or three years. So, we make an agreement with Microsoft to give us a license for a number of products, including Azure Active Directory, for two or three years.
What other advice do I have?
I would highly recommend this solution. We plan to keep using it for the long term.
It is among the best in the industry, but there is room for improvement. I would rate it an eight out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Buyer's Guide
Microsoft Entra ID
September 2026
Learn what your peers think about Microsoft Entra ID. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2026.
914,351 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Consultant at Upwork Freelancer
Eliminates the need for VPNs and enables conditional access based on a user's location
Pros and Cons
- "Conditional Access, Geofencing, and Azure Multi-Factor Authentication are the major security features to secure resources."
- "To summarize, the big advantages of this platform are the reliability, cost-effectiveness, and security."
- "We have a lot of freedom in using the Group Policy Objects and, although Group Policy Objects are part of Azure Active Directory, there are still a lot of things that can be improved, such as providing local admin rights to a user. There are various, easy ways that I can do that in the on-premises version, but in the cloud version, it is a bit difficult. You have to create a bunch of policies to make it work."
What is our primary use case?
The use cases depend on my clients' specifications. If they have the on-premises Active Directory and it is a hybrid environment, then objects are synchronized with the cloud in Azure Active Directory. Services that are on-premises or in the cloud are synchronized with each other, to create a centralized management solution.
If we're talking about Azure Active Directory only, the cloud-based, centralized management solution, we don't need to use a VPN to access the resources; everything is cloud. We just need to be connected with Azure Active Directory and we can use the resources anywhere in the world and resource security will be intact.
I use both the cloud and on-premises versions.
How has it helped my organization?
Everybody is moving from on-premises to Azure Active Directory because it's cost-effective. They don't need to spend a lot of money on the on-premises resources, such as an on-premises server and maintenance. Now, given that Microsoft has started Windows 365, which is a PC in the cloud, you don't need to have a PC. You can work on an Android tablet from anywhere in the world, using cloud technology.
In terms of the user experience, because the solution is in a cloud environment, people are not bound to work in a specific network. In the old-school way, if you worked from home and you had on-premises Active Directory, you needed to use a VPN. VPNs can be highly unstable because they depend on your home network. If your home network is not good, you won't get the same bandwidth as you would get when using the resources inside the office network. With Active Directory in the cloud, you can use your own network to access the resources. It's faster, reliable, and it's cheaper compared to Active Directory on-premises.
What is most valuable?
- Conditional Access
- Geofencing
- Azure Multi-Factor Authentication
are the major security features to secure resources.
For example, if I don't want users using the company resources outside of India, I will add managed countries within Conditional Access. Only the people from the managed country will be able to access things. If an employee goes out of India and tries to access the resources that have been restricted, they will not be able to open the portal to access the resources.
What needs improvement?
We have a lot of freedom in using the Group Policy Objects and, although Group Policy Objects are part of Azure Active Directory, there are still a lot of things that can be improved, such as providing local admin rights to a user. There are various, easy ways that I can do that in the on-premises version, but in the cloud version, it is a bit difficult. You have to create a bunch of policies to make it work.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Azure Active Directory for six years.
How are customer service and support?
Microsoft works with suppliers and vendors. Certain vendors are very good at providing support and certain vendors are not very good at providing support. It depends on the time zone in which we are opening a ticket and which vendor the ticket is going to.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
How was the initial setup?
It's pretty straightforward in general, although it depends on what kind of requirements a client has.
If I'm deploying with Microsoft Autopilot, it usually takes at least 40 to 50 minutes to deploy one machine. If I'm deploying 1,000 machines in one go, you can multiply that 40 minutes for each of those 1,000 machines. Everything is configured in the cloud, in Azure Active Directory. You just need to purchase the machine, configure things, and ship the machine to the user. When they turn it on they will be able to work on it. Everything will be installed in the backend. If it's not on Autopilot, it's just in a matter of a few clicks to connect the machine to Azure Active Directory.
The deployment plan also depends on the client. If the client is not providing machines to their employees, they want the machine to be BYOD, we will work on the existing computer. In that case, we just set up the policies and ask the user to connect to Azure Active Directory. But if a client is concerned about complete security, and they want the machine to be used in a certain way, and they are providing the machine, then I prefer that it should be Autopilot. It becomes an enterprise-managed machine, and we have more control over it.
What was our ROI?
Clients only invest their money when they know that they are getting a really helpful platform. They want to see that I, as a consultant, am confident in the product I'm asking them to use. I have to be very confident that I am providing them a solution that will definitely work for them.
What other advice do I have?
People have a tendency to keep their information in-house, but the cost of keeping information on-premises in SharePoint servers is very expensive. There is a good chance that, if something happens, they will lose the database. There is no backup. And to keep a backup, you have to pay more for a cloud backup solution to keep your data on another server. You are compromising with your data in a two-sided scenario, where one is on-premises and the other is on a data server as a backup. If you go for the cloud version of Active Directory, everything is secure and everything is in the Microsoft data center, which is reliable and secure. They have disaster management and recovery. That's a win-win situation.
My work is generally on device management, which is on Intune, Endpoint Manager, and Cloud App Security. These all work hand-in-hand. Azure Active Directory is just an assembler of management resources, but Intune makes the device secure. The policies create restrictions. These things work together. If you need Active Directory, you will definitely need Intune.
The largest deployment I worked on with one of my clients was about 2,500 computers. As far as managing them goes, it varies, between 200 to 300 computers at one time in one environment. If I'm working on providing a day-to-day solution, it is different because the queries are different. People usually have problems related to smaller queries, like their printer is not connecting, or they are not able to access SharePoint, or they do not have permissions for a given file. But as far as deployment and designing the architecture of Azure Active Directory goes, I work with midsize companies.
To summarize, the big advantages of this platform are the reliability, cost-effectiveness, and security. These are the features that make it one of the best solutions in the IT industry. Azure AD is the future. Everyone is adopting the cloud environment. I, myself, use Azure Active Directory for my own devices and resources. I encourage other people to accept the future. It gives you more security than the on-premises Active Directory. To me, it is the best solution.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Founder, CEO at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
With multi-factor authentication, we've seen a marked decrease in the number of threats we've seen come through
Pros and Cons
- "Being able to use Azure AD means that you can use some of the Azure AD security features like Advanced Password Protection. As well as querying your normal password requirements like lengths and complexity, Azure AD has a feature in which you can put specific words. It can be words to do with your company, words to do with your company location, or words that a lot of your employees would otherwise use. You can disallow them. It's very good at making more obvious passwords, ones they're not allowed to use anymore. That's a good feature."
- "It has improved our security posture a lot, with features like conditional access, single sign-on, and multi-factor authentication making access easier for users while significantly strengthening protection of our applications and data."
- "The conditional access rules are a little limiting. There's greater scope for the variety of rules and conditions you could put in that rules around a more factual authentication for other users. If you have an Azure AD setup, you can then connect to other people's Azure AD, but you don't have a huge amount of control in terms of what you can do. Greater control over guest users and guest access would be better. It's pretty good as it is but that could be improved."
What is our primary use case?
We use it for all of our internal colleagues. Every single user is synced from our internal on-prem directory to Azure AD. Every single user has a presence in Azure AD and that account or identity is then used for at least 10 to 15 different applications. They directly query what groups they're a member of within Azure AD. We use Azure AD for at least 15 different applications.
How has it helped my organization?
It has improved our security posture. Not only with the password feature but there were also things like conditional access, applications within Azure that you can use for better access. You can put conditional access rules in front of those applications, which means that either the device that they're accessing it with has to have a certain up-to-date version of antivirus, it has to have all of its Windows updates, or they have to use multi-factor authentication. All of those nice-to-have features help our security posture a lot.
When users are in Active Directory they can use single sign-on, which means once they've signed on to their machine, they then don't have to sign on again when they access things like their email. They can just go to those URLs. Because those applications are attached to our Azure AD and to our Azure tenant, they can just go to the applications. Those applications know who they are because they have a single sign-on enabled. So that has helped them so they don't have to turn on passwords when they have to access all these different applications.
What is most valuable?
Being able to integrate with third-party solutions is the most valuable feature. These are solutions that produced software as a service and we haven't then had to bring that service to our own data or in our own directory. We can use our Azure identity to connect to their solution. Being able to connect to third-party applications in these identities is the best thing we've found.
