Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

Microsoft Entra ID serves as the main use case for everything, supporting M365 and all related services, with Entra ID being a key component for everything.

The features for users, groups, and management are what I appreciate most about Microsoft Entra ID.

Single sign-on (SSO) is an example of how the features of Microsoft Entra ID have benefited my organization. We use Entra to access our laptops and applications, and single sign-on helps ensure business resiliency so that if our domains are compromised, we can still access Microsoft M365 and other services.

Microsoft Entra ID's integration capabilities influence our zero trust model significantly, as we use a lot of conditional access through Entra to support that part.

Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, I have observed that it would be beneficial to have more analytics and everything integrated there, as opposed to how we normally do searches. Co-pilot might play a big role in getting more data much quicker from Entra.

I think more analytics would be beneficial in the next release to improve Microsoft Entra ID.

I want Microsoft to improve dynamic group creation and the logic behind them. Another area needing improvement is dynamic groups, where you cannot utilize many of the custom attributes in the dynamic groups, which are very limited.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for ten to fifteen years.

I would assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as acceptable; we have issues sometimes, but overall, it is satisfactory.

I have experienced downtime, crashes, or performance issues on occasion.

Microsoft Entra ID scales well with the growing needs of the organization, and I find it good overall.

I have expanded usage of Microsoft Entra ID.

The process of expanding usage was quite smooth.

I would rate my customer service and technical support as six out of ten, noting that level two support is really poor while everything else above that is good.

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID, I was using an on-premises Active Directory solution to address similar needs.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID as good overall.

The process worked well, and I faced no significant challenges. However, we had some initial mapping issues when trying to perform synchronization services from on-premises AD to local AD to Entra, and there is still a limitation on the number of mappings you could do from there.

My experience with the deployment was good, though initially, the biggest challenge was mapping the fields from on-premises to cloud and making sure you have all those requirements for the application. Once we got the initial part done, it is quite good.

I have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID.

My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Entra ID is that it is part of our base, and there is no additional cost.

Before selecting Microsoft Entra ID, I did not consider any other solutions as we are in the Microsoft Azure ecosystem and do not have any other choice.

My organization's approach to defending against token theft of nation-state attacks has not changed since implementing Microsoft Entra ID.

The implementation of device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator has affected my organization's approach to phishing resistance in that we do not use that directly. We use a third-party system to do that, which is primarily Okta. However, I have tested FastPass and enabled it for mine, so it is definitely helping with security and ensuring that all authentication is secure, though we do have a pilot and do not use it for the majority.

The factors that led me to consider a change to Microsoft Entra ID included scalability, cost, and being cloud-native.

I can share metrics or data points that demonstrate the impact of our integrations.

I can share data points or examples, as it is the AD. Without that, nothing will work. Without Entra, it is the key one for that, meaning it is the base fundamental thing you need in order to do anything.

My advice to another organization considering using Microsoft Entra ID is to look at the initial implementation, which will take time, so ensure you plan regarding what you need. For us, that was mapping, how authentication would change, what applications you are migrating to the cloud, and how you are going to map those things. Good planning before implementing would be beneficial. I rate this review seven out of ten.

Our main use cases with Microsoft Entra ID involve extending our on-premises Azure into the cloud, starting with messaging in M365 and syncing the IDs up, but we also do a significant amount of work with enterprise apps, app registrations, and different types of identity within Azure.

Within Microsoft Entra ID, I appreciate being able to perform the SAML configurations for enterprise apps and app registrations, SSO, which is something that we are using heavily with Conditional Access for the MIDFS.

The implementation of Microsoft Entra ID has had a huge impact on our secure access to the apps or resources in our environment, as we can use Conditional Access to apply MFA going into apps, which definitely helped with our compliance.

The integration capabilities of Microsoft Entra ID have influenced our zero-trust posture quite a bit, as we actually use the zero-trust worksheets that Microsoft put out, we are doing PIM, and applying PIM on various items, along with Conditional Access policies, so I would say we are using it quite a bit for that.

I do not have anything to share at the moment on how Microsoft Entra ID can be improved or what additional features should be added in the next release.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID heavily for six months.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as pretty solid, aside from that Front Door issue recently, since everybody makes mistakes.

Other than that Front Door issue, I have not experienced any other downtime, crashes, or performance issues. There was about a month ago when you could not get into the portal, but aside from that, the users kept working, we just could not access it.

Microsoft Entra ID scales with the growing needs of my organization, and I experience no issues there.

We have expanded usage, as we are continually growing and merging tenants with a parent company that acquired us.

On a scale from one being the worst and ten being the best, I would rate my customer service and technical support as a five.

I give it a five because it depends on who you get; some people are awesome, and some people, I can find answers through Google before I get a response from them, so it just all depends on the engineer. Once you get past the first engineer, you normally get some pretty good help.

