Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) and Cloud Workload Protection Platform (CWPP) for Azure, on-premises, and multicloud (Amazon AWS and Google GCP) resources.
N/A
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (formerly Microsoft Cloud App Security) is a multimode cloud access security broker.
Microsoft is well-suited with its definitive cloud, and I also like its Microsoft Intune ID. The conditional policies are great with that, and they're really good and well situated, so you can't beat them at that conditional policy level. Less appropriate, as I said, some of these low-hanging fruit features, like being good in phishing campaigns, and then I feel like maybe doing better at their seam products. So we'll see how that goes.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is well suited when working with other Microsoft Applications. For example, if you are working with Microsoft Office 365 it works very well when implementing CASB features. It works when implementing monitoring or blocks on Sanctioned applications however customizing the message to users is not that great.
The integration to Microsoft Entra ID is seamless, which allows Conditional Access to redirect the session to Microsoft Defender for Cloud App for it to take actions (Block or Monitor).
Tracker users' activity is very good when troubleshooting or running an investigate.
Detecting risky users through tight integration with Microsoft Entra ID is a very good feature.
Detecting mass downloads and blocking the download of files from non-manage company devices is a very good feature as well.
Granular permissions and role-based access management could improve security. This would enable organizations to control who has access to and can set specific features.
While it offers integration with various Microsoft services, expanding support for third-party cloud platforms and applications would enhance its versatility. Many organizations use multiple cloud providers, and broader compatibility would be advantageous.
The cost structure could be more transparent, especially for larger organizations with extensive cloud resources. Clearer cost breakdowns and predictions would help organizations budget more effectively.
It takes some time to scan and apply the policies when there is some sensitive information.
After it applies the policies, it works, but there is a delay.
It doesn't provide any way to scan Microsoft Teams when an external exchange of images is happening. You can always do the filtering on the documents during the chat, but if there is an image, then some kind of OCR capability is required to detect it. At present, there is no way [Microsoft Cloud App Security] can go and detect those kinds of images and alert us
It is a great product that integrates nicely when running an Azure platform and even multi-cloud environment. Not looking for point-solutions but a suite that answers most requirements. It is very comfortable being able to use KQL, workbooks and automation that is native to the azure platform
My visibility is limited because I'm only doing very small pieces of what the overall org does. And also, we have limitations on what we're allowed to use. It's not like we get a new product as users or leadership level users, and everything is on, and we can just do whatever we want. We're very restricted in what we can use any tooling within the org because of the different levels of regulatory constraints we have, because of just the nature of who we are inherently. So that's why. I don't think it's necessarily the product. I think it's more or less of what we're able to do with the product.
The interface is pretty simple and easy to use; however, you will need to do a lot of investigative research on your own to get comfortable with it. Originally, many of the Microsoft security tools had their own seperate consoles. Overtime, they have blended into one interface which is the ideal state. In some cases it is clear Microsoft had to pick which console a certain feature or setting was going to reside in and this leads to some confusion. For example, DLP is managed through Defender for Cloud Apps but you will also need to jump into Purview. For things like reverse proxy on your M365 tenant, you will need to go into Azure and setup conditional access rules. Not a big problem and I can understand why the settings are located where they are but for someone just starting out with Defender for Cloud Apps, it will take some time to figure out.
I have not utilized actual support but the Sales and Product teams have been super helpful in moving our implementation forward and showing us the best practices.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is definitely the choice with the latest market trend and attacks that are currently happening. Microsoft has been able to safe guard a lot after the recent serious attacks happening globally in the digital world. There is a trust in this software and with the latest updates and machine learning capabilities, Microsoft Defender for Cloud should be the choice.
More flexible and more features with easy integration with cloud services like Microsoft Azure and other cloud services. Overall both gives similar features but we prefer Microsoft cloud app security due to its high threat detection rate. mostly we have been able to stop the threat in very very less time.
It simplifies security management and saves time. I'm not sure, but I'm very confident it saved me a couple of paychecks by centralizing the data I need to secure the cloud environment.
I also utilize the inventory overview to monitor my team's activities and verify they are following internal regulations, as well as cost overruns.
The recommendations can be utilized as a valuable instructional tool. I have the team explain why they are receiving them, why they are not following them, and what they are doing differently.
Cloud App Security saves us thousands of dollars finding and rectifying apps security issues
Identity Security Posture helps the organization identity stay in shape, saving thousands of dollars on security consultations
The cost of suffering a breach cannot be quantified, CAS helps minimize the chances of the attackers succeeding, with excellent historical logging for most operations