Being able to use Azure AD means that you can use some of the Azure AD security features like Advanced Password Protection. As well as querying your normal password requirements like lengths and complexity, Azure AD has a feature in which you can put specific words. It can be words to do with your company, words to do with your company location, or words that a lot of your employees would otherwise use. You can disallow them. It's very good at making more obvious passwords, ones they're not allowed to use anymore. That's a good feature.
It has something called Dynamic Groups so that when a user joins the company and they get added to specific groups, Azure AD will add them dynamically to other groups that will give them access to some of the base applications.
We have certain sets of software that they have to be able to access. Instead of somebody who deals with new users having to add them into 20 different application groups, you need access to this, this, and this. The Dynamic Group update feature from Azure AD means that you can just put them in one group and say that they have a role, and it will automatically then add them to about six or seven other groups, giving them default access to other things as well, instead of having to do that. It means there's a lot less manual work when you get new employees.
What needs improvement?
The conditional access rules are a little limiting. There's greater scope for the variety of rules and conditions you could put in that rules around a more factual authentication for other users. If you have an Azure AD setup, you can then connect to other people's Azure AD, but you don't have a huge amount of control in terms of what you can do. Greater control over guest users and guest access would be better. It's pretty good as it is but that could be improved.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Active Directory in my current role for around six months and in a previous role for three years. I recently moved companies about three months ago. Before that, I was working for another company. I was there for about five years and for at least half that time I was using Azure AD.
We use the latest version. Azure AD doesn't really have version numbers, it's an evolving platform. In my current role, we're on the latest version of it.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Stability is pretty good. In the lifetime of me using it, there have been outages of certain features within Azure. We use multi-factor authentication. There have been times when that authentication feature has gone down and people couldn't access things that required that when they log on. That has happened maybe twice in the last 15 or so years. So it's pretty good. The uptime is pretty good, but it's not 100%.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The company I used to previously work for had 90,000 users that were synced. That was nothing. There was room for loads more. I think they have a limit of a million or something objects within Azure AD. That's something you can ask to have increased if that's a requirement. Scalability is pretty unlimited. There is no issue there at all.
In the company I used to work for there were 90,000 people connected to Azure AD. As soon as they logged on, they were using Azure AD. In the current company, it's nearer five or 6,000, but all of those accounts have access to Azure AD.
There are various roles including administrators who will have the ability to change any settings like sync settings and any settings on an individual user. Then we'll have a second line, which will be able to change some of the settings within a user's group and be able to reset their password or add them to different applications. There is a first-line service desk level set of users who will only have the ability to reset passwords, but if there's anything more complicated than that they'll pass it on. There are about three different levels of access that we currently have. There is level three and two access for not too difficult issues and then level one for password resets.
In the last place I worked, there were eight of us who took care of Azure AD which was for 90,000 people in Azure. There were people actively looking at the syncing engine, which does the sync between the two domains and there were four of us who managed that. We were called identity technical experts. So of a company of 90,000, we needed four of us, but that was only so that when people went on holiday, other people could still do the work.
It's extensively used in that everybody has an account in Azure AD. I'm guessing we don't use all the features that are available. We still have our own mailboxes on-premise rather than in Azure. I would think that would be something in the future that they would look to move some or all of our mailboxes into Azure. But we all have a presence in Azure, so we are using a lot of the features, but I believe there are still a lot more we could use.
How are customer service and technical support?
Their support was excellent for the deployment. They were really good. It depends a little bit on who you get at the other end and the nature of your question, but with the Azure AD stuff, we got through to experts who were able to give us the right answer straight away. They were very good at that point.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We didn't use any other cloud solution. That was the first one that we used in the cloud. There's an on-premise Active Directory which is an additional Microsoft Active Directory. And the whole point of Azure AD is that it does connect to that. We haven't used any other directory service apart from those. The on-prem version of Active Directory I've used for 20 years. I haven't used any other active directory service. I'm sure there are others, but these are the main ones.
It's a level of responsibility, which is being passed over to Microsoft, that we no longer have to deal with. Certainly, the companies I've worked with were very happy for those bits of the technology being looked after by someone else. And so we were just in charge of the data that's in there rather than all the other, not-so-interesting things like backup and such.
It's moving the responsibility of the not very exciting bits over to Microsoft and their very good SLA. You can just concentrate on the bits that you're interested in.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was pretty straightforward. The only complex thing is syncing your on-premise active directory into Azure AD. It's not overly complicated and they also give you very good support. It's not very difficult to set up.
The deployment took a couple of months in the end because we just wanted to do it at a pace that we were comfortable with. We did some initial tests on users. We synced them into Azure AD, made sure they could access what we thought they could access, and make sure they could still do the same job that they could do before. Then we synced across another set of test users, then a bigger test, and then eventually synced everybody else. We did it over the course of a month. Technically you could do it in less than a week, but we just wanted to be cautious and make sure that it worked as we expected.
In terms of the implementation strategy, we have two different Azure Active Directory setups. We have one in our development area, so we did the development area one first. We sure we worked out how to do the syncing correctly, making sure we can see all the attributes that were on the on-prem AD that were then turning up in Azure AD. And then once we did a development one and that worked as we expected, we then did the production one. We did it in a step-by-step approach. We did a small set of test users, a larger set of test users, and then the entire company. It was a phased approach.
What about the implementation team?
We did the deployment ourselves. We spoke directly to Microsoft when we had a couple of queries because we had an enterprise agreement with them so we can raise a number of support tickets. There were a couple of questions we had about certain features, but the actual setup and deployment of it we did ourselves.
What was our ROI?
We've certainly seen returns on investment in terms of some of the security features around Azure. We've seen threats that have been detected much earlier. Previously, threat detection and that sort of thing was more of a response rather than doing anything preemptive. Something would happen and we'd then fix it. Whereas now in Azure AD, we've seen recommendations and those sort of things coming through from Microsoft saying, "You've got these accounts, these have all got weak passwords. We recommend getting these changed for end-users before they get hacked." We saw a marked decrease in the number of attacks and breaches against our credentials when we introduced multi-factor authentication for the entire company.
Had anybody, for whatever reason, passed on or shared their username or password, those could then be used to get into our services. Now with multi-factor authentication, we've seen a marked decrease in the number of threats we've seen come through. So there are some marked benefits of the security features.
SSPR, self-service password reset has also realized ROI for us. In the past, 60 to 70% of the calls coming into our help desk guys were for password resets. A large chunk, 50 to 60% of those are gone because people can just go to the URL we've shared with them and reset their password themselves without having to phone us, which means that our service desk guys can deal with real issues rather than just somebody to put on their password. So we saw a large decrease in password resets. We're still trying to get rid of even more of those, trying to make their job even easier, but we've seen a large reduction in the number of password request changes to our service desk.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
There are various levels of licenses. There are things called E3 and E5 licenses. E5 licenses come with more features but aren't required for some of the kinds of users who are just using email and Office. They only need an E3 license.
Pricing depends on the size of your organization and the deal you get with Microsoft. If you're a public sector, rather than a private sector, you get a good deal. Academic sectors get very good deals. The vast majority of our users use E5. But we're a Microsoft partner who resells their product so we get favorable rates because of that.
They have various pricing levels and the higher level you buy, the more features you get within Azure. The basic one is perfectly good for most customers. The more advanced and greater security features come with the higher pricing. And so customers who require that like military, banking, government or something are willing to pay that. The private sector generally pays more than the public sector. I know some colleagues who work in the academic sector get extremely good deals because Microsoft is very keen to have academic institutions on board. If you're working in academia or you work in the public sector, you will get a much better deal than you would in the private sector, but that's just business.
An E5 or E3 license is on a per-user basis. So the number of users you sync into Azure AD is the number of licenses you need to report that is going to be consumed by the end-users. It's a per-user per-year license.
The only other cost you get with Microsoft over and above the license cost of using Azure is the cost of using their operating system and software. So if you use Windows, then you can pay for your Windows licenses again through Azure. And if you use Office, meaning Excel, Word, and all that other stuff, you can pay an extra bit and they'll get a 365 license for the entire suite of offices.
If you're buying an E5 Office plus Windows, then you'll get a greater discount than if you were buying those separately. Microsoft will charge you for what you actually use. So if you've got a user who isn't using Office, or isn't using Windows for whatever reason, but they are consuming services within Azure, then you just give them an Azure license. Microsoft will split up and you buy a license based on what you actually use.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
There are a couple of other options. There's obviously Amazon AWS and there's now Google GCP. I'm not sure either of those particular cloud providers had a particularly enterprise-level directory service. At the point when we migrated our users to Azure, I believe Azure was the only one that was an enterprise standard. Whilst the other ones have options, they weren't really suitable for the size of enterprise that we were running.
What other advice do I have?
My advice would be to talk to Microsoft or a partner of Microsoft who will deploy it for you. You can do it yourself, it is absolutely possible but seek advice. Because the more users you sync into Azure, the more you have to pay for their licenses and not everybody has to be using Azure. Sync only accounts you need to, but in all cases, I would seek advice from a Microsoft partner or Microsoft themselves. They'll be able to talk through what you actually need, what you require, and then the best way to implement that. Whether that's syncing your entire user base or whether that's syncing a small subset of them because they're the only ones that are going to consume the services required.
I have learned two main lessons from using Azure AD. First, the introduction of multi-factor authentication. It was such a marked difference in the number of security incidents we had. There was such a reduction. If you have Azure AD, switch on multi-factor authentication, not just for the admin accounts and the highly privileged accounts that can access all the bits, but switch it on for everybody. It is a pain initially, while people get themselves set up. But once it's done the number of incidents you have relating to people losing their credentials is markedly reduced. It's a massive win.
I would rate it a nine out of ten. There are some things they can improve on, but those improvements are pretty small beans compared to what they've done.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Chief Technology Officer at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Provides an organization flexibility to move towards the public cloud
Pros and Cons
- "A use case that we did for an end user in a manufacturing organization: We used WVD with biometric authentication because 1,500 processes need to happen in a process. The user didn't want to use a login using their credentials. They wanted to use fingerprinting or tap their ID. That is where we integrated with the authentication. Now, they can process in a couple of hours, and they run those 1,500 processes every day. This changed their login process, which improved the manufacturing process. This helped a lot for their high deployment."
- "It provides an organization flexibility to move towards the public cloud, so their workload can be upstream, and they can see that they don't have to come down to their on-premises for any authorization authentications."
- "The only issue is the OU is not properly synced. Therefore, you have to do a manual sync sometimes or you might lose the connector due to AD Connect or sync servers."
What is our primary use case?
I was a consultant. I recently changed my job (seven days ago). Most of my customers did everything in Azure. They used Azure Active Directory Domain Services (AD DS) as well as Active Directory Federation Services (ADFS) to sync a user's profile using AD Connect and a federated model. So, they could access an application on-premises as well as in a cloud.
I am now a CTO for a big hospital. I manage Azure AD for all hospitals as the CTO. They also use Office 365 across all four of their hospitals.
The solution is hybrid cloud. We have the Active Directory on-premises and Active Directory Domain services in Azure. This is where I use AD Connect (or sync server) to sync the user's profile.
How has it helped my organization?
Azure AD has features that have helped improve security posture. From a security point of view, they integrated with Okta, which is one of the integrations that we used for a customer's use case. From there, their entire security posture is managed and integrated with Azure.
It gave better visibility on our customers' security posture - the way that they configure users, configure their end user computing, and multi-factor authentication. This is where they get better visibility and manageability through this particular solution.
A use case that we did for an end user in a manufacturing organization: We used WVD with biometric authentication because 1,500 processes need to happen in a process. The user didn't want to use a login using their credentials. They wanted to use fingerprinting or tap their ID. That is where we integrated with the authentication. Now, they can process in a couple of hours, and they run those 1,500 processes every day. This changed their login process, which improved the manufacturing process. This helped a lot for their high deployment.
In my current organization, it is connected only for Office 365. We are getting into other services that Azure has to offer, but that has not yet started. The first use case that we are going to do is backup and recovery through Azure AD.
We are trying to do backup for some Tier 1 applications through Commvault. We will use that data to restore within the Azure environment or Azure Virtual Network (VNet), recovering all the applications. We then make sure that we have the capability for recovering those applications end-to-end. This is where Azure AD will play a huge role, so we don't have to come down to on-premises for authentication.
What is most valuable?
- The authentication process, e.g., multi-factor authentication.
- Directory Domain Services.
- Azure AD Connect (sync services).
What needs improvement?
The biggest thing is if they could integrate with their IPS/IDS processes as well as have integration with another app, like a third-party application. Varonis was another solution that my customers are trying to integrate with ADFS. For some reason, they were seeing some difficulties with the integration. There is a case open with Microsoft on this particular thing.
The only issue is the OU is not properly synced. Therefore, you have to do a manual sync sometimes or you might lose the connector due to AD Connect or sync servers.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for a couple of years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I haven't seen any major issues.
We had a customer with roughly around 80,000 users. They had three SMEs or FTEs managing their Active Directory environment or solution.
Maintenance-wise, we need at least two FTEs for backup, making sure that we have the right coverage 24/7.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I think we can add more systems to make sure that we can connect. The documentation provides more detail about the sizing information for OVA files or AD Connect files on the server. So, you have those kinds of capabilities built into the scalability.
How are customer service and technical support?
Before, we used to manage most technical issues. For example, if there was a critical thing that had to happen, then we would open a case. The support that we used to get from Microsoft was great because we were a Gold partner with Microsoft, so we had good access for the technical team.
We don't use the technical support too much because we have engaged a partner for my current organization.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was so straightforward. The documentation is good. There were no problems deploying it. We did the deployment for one customer in less than an hour. Another customer took some time because it is more like a process for change management. Otherwise, the actual installation, download, and configuration took less than a couple of hours.
My previous company's focus was on how to integrate a customer's Active Directory with Okta, how to integrate it with MFAs, and how to integrate with security IMs.
The deployment was easy to do and integrate with on-premises. So if it was a small- or medium-sized customer, we could bring them into the cloud in no time. Also, we could start looking into other applications that the customer could use: Docker containers or DevOps. This is where we spent most of the time, i.e., with customer design.
Every hospital with Office 365 comes with Active Directory Domain Services so you need to sync all your users. That is how the implementation is done today.
What about the implementation team?
At my previous employer, most of our customers' application deployment used Ruby on Rails in their AWS environment and were looking for an authentication process. So, we installed Active Directory or ADFS in Azure for a specific client. Then, all applications would get authenticated to Azure Active Directory and synced from their on-premises environment.
There was another client for whom we installed Azure Directory Domain Services, which synced with their on-premises data and federated model so we could get the single sign-on. We then installed Azure VMware Solution in Azure for their expanding or extending their on-premises VMware architecture.
We created a questionnaire where we documented the customer's current environment. For example, customers wanted to sync the amount of users. We then used that questionnaire to take care of the prerequisite before we even started deploying this solution.
The whole deployment process should take less than one FTE.
What was our ROI?
It provides an organization flexibility to move towards the public cloud, so their workload can be upstream. They can see that they don't have to come down to their on-premises for any authorization authentications. That is where we were seeing more development environments, staging environments, and DevOps environments, as most of our customers were pushing towards the public cloud, which would then be integrated with their Azure Active Directory.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The licensing model is straightforward. I don't think there are any issues with the E3 license or E5 license.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We had a customer with very traditional architecture in AWS. We spun up the ECP instance, then installed and replicated the Active Directory. Other than that, I don't think we had another customer who was going in a different direction.
What other advice do I have?
We have a budget for Q4 2021. By Q1 2022, we are hoping to get one hospital completely in Azure by 2022.
The only way to learn about the value that Azure brings to the table is if a customer can use as an evaluation copy or license. Then, they can integrate and push the development OUs or the test OU to make sure that they can integrate with the MFAs.
I would rate this solution as an eight or nine (out of 10).
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Global Head of Identity and Access Management at Adecco
End users have one password to get into their online applications, which makes for a better user experience
Pros and Cons
- "It is one of those costs where you can't really quantify a return on investment. In the grand scheme of things, if we didn't have it, we would probably have a lot more breaches. It would be a lot harder to detect issues because we would have people using static usernames and passwords for various sites, making us open to a lot more attacks. The amount of security and benefit that we get out of it is not quantifiable but the return of investment from a qualitative point of view is much higher than not having it."
- "The amount of security and benefit that we get out of it is not quantifiable but the return of investment from a qualitative point of view is much higher than not having it."
- "Some of the features that they offer, e.g., customized emails, are not available with B2C. You are stuck with whatever email template they give you, and it is not the best user experience. For B2C, that is a bit of a negative thing."
What is our primary use case?
It has allowed us to use other SaaS products that will authenticate with Office 365 as well as other Microsoft products and non-Microsoft products, so we can have a single sign-on experience for our users. Rather than them needing to have multiple usernames and passwords, they just use whatever they have as their main username and password to log onto their machine.
It is SaaS based, but we sync up from our on-prem into Azure AD.
How has it helped my organization?
With COVID-19 at the moment, this solution is a good example of where we needed to move a lot of our traffic from our on-prem authentication into the cloud. Last year, before I joined the company, we had to setup our VPN differently. It was easy enough for us to do because our machines were already joined to Azure AD. We just split the traffic and stopped having to rely on our on-prem VPN for our Office 365 traffic. We were just good to go into the Internet because we had all the features setup, e.g., MFA and Conditional Access, which made life a lot easier.
It has made our security posture better. There are always improvements to be made, but we feel more secure because of the way that things have been setup and how everything integrates together.
What is most valuable?
- Single sign-on is the most useful at the onset.
- The dashboards offered are very granular, in terms of usages.
- We find the Conditional Access element and Multi-Factor Authentication side of things very useful.
These features let us have secure, yet user-friendly interactions, rather than having to be embroiled in various types of signups for each application. These allow us to be a lot more granular as well as making sure our environment is more secure. Our accesses and users remain secure too.
Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) and Conditional Access have helped us be more secure. There is one place where all these features are posted, making life a lot easier. If we were to try and buy these separately, then it would be a painful experience. Whereas, if it is in one product, then all these features talk to each other and it is available for us in one go. For example, when you buy a car, if you buy the steering wheel and engine separately, then you need to make it work altogether. Whereas, you just want to buy a car with everything included, making life a lot easier.
It has made the end user experience a lot better. They only have one password to get into their online applications and that makes the user experience much better.
What needs improvement?
The one area that we are working on at the moment is the business-to-consumer (B2C) element. It is not as rich as some of the other competitors out there. The B2C element of Azure AD is quite niche. Some of the features that they offer, e.g., customized emails, are not available with B2C. You are stuck with whatever email template they give you, and it is not the best user experience. For B2C, that is a bit of a negative thing.
In my previous role, there would have been a few things that I would have liked added, but they have already introduced them. Those are already in the roadmap.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the product for many years. I have only been at Adecco for six months, but I had experience with it at my prior role as well. Overall, I have used it in excess of five years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability is fantastic. It is a big step from using Active Directory on-premise to now moving to something that has been completely rethought in the cloud. It is very impressive and fits into the whole Microsoft ecosystem, making life easier.
We have had some downtime, but I think a lot of that has been unavoidable from Microsoft's side of things. Microsoft made some changes in some instances which caused certain features to be unavailable, like Azure AD became unavailable a few weeks ago. I love that they were very frank, open, and honest as to what happened. However, the bottom line is that we prefer downtime not to happen.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have had no problems with it. We are not exactly the biggest organization, i.e., 30,000 accounts. IT makes up probably 5,000 of those accounts, or less. If we were an organization of hundreds of thousands, then we might be questioning scalability. However, I have never known it not to be scalable. For medium- to large-organizations, it is fine. I think it is when you get into multiple companies with multiple complexities then it becomes a struggle. For us, it is more than scalable for our purposes.
We still have many applications that need to be onboarded to Azure AD. Because we are moving to the cloud, there is a lot more that we need onboarded into Azure AD, but it is working well so far.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support is great. We have a dedicated resource who understands our environment. We have regular meetings with them once a week where we get to discuss the current status of various tickets as well as our questions. The support that we get is very good.
We have Premier Support. We also have Premier Mission Critical Support on Azure AD, which is where we have someone who is dedicated to our setup and knows how our environment's setup. Therefore, if we do have a major issue, then they would be brought in to help resolve those issues.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
It was a given that we would use Microsoft. To use Microsoft 365, you need to use Azure AD, so that is what we did.
I have always used AD and Azure AD.
How was the initial setup?
In my previous role, the initial setup was quite simple. It was a simple case of install and follow some wizards, then you pretty much had it setup and synced to your Azure AD from the on-prem. Minimum effort was required.
The deployment was about three weeks, which was mainly the change process and getting it through our internal changes. It was quite quick.
What about the implementation team?
We did it ourselves internally with some help from Microsoft. There were four people involved in the deployment: the service owner, a Microsoft product engineer, and two internal engineers.
We have the maintenance outsourced to a partner. However, we have had trouble with this partner because of their lack of delivery.
Ideally, I would like around five people to work with the partner and maintain the environment. At the moment, we have one person and are recruiting two others. For our scale, three to five people would be great as well as working with a partner to do the operations. That is the model that I am using.
What was our ROI?
It is one of those costs where you can't really quantify a return on investment. In the grand scheme of things, if we didn't have it, we would probably have a lot more breaches. It would be a lot harder to detect issues because we would have people using static usernames and passwords for various sites, making us open to a lot more attacks. The amount of security and benefit that we get out of it is not quantifiable but the return of investment from a qualitative point of view is much higher than not having it.
It is the one platform that should be used for all authentication. Azure AD allows you to have one username and password to access all of your sites, which makes life a lot easier. Therefore, the return on investment is good because people have to use the one ID and password.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Be sure:
- You know your userbase, e.g., how many users you have.
- You choose the right license and model that suit your business requirements.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
In the future, I would maybe like better integration with competitive products. Obviously, Microsoft would be selective on that anyway. For example, working alongside Okta as a competitor, their product seems to be a bit richer in its offerings. From what I have seen, Okta has a bit more of an edge, which is something that might benefit Azure AD.
What other advice do I have?
Be prepared to learn. It is a massive area. There are a lot of features offered by Azure AD. It works well within the Microsoft realm but also it can work very well with non-Microsoft realms, integrating with other parties. The fact it is Microsoft makes life so much easier, because everyone integrates with Microsoft. Just be prepared to absorb because it is a big beast. It is also a necessary evil that you need to have it. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages of having it.
The learning curve is both steep and wide. You can only focus on what you can focus on with the resources you have in your organization. It is such a big product and changing all the time. This means that you need dedicated people to be on it. There is a lot of keeping up with what Microsoft puts out there with Azure AD, which is great. This makes its feature-rich, but you need to be able to learn how it integrates into your business as well.
What Azure AD does for my current organization is sufficient, but we are probably not adopting most of what Azure AD has. We do not have it at a mature place at the moment, but we hope (over the next couple of years) to get it up to the latest and greatest.
It is an integral part of using Microsoft stuff, so we are not going to move away from it any time soon. If anything, we will ensure that everything is on Azure AD and authenticating users use Azure AD. That part will still take some time to do. Like most large organizations who have been around for a long time, we have legacy to deal with and some of that legacy does not support Azure AD. So, we are working towards that.
If you come from a company with legacy technology, then there will be a lot of business and technological changes for you to make.
The adoption of Azure AD B2C is progressing somewhat well. That is something that we just started in the last couple of months. We are having more of our products being onboarded into it. We will be moving other implementations of Azure AD into the one Azure AD implementation, and it has been great so far.
I would rate it as a nine out of 10. I would have given it a 10, but it is impossible for something to be perfect. The product does itself a disservice when there is an impact due to downtime, which we have had over the years. Because you rely on it so heavily, you can't afford for it to go down for a few minutes because then there will be user impact.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Principal Service Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
Flexibility around accessing company systems from anywhere at any time has proven to be helpful
Pros and Cons
- "Azure Active Directory provides us with identity-based authentication, which secures access at the user level and also integrates with conditional access policies and multi-factor authentication helping to increase the identity security for that person. So, the hacking and leaking of passwords is a secondary problem because you will not authenticate a person with one factor. There is a second factor of authentication available to increase the security premise for your company."
- "Bringing our many hundreds of applications onto Azure Active Directory single sign-on authentication has had a big impact on users' productivity, usage, and adoption of enterprise applications because they don't need to log in."
- "There is a concept of cross-tenant trust relationships, which I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing. That is something which in the coming days and years to come by will be very key to the success of Azure Active Directory, because many organizations are going into mergers and acquisitions or spinning off new companies. They will still have to access the old tenant information because of multiple legal reasons, compliance reasons, and all those things. So, there should be some level of tenant-level trust functionality, where you can bring people from other tenants to access some part of your tenant application. So, that is an area which is growing. I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing this, and it will be an interesting piece."
- "There is a concept of cross-tenant trust relationships, which I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing."
What is our primary use case?
We are using Azure Active Directory (AD) for:
- Application authentication, which is single sign-on.
- Multi-factor authentication (MFA).
- Conditional access for people coming in from non-trusted networks, which are interlinked.
- Azure AD B2B.
These are the four big items that we are using.
How has it helped my organization?
The flexibility around accessing company systems from anywhere at any time has proven to be very helpful. Organizations decided during the COVID-19 pandemic, on a very short notice, to announce that everyone should be working from home. The good part was that our company was already working under Azure Active Directory, and most of our applications were under Azure at that time. For us, it was a very seamless transition. There were no major impacts on the migration nor did we have to do any special setups or need to configure networks. So, it was a very seamless experience for our users, who used to come into our office, to access systems. They started working from home and there was no difference for them. We did not have to do anything special to support that transition from working from the office to working from home. It was seamless. There was no impact to the end users.
Bringing our many hundreds of applications onto Azure Active Directory single sign-on authentication has had a big impact on users' productivity, usage, and adoption of enterprise applications because they don't need to log in. It is the same credentials and token being used for days and months when people use our systems with hundreds of applications being integrated. From a user perspective, it is quite a seamless experience. They don't need to remember their username, passwords, and other credential information because you are maintaining a single sign-on token. So, it is a big productivity enhancement. Before, we were not using a single sign-on for anything. Now, almost 90 to 95 percent of applications are on Azure Active Directory single sign-on.
What is most valuable?
The single sign-on is an amazing product. Its integration with the back-end, like MFA and conditional access, is very helpful for enterprise class companies because of changing dynamics as well as how companies and workers interact. Traditionally, companies used to have their own premises, networks, network-level VPN and proxy settings, and networks to access company systems. Now, anyone can work from anywhere within our company. We are a global company who works across more than 60 countries, so it is not always possible to have secure networks. So, we need to secure our applications and data without having a network parameter-level security.
Azure Active Directory provides us with identity-based authentication, which secures access at the user level and also integrates with conditional access policies and multi-factor authentication helping to increase the identity security for that person. So, the hacking and leaking of passwords is a secondary problem because you will not authenticate a person with one factor. There is a second factor of authentication available to increase the security premise for your company.
The analytics are very helpful. They give you very fine grain data around patterns of usage, such as, who is using it, sign-in attempts, or any failed logins. It also provides detailed analytics, like the amount of users who are using which applications. The application security features let you drill-down reports and generate reports based on the analytics produced via your Active Directory, which is very helpful. This can feed into security operation centers and other things.
What needs improvement?
One of the areas where Microsoft is very actively working on enhancing is the capabilities around the B2B and B2C areas.
Microsoft is actively pursuing and building new capabilities around identity governance.
There is a concept of cross-tenant trust relationships, which I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing. That is something which in the coming days and years to come by will be very key to the success of Azure Active Directory, because many organizations are going into mergers and acquisitions or spinning off new companies. They will still have to access the old tenant information because of multiple legal reasons, compliance reasons, and all those things. So, there should be some level of tenant-level trust functionality, where you can bring people from other tenants to access some part of your tenant application. So, that is an area which is growing. I believe Microsoft is actively pursuing this, and it will be an interesting piece.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for three and a half years.
We have worked very closely with Microsoft over the past few years. We were one of the early adopters as an enterprise. We worked very closely with Microsoft to develop many products and features.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Looking at our journey over the last three and a half years, there were a few stability incidents, which is understandable from any technology platform provider perspective. However, it was overall a very good experience with a stable platform. There were two or three major incidents in the last three years.
There are about eight people who handle the day-to-day maintenance. These people focus on single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, and Azure B2B.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is amazing. Microsoft gets billions of logins every day. They are scaling it every day. They announced an increase in the availability that the SLA guarantees from 99.9 to 99.99 percent from April of this year. Overall, it is very stable and scalable. These are things that we don't need to worry about.
It is fully rolled out to everyone in our organization.
How are customer service and technical support?
Overall, the technical support is very good. Overall, if you follow the customer support route and raise an incident ticket, then they are very prompt. They work very closely and collaboratively with us. We have a dedicated technical account manager (TAM). We have governance in place. We engage with them bi-weekly. So, we have a pretty good working structure with them.
Identity within Microsoft is a separate division, and we work very closely with them.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We didn't use another solution before Azure AD.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was straightforward.
How you plan the tenant and set it up is quite key. There are major components that you need to be aware of:
- Are you planning to implement multi-factor authentication at the tenant level?
- What type of conditional access policies do you want to implement?
- What type of access governance do you want to put in?
- What type of role catalogue do you want to maintain?
- What type of structure of the AD organization you want to maintain?
- What type of device registrations do you want?
There are some prerequisite checklists available from Microsoft. However, these are quite fundamental decisions. If you don't take the lead on them, these decisions will impact you, then you have to go back and fix them later on. So, plan ahead.
Initial deployment took us a few months across our organization, but we decided to use most of the elements at a very early stage. So, our use case could be different than other companies. Some organizations that I know have chosen not to deploy multi-factor authentication nor do self-service password reset to deployment, then the user community is impacted with that. It can differ organization to organization based on the scale, number of users, locations, etc. So, there are many factors involved.
We phased out our deployment over a couple of years, focusing on single sign-on and multi-factor authentication, then self-service password reset and other components. So, we did it as a phased deployment with a small team of four or five people.
What about the implementation team?
I strongly recommend the Microsoft GTP Teams, which are with their R&D division. They have a go into production, dedicated team who work with customers from an end-to-end lifecycle perspective. So, they will help you to build the tenant from scratch, following the right standards and guidelines. For us, it was straightforward, but we started this journey in 2017/2018. It is quite a mature product now.
We work with most managed service providers, like Infosys, TCS, Wipro, etc. We have had good experiences with them. Initially, we worked with Infosys.
What was our ROI?
We are closing all data centers. Therefore, to build or enhance any existing capability in applications, it could have been very a costly effort for us. Rather than building an authentication platform, we are using a standard-based approach where we just need to plug and play. Instead of going in and reinventing the wheel for every application, we are using a standard out-of-the-box service offering from Azure Active Directory, where we just consume that service, then users have a seamless experience.
Having a single supplier saves you loads of headaches from:
- Multiple suppliers and multiple technologies
- Integrating everything.
- Doing upgrades.
- Maintenance.
- In-house deployment
- Having multiple components of those solutions to work together.
- Managing multiple vendors, supplier support teams, contracts, renewals, and licenses.
If you are dealing with one supplier with an out-of-the-box solution, which provides you end-to-end capabilities, then it is naturally cheaper and less of a headache to manage and operate.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
This solution was the natural choice. There is no vendor nor supplier providing this type of capability right now in the market, especially considering people in organizations are using Office 365. So, it is the natural choice to not to go with a third-party supplier, then try to integrate those third-party solutions and technologies into Microsoft. It is one box and the same Office 365 tenant in the same environment where you operate all your settings. Therefore, it is a very natural, out-of-the-box solution.
What other advice do I have?
Look at the market. However, look at it from an end-to-end perspective, especially focused on your applications and how a solution will integrate with your overall security landscape. This is key. Azure Active Directory provides this capability, integrating with your Office 365 tenant, data security elements, classifications, identity protection, device registrations, and Windows operating system. Everything comes end-to-end integrated. While there is no harm evaluating different tools, Azure AD is an out-of-the-box solution from Microsoft, which is very helpful.
Every day we are increasing the number of users and onboarding new applications. Also, we are growing the B2B feature. We try to use any new feature or enhancement coming in from Microsoft, working very closely with them. It is an ongoing journey.
Dealing with a single supplier is easier rather than dealing with five suppliers. Historically, if you have to do anything like that, then you will end up dealing with at least 10 different vendors and 10 different technologies. It is always interesting and challenging to manage different roadmaps, strategies, upgrade parts, licensing, and contracts. The biggest lesson learnt is wherever you can go with native-cloud tools and technologies, then go for it.
I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
IT Security Consultant at Onevinn AB
The passwordless feature means users don't need a password anymore and makes it easier for them to be more secure
Pros and Cons
- "Using [Azure AD's] passwordless technology, you're not even using a password anymore. You're basically just creating a logon request without actually sending or typing or storing the password. This is awesome for any user, regardless of whether you're a factory worker or a CFO. It's secure and super-simple."
- "Using Azure AD has improved our security posture overall, more than anything I've ever worked with."
- "The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, has room for improvement. We are moving from another solution into the Application Proxy and it's quite detailed. Depending on the role you're signing in as, you can end up at different websites, which wasn't an issue with our old solution."
- "The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, has room for improvement."
What is our primary use case?
I use it for managing identities, access, and security in a centralized way. I help other people use this product.
How has it helped my organization?
Using Azure AD has improved our security posture overall, more than anything I've ever worked with.
It enables end-users to be more secure without it actually affecting their work. Usually, security solutions makes it harder for them, so many start using other solutions instead, solutions that are not managed or monitored by the organization. But when we use Azure AD's Conditional Access, for example, as long as they behave, users don't even notice it.
The passwordless feature means they don't even need to have a password anymore. It's easier for users to be more secure. You can invite anyone to collaborate in a secure way.
What is most valuable?
Passwordless sign-in, which is one of the new features where you no longer need to have a password, is one of the great features. Passwords have always been hard for end-users, but not so hard to bypass for bad guys. It often doesn't matter how complex or long your password is. If a bad guy can trick you into giving it to him or can sniff your keyboard or your network, or access it through malware, your password doesn't matter anyway. So all the complexity, length of the password, and having to regularly change it is hard for users, but it doesn't stop hackers. And that's what makes passwordless so valuable.
Multi-factor authentication is good as it allows you to answer a notification or even an SMS or a phone call, but that has become more unsecure now because the bad guys are learning new way to bypass these methods. But using passwordless technology, you're not even using a password anymore. You're basically just signing a logon request without actually sending, typing or storing the password. This is awesome for any user, regardless of whether you're a factory worker or a CFO. It's secure and super-simple.
It also stops phishing, which is amazing. If someone tricks a user into going into the "Macrosoft" store or some other site that looks like the real site, they can trick the user into signing in there and then they can steal the password. But if the user is using passwordless, the passwordless solution would say, "Sorry, I don't have a relationship here. I can't sign in." In that way, it can stopping phishing, which is one of the most common attack vectors right now.
Another feature that has improved our security posture is Conditional Access where we can not only say "yes" or "no" to a sign-in, but we can also have conditions. We can say, "Sure, you can sign in, but you need to be part of the right group. You need to come from a managed client. You can't come in with a risky sign-in. You need to come in from a certain platform or a certain network." You can have a really complex set of rules and if those rules are not fulfilled you will not be able to sign in, or we can require MFA or even control the session. That is also a really good security feature.
The B2B feature is another good one where, if I want to give someone access to my my apps or data, instead of creating an account and a password and giving that info to the user, I can invite that user so he or she can use their own existing account. That way, I don't need to manage password resets and the like. The B2B feature enables collaborating with anyone, anytime, anywhere.
What needs improvement?
The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, is really good, but has room for improvement. We are moving from another solution into the Application Proxy and the other one has features that the App Proxy doesn't have. An example is where the the role you're signing in as will send you to different URLs, a feature that App Proxy doesn't have (yet).
With Azure AD, if you look in detail on any of the features, you will see 20 good things but it can be missing one thing. All over the place there are small features that could be improved, but these improvement is coming out all the time. It's not like, "Oh, it's been a year since new features came out." Features are coming out all the time and I've even contacted Microsoft and requested some changes and they've been implemented as well.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Azure Active Directory for close to eight years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability or availability is incredible. It's super-good. However, just the other week, there was an outage for a few hours, so it's not 100 percent. But in Microsoft's defense, that hasn't happened for a long time.
What I also usually point out to people is that if you host your own solution and things break in the middle of the night, who's going to look at it? With this solution, you know that in the first millisecond that something breaks, 10 people or 100 people are looking at it. You get constant feedback about what's going on and you usually get a full report afterwards about what actually happened and how they will prevent them in the future. They are really good at managing these outages.
I don't know what the uptime is, but it's still 99.999 or something like that. It's super-trustworthy, but it's not 100 percent. What is? Still, it's likely much better than a private on-premises solution could ever be.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
In terms of scalability there are no limits. I have customers with 10 people and others with up to 300,000, and everything in between. There is no difference. I haven't had to think about memory or disk space or CPU in a long time because everything just works. It's super-scalable.
We have 100 customers and all of them use Azure AD. They are spread all over the world. In Sweden, where I'm from, we have government municipalities, we have private corporations, hospitals, manufacturing. Everybody needs this. It doesn't matter which market or which area you work in. I don't see a target audience for this. It's everyone.
How are customer service and technical support?
Their tech support is pretty good, depending on who you end up talking to. If you open a support request, you can be asked quite basic questions at first: "Have you tried turning it on and off again?" Sometimes we need to go through five people to get the correct people, the people who know the problem area really well. We usually dig really deep into the area and learn al lot first. We need someone who is expert in this product and who knows exactly how that area of the product works. Sometimes it takes a while to get to the correct person, but once you get there, they're usually super-knowledgeable, super-friendly and quick to reply. It can be tricky to find the right person. But I suppose that is the same in any company.
Over the years, we have built up a contact network so we can usually contact the right people right away, as we are a Microsoft partner. But because this review is for everyone, I would suggest that you keep asking until you'll end up at the right people.
Overall, Microsoft is really attentive. Previously, you could say, "Can you show me the roadmap for the next three years?" and they would say "Sure." They don't really do that anymore because they say, "It now depends on what you want." We can help influence Microsoft how to prioritize. They have daily and weekly meetings where they discuss "What do people want now? How should we prioritize?" It's a totally new Microsoft compared with a few years ago. If I see something missing, they usually come up with it pretty quickly.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I see people moving from other solutions into Azure AD because they're not satisfied with the other solutions.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is a straightforward process, for such a complex technology. Although there are a lot of moving parts involved in actually setting it up, it is quite easy.
I've set this up for many and, in general, it takes less than a day to get things up and running. Then, of course, there's tons of optional configuration to improve and secure things, but just getting it up and running takes less than a day.
The implementation strategy used to be helping them get to the cloud, by doing things like making sure that they clean up the accounts in the on-premises solution and setting up the synchronization rules. But nowadays, most of my customers are people who have Azure AD in place already. So now I'm trying to enable and configure and improve security configuration. For example, you don't have to set up the passwordless feature and you don't have to do multi-factor authentication. They are optional. So my task now is more one of improving their configuration and turning on security features. A lot of it is secure by default, but some features require you to configure and set them up.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
With the licensing there are so many features involved, and different features for different licensing levels. Those levels include the free version, as well as Premium P1, Premium P2. My approach with my clients is usually, "What kind of licenses do you have? Okay, let's improve this, because you have it already. You're paying for it already. Why not use it?"
The next step is, "These features are included in the licensing you don't have. Do you think it's worth it?" I talk to them, I explain them, and I demonstrate them. They will usually say, "Yeah, we need that one."
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I don't know other solutions really deeply. I know of them, but I'm a specialist who is focused on this one. But I realize, when I talked to other specialists in other areas, that they are solving the same problem, so they usually have similar solutions.
What Microsoft is winning on is that people used to say, "Buy the best product, the best in class or best in breed for each area." But that has changed now. "Buy the best ecosystem" is the better approach. If I have Azure AD as my identity and access solution, and if I also use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and the Defender for Office 365, and other Microsoft solutions, I can then go to one portal, one place, and see how my apps are doing, how my users are doing, how my devices are doing, and how my data is doing. You get this super-integrated ecosystem where everything talks to each other. That is the strength.
In my opinion Azure AD is a fantasic standalone product, but you have so much more benefit from using it together with other Microsoft solutions.
The user usually doesn't care if we use Microsoft or any other vendor's to protect his identity or his computer or his data. They just want to do their jobs. But as admin, I see the advantage of using the same provider. I can actually create a query saying, "Show me all users who logged in to Azure AD from a device with this operating system, accessing this application, and who have a risk on their device, where a document is classified as sensitive." I can do all of that in one query for identity application devices and the data. That's the strength, having that insight into everything. And when it comes to security and Azure AD, Microsoft has 3,000 full-time security researchers, and they spend over a billion dollars each year on security research alone.
What's amazing is that the CIA, the FBI, and these big companies or organizations are using Azure AD, and they have really high requirements for audits and protection. As a "regular" organization, you can get the same level of security without have to ask for it. You get to ride on the coattails of that amazing security without spending $1 billion yourself.
If another Microsoft customer is hit by something bad, Microsoft is going to stop it for the rest of its customers. If you're the first to get hit by new bad malware, that may be tough, but all of the other customers are instantly protected because different customers share threat intelligence, in a way. You get the benefit of all the security discoveries that Microsoft makes, instantly.
What other advice do I have?
Talk to someone who knows a lot about it. Sure, you can look at everything on the docs.microsoft.com page, but it can be hard to understand what each feature is and the value it give you. Talk to someone who knows both licensing and technology, to understand what's there and what you should pay for and what you should not pay for.
There are also a lot of good videos out there, like sessions from Microsoft Ignite. You also have the Microsoft Mechanics video series on YouTube with a lot of videos. So if you like to learn through video, there's a lot available for you. You can also go to docs of Microsoft.com and search for Azure AD. You will get like a starting page where you can learn the identity and access basics or also how you integrate apps. There is a link collection with everything and anything you would like to know. Or you can call me.
We are Security advisors. We help people, we train people, we implement it for them, we document it, we teach them, and we talk at seminars. We sell our knowledge. We don't sell solutions. There are 25 people in our company and five to 10 people are working with Azure AD. It's not that we need five for our daily operations, it's just that's how many of us are working with it. In general, a company might need one to five people working on it. If I need to set up a feature for five people or 500,000 people I do the same steps. The thing that is different in bigger companies, is that you need to communicate, you need to educate, you need to write Knowledge Base articles, you need to inform the service desk. All of those things are just to prepare users. But that has nothing to do with Azure AD. The technology is super-simple. It's more that the process around it is different in different companies.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
Product Manager/Architect at a retailer with 5,001-10,000 employees
We can see all facets of the business, providing us more visibility
Pros and Cons
- "It enhanced our end user experience quite a bit. Instead of the days of having to contact the service desk with challenges for choosing their password, users can go in and do it themselves locally, regardless of where they are in the world. This has certainly made it a better experience accessing their applications. Previously, a lot of times, they had to remember multiple usernames and passwords for different systems. This solution brings it all together, using a single sign-on experience."
- "It definitely has improved our security posture, certainly from providing that second factor of authentication, and it enhanced our end user experience quite a bit by giving them self-service password reset and a single sign-on experience instead of having to remember multiple usernames and passwords for different systems."
- "The thing that is a bit annoying is the inability to nest groups. Because we run an Azure hybrid model, we have nested groups on-premise which does not translate well. So, we have written some scripts to kind of work around that. This is a feature request that we have put in previously to be able to use a group that is nested in Active Directory on-premise and have it handled the same way in Azure."
- "The thing that is a bit annoying is the inability to nest groups."
What is our primary use case?
We run in a hybrid model. We have our Active Directory on-premise directory services that we provide. We basically went to Azure so we could provide additional capabilities, like single sign-on and multi-factor authentication.
We are running in a hybrid environment. It is not completely cloud-native. We sync our on-premise directory to the cloud.
How has it helped my organization?
It definitely has improved our security posture, certainly from providing that second factor of authentication. It provides more visibility. We can see all facets of the business, e.g., when people are logging into our resources. This solution makes it highly visible to us.
It enhanced our end user experience quite a bit. Instead of the days of having to contact the service desk with challenges for choosing their password, users can go in and do it themselves locally, regardless of where they are in the world. This has certainly made it a better experience accessing their applications. Previously, a lot of times, they had to remember multiple usernames and passwords for different systems. This solution brings it all together, using a single sign-on experience.
Is this specific to Azure? No. We have had other IdPs that gave us that same experience, but we have more apps that are integrated into Azure today from single sign-on than we had previously. Having that one handy "my apps" page for folks to go to as their one source for being able to gain access to all their apps is a much better experience from my point of view.
What is most valuable?
- Azure Application Proxy
- Single sign-on capabilities for SAML
- OAuth integrated applications
- The multi-factor authentication piece was desirable.
- Defender for Identity, as of recently.
- Some of the services, like Microsoft MCAS solution.
These features offer additional layers of security, which is kind of what we were looking for.
Some of the self-service password utilities certainly helped, given the scenario of the world today with COVID-19 and lockdowns. We certainly benefited from being able to say, "Have our users changed their password remotely." When they connect to the VPN, then sync them back up with the domain. So, that was very beneficial for us as well.
What needs improvement?
The thing that is a bit annoying is the inability to nest groups. Because we run an Azure hybrid model, we have nested groups on-premise which does not translate well. So, we have written some scripts to kind of work around that. This is a feature request that we have put in previously to be able to use a group that is nested in Active Directory on-premise and have it handled the same way in Azure. That is something that is actively being worked on.
One of the other things that we felt could be improved upon is from an Application Proxy perspective. We have applications native to SSH, and we want to be able to do app proxy to TCP/IP. It sounds like that is actively on the roadmap now, which was amazing. It makes us very excited that it is coming, because we do have use cases with that as well.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for a few years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability has been pretty rock solid. For the first time, we have seen some instability over the last month. I know there were some issues with Microsoft in terms of one of their stacks. That was something that they addressed pretty quickly though. We were appraised of the issues by our technical account manager, so we were in the know. We weren't left in the dark when something happened, and it was remediated pretty quickly.
We have about five to six folks whose main role is to manage identity, and that is my team at the company. However, we also have administrators all over the globe, handling service desk tickets, e.g., resetting passwords. There are about 30 or 40 people, if you include that level of things. However, from a global admin perspective, we probably have a total of eight people.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is certainly scalable. Whether you are connecting to a local on-premise directory services organization, or if you are using B2B and B2C. This is part of the vision: At some point, leverage some of the B2B features that we have appointed to us in Azure, which we don't do today. This is certainly something that we are looking at internally as a potential for moving forward.
We are managing 7,000 to 8,000 users within Azure AD.
This is room for growth.
How are customer service and technical support?
We are part of the DPP program. So, we talk to the identity folks at Microsoft on a weekly basis, who are amazing. It has been such a great experience with those folks.
The technical support that we get through the GTP program is amazing. Microsoft Premier Support is pretty good as well. We have called them, but typically we don't have the type of issues that we are calling all the time for. We have a pretty savvy team, and just being plugged into the GTP team has helped us understand new features which are coming out, whether we are part of an active preview or attending an evening where they are doing a webinar to introduce new features to us. The cool thing about that is you do have that line of sight if you need to ask questions or get technical answers. Between our technical account manager and our GTP partner, we do relatively well without having to open too many cases.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We had a different identity provider at one point in time. At the time that we were looking at identity providers, Microsoft really wasn't there from a technical perspective. They are there now, far surpassing some of the things that we have done in the past. So, it was a no-brainer for us. We are very much a Microsoft organization. Primarily, it is the operating system of choice, not only for endpoint service, but it was a pretty good deal to move over and leverage some of the licensing and whatnot for our end users.
From an IdP perspective, we had Okta for quite some time. We had some limitations with Okta that we were looking at Azure to handle. I got pulled in kind of mid-project. I am not really sure when the decision was made, or how it was made, but certainly cost was a factor. We were already licensed for a lot of what was needed to go with Azure, where we were paying Okta separate licensing fees. So, we saved money by switching from Okta to Azure.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup would have been complex if it had not been for being part of the GTP program. We have gotten a lot of value out of that program in terms of cross-training our team members, catching up on any new features that come out as well as any of the gotchas that the Microsoft team has seen. So, those have benefited us quite a bit.
The deployment probably took six to eight months. Standing up Azure and sinking your directory services, like creating a connector, takes minutes. We could stand that up in the day. What took time was taking all of the applications that we have throughout the environment, migrating them across and doing integrations with single sign-on. You need to have conversations with different application owners as well as potentially pulling in some vendors to do some of the configuration. There may be some apps which are not as straightforward as others, but we thought that the experience was pretty straightforward (to a point) where we can handle a lot of the work ourselves.
What about the implementation team?
When we needed Microsoft, we were able to reach out, talk to them, and get the assistance that we needed. That was super beneficial to us.
What was our ROI?
There are a lot less calls to our service desk. For some of the traditional, "Hey, I need to reset my password," or "Hey, I'm locked out." So, we're seeing a lot of that self-service, gaining access to the different apps, and having it all be integrated with Azure will take away some of the headache. For example, "I don't know what my password is for GitHub," or, "I don't know what password is for Slack." We are like, "Well, it's the same password that you use every day." So, that has dropped call volume.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
If you have a different IdP today, I would take a close look at what your licensing looks like, then reevaluate the licensing that you have with Microsoft 365, and see if you're covered for some of this other stuff. Folks sometimes don't realize that, "Oh, I'm licensed for that service in Azure." This becomes one of those situations where you have the "aha" moment, "Oh, I didn't know we can do that. Alright, let's go down this road." Then, they start to have conversations with Microsoft to see what they can gain. I would recommend that they work closely with their TAM, just to make sure that they are getting the right level of service. They may just not be aware of what is available to them.
We look to gain new features when updating licensing. Every time we go to negotiate an enterprise agreement, we are looking at:
- What are the benefits?
- What are we getting back from Microsoft?
They are very good at working with us to get what we are looking for in terms of working on packaging for pricing.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did not evaluate other options. The decision was pretty easy. When we initially looked at Okta years ago, Microsoft was also one of the folks that we looked at. Okta was a little more advanced than some of the gallery apps. Then, Microsoft made a huge play and added more gallery-type apps. That helped us quite a bit to move things along.
What other advice do I have?
For others using Azure ID, take cookie online training. They are widely available, free, and give you a very good idea of what path you need to go to. So, if you want to take some professional training to become a guru, then you know what classes to go take and the fundamentals that you need to take before you get into that class. So, I highly recommend taking the video term.
I come from an Active Directory background for more than 20 years. Coming into Azure was actually great. We had somebody leave the company who was managing it, and they said, "Hey David, I know you are working for this other pocket of the business. How would you like to come back to the identity platform?" I said, "Absolutely." So, it was easier for me to come up to speed in several of the advanced areas of Azure, e.g., conditional access policies. We are starting down a zero trust methodology, which has been very exciting for me.
I would give it a solid eight (out of 10). It has a lot of the features that we are looking at. I don't think there are any tools out there that will give you that one magical wand with everything that you are looking for, but certainly this comes close. Microsoft has been working with us to help us through some of the new features and additions that are coming.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Principal Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
A central point for authentication, providing cloud lock-in for our company
Pros and Cons
- "It is a central point where we provide the cloud lock-in for our company. We focus the multi-factor authentication within Azure AD before jumping to other clouds or software as a service offerings. So, it is the central point when you need to access something for our company within the cloud. You go to Azure AD and can authenticate there, then you move from there to the target destination or the single sign-on."
- "The most valuable feature is the possibility to create multi-tenant applications alone, or in combination with Azure Active Directory B2C."
- "It would be awesome to have a feature where you can see the permissions of a user in all their Azure subscriptions. Right now, you have to select a user, then you have to select the subscription to see which permissions the user has in their selected subscriptions. Sometimes, you just want to know, "Does that user have any permissions in any subscriptions?" That would be awesome if that would be available via the portal."
- "The user administration has room for improvement because some parts are not available within the Azure AD portal, but they are available within the Microsoft 365 portal."
What is our primary use case?
The use case for this solution is the access to Office 365, Azure subscriptions, and several software as a service platforms as well as other SaaS-developed applications that we provide access to, such as, OpenID Connect, OAuth, or SAML.
How has it helped my organization?
It is a central point where we provide the cloud lock-in for our company. We focus the multi-factor authentication within Azure AD before jumping to other clouds or software as a service offerings. So, it is the central point when you need to access something for our company within the cloud. You go to Azure AD and can authenticate there, then you move from there to the target destination or the single sign-on.
Azure AD added a different layer. We were able to add multi-factor authentication for cloud applications, which was not possible before. We also may reduce our VPN footprint due to the Azure AD application proxy. We have a central point where we have registered our software as a service applications that we obtain from other providers or the applications that we host ourselves.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is the possibility to create multi-tenant applications alone, or in combination with Azure Active Directory B2C. So, you can provide access to applications for your external partners without having to care about the accounts of external partners, because they will stick it in there as an AD tenant. That is the feature that I like the most.
The solution has features that have helped improve our security posture:
- A tagging mechanism that we use for identifying who is the owner of an application registration.
- Conditional access and multi-factor authentication, which are adding a lot to security.
- The privileged identity management feature that has arisen off privileged access management. This is helping a lot when providing access to certain roles just-in-time.
They are also still developing several other features that will help us.
It does affect the end user experience. It depends on where they are. When they are within the corporate network, then they already have a second factor that is automatically assigned to them. When they are outside of the company, that is when they have to provide a second factor. That is mostly a SMS message. Now, with the Microsoft Authenticator app that you can install on your mobile phone, we are shifting towards that. This has reduced errors because you may just say that you confirm a message on your mobile phone instead of typing the six-digit code, hoping that you are still in time, and that you entered it correctly. So, it does affect our employees. We try to be up-to-date there.
Mostly, it affects security. It is an obstacle that you have to climb. For example, if you have to enter the code in from the SMS message, then you have to wait for the SMS message to arrive and copy the code, or you have to transfer the code from the SMS message into the field. We reduce that workload for employees by having them be able to receive a message on their phone, then confirm that message. So, security is less of an obstacle, and it is more natural.
What needs improvement?
The user administration has room for improvement because some parts are not available within the Azure AD portal, but they are available within the Microsoft 365 portal. When I want to assign that to a user, it would be great if that would be available within the Azure AD portal.
It would be awesome to have a feature where you can see the permissions of a user in all their Azure subscriptions. Right now, you have to select a user, then you have to select the subscription to see which permissions the user has in their selected subscriptions. Sometimes, you just want to know, "Does that user have any permissions in any subscriptions?" That would be awesome if that would be available via the portal.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for more than two years now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability is very good. They had a problem recently that was hopefully the exception.
I am looking forward to the adjustment of the SLA that they increased from 99.9 percent to 99.99 percent. With this increase, which should happen on the first of April (not an April joke), this should be a huge improvement for the visibility towards the world because this is a commitment by Microsoft, saying, "We are taking care of Azure AD." I think that is a very good thing.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
From my point of view, it scales very well. There are different possibilities to take care of it, depending on what you want to achieve. Lately, they introduced something like administration units, where you can achieve that even a bit further to restrict the access of your administrator to a certain group. So, that should be really helpful for even better scaling.
One company has around 50,000 users and another company has around 200 users. For the bigger company, there are several people involved, three to four people. They are taking care of application registrations as well as the Azure AD Connect synchronization to see if there are any errors, then clear those errors. However, it is mostly the application, registration, and configuration of the Azure AD.
How are customer service and technical support?
The technical support is great. We have access to a special unit within Microsoft where we have additional support besides the technical support. So, it has been really good working with Microsoft.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have other tools:
- Red Hat SSO
- OpenID Connect
- OAuth
- Azure Domain Federation.
We just removed the Azure Domain Federation (AD FS), thanks to the Azure AD.
How was the initial setup?
Deployment time really depends on how you set up your Azure AD. You might:
- Want to set up Azure AD Connect, then the process takes longer.
- Just use Azure AD, then the process is much faster.
- Directly connect to another source of truth, then there is something in-between.
It really depends on your situation. I would say it takes between an hour and a week.
What about the implementation team?
For the company, I didn't set it up. I did set it up for myself, but that was a simplified situation and I found the process to be straightforward.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Make sure that you get the most out of your Office 365 licenses for Azure AD. If you have additional concerns for users who don't have an Office 365 license, consider Azure AD Premium P1 and P2. Be aware that you have to evaluate your license usage beforehand.
Consider the usage of Azure AD Premium P1 and P2 when you are not assigning Microsoft or Office 365 licenses. This is really important to get access to good features, like conditional access, privilege identity management, and accessory use.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate Azure AD as a nine out of 10.
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Microsoft Entra ID Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: September 2026
Product Categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) Authentication Systems Identity Management (IM) Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) Access Management Microsoft Security SuitePopular Comparisons
Microsoft Intune
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
Cloudflare One
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Okta Platform
SailPoint Identity Security Cloud
Microsoft Sentinel
Microsoft Defender for Office 365
Microsoft Purview Data Governance
Microsoft Defender XDR
Workspace ONE UEM
Azure Key Vault
Ping Identity Platform
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention
Google Cloud Identity
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Microsoft Entra ID Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- What do you think of the integration of Azure AD Services, Defender for Endpoint, and Intune as comprehensive security solutions?
- What are the biggest differences between Google Cloud Identity and Microsoft Azure Active Directory?
- How does Duo Security compare with Microsoft Authenticator?
- How does Microsoft Authenticator compare with Forinet FortiToken?
- When evaluating Single Sign-On, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- CA SiteMinder vs IBM Tivoli Access Manager
- What single sign-on platform do you recommend?
- How much time does SSO save?
- Why is SSO needed?
- Why is Single Sign-On (SSO) important for companies?