In evaluating the customer service and technical support, I think that everybody is always nice, and I can tell they all try, but you just do not seem to get a high-level expert on the first contact, and it sometimes takes too long to escalate quickly when needed, which is my best recommendation.

Neutral

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID, I was using another solution, which was just on-premises AD.

The process of merging tenants has been somewhat smooth; we are still going through it, but we pretty much did a net new on their side, Greenfield, so the user accounts are all new, and we did not actually migrate them, but we are adding around 15,000 users to the tenant, so it seems to just be doing its job, syncing, and creating the accounts.

My experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID is that we have had it for so long that I actually did not deploy it at this company; it was already deployed, and I had to fix a lot of things, but Entra Connect, it all just kind of works, and I have no major complaints that I can think of.

My experience with the deployment has been good, as there were no issues that I could think of, and I have done several upgrades to it, and it all just kind of works.

I do not know the cost, so I cannot say for sure if I have seen a return on investment.

Regarding my experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Entra ID, I do not manage licensing, so I cannot speak to that. It is expensive, but thankfully, I do not manage the licensing.

Before selecting Microsoft Entra ID, we considered other solutions and determined that we are a Microsoft shop, so we pretty much needed it for Teams and email and everything else.

Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, I do not have any metrics on the frequency or the nature of the identity-related security incidents in my organization that I can share.

Our organization's approach to defending against token theft and nation-state attacks has not changed as a result of Microsoft Entra ID, as it is constantly changing because we are always trying to improve.

The implementation of the device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator is something we are working on switching to, so I cannot say for sure; we are using some other MFA.

The advice I would give to another organization considering Microsoft Entra ID is that I do not really have any; it just kind of works, and I think it is a good solution that works well despite not having all the features of some other options. I give this solution an overall rating of nine.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID since its release. My main use cases with Microsoft Entra ID include identity management, lifecycle management, account creation, and access management within Entra. Currently, we are exploring Microsoft Entra ID governance and looking to expand in that direction. Overall, everything around account management and identities management within Microsoft Entra ID itself, from creation to deletion, represents our primary focus.

Working in the Microsoft environment, I find it beneficial to have Microsoft Entra ID integrated within the entire ecosystem. It is fast, accessible, and I believe it is the best option on the market for directory services.

The implementation of Microsoft Entra ID has definitely made app access easier and more seamless for working with Azure registered apps by allowing them to be integrated within the system and setting up SSOs and secure authentication through Entra.

The implementation of device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator has definitely improved our organization's approach to phishing-resistant practices because we went passwordless. We still have a small fraction of users who are not capable of performing MFA because of their work specifics, but it has definitely made our security stronger.

Microsoft Entra ID could be improved with more integration with third-party solutions like SAP or access management to third-party apps that are not capable of being registered within Azure itself. Having this extra extension to non-native, non-integratable things with Microsoft solutions would allow us to manage access to those systems as well.

I have approximately ten years of experience in my main area of expertise.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as very good. We do not see any outages or problems whatsoever. Occasionally something happens, but it has to be a global outage. I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues with Entra.

Microsoft Entra ID scales very well with the growing needs of our organization. We are expanding usage every year. The process for expanding usage is very smooth. We purchase extra licenses, provision users, and that is it.

On a scale from one being the worst and ten being the best, I would rate my customer service and technical support experience as an eight. I give it an eight because every now and then we get some questions, maybe not necessarily within Entra, but overall within tools available in Azure. Sometimes it takes a bit if we have a very difficult, very specific niche question to get the expert product team to help us, but again, it has to be something very complicated. I evaluate my customer service and technical support experience as very good overall.

Positive

Before adopting Microsoft Entra ID, I was using Active Directory to address similar needs.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID as taking some time but relatively easy with support from Microsoft partners integrated, so it was not extremely difficult.

I did not face any major challenges during the implementation process. My experience with the deployment was a long time ago. The process was okay, like any other project. We transitioned from on-premises to Azure Active Directory, which was then renamed to Microsoft Entra ID. It took some time, but it was a very good and interesting project overall, something new coming from on-premises to completely in the cloud, which was beneficial. Currently, we are trying to go cloud-first, but that is a long journey as well to minimize the on-premises footprint in our organization.

I would not necessarily be able to answer if I have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID at this point.

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is within my area of responsibilities, as I personally manage the licensing for our company. The only thing I would improve in that area specifically is that when we do contract extensions, which happens every year through annual orders, this process is fine. However, any additional licenses we purchase throughout the year through a volume licensing portal can sometimes be confusing because understanding what we are actually purchasing versus what we actually need is unclear. The differences with naming and SKU names between different channels are not unified. Purchasing extra licenses is sometimes confusing.

I did not really consider other solutions before selecting Microsoft Entra ID.

For example, we were capable of introducing complete passwordless authentication for our users, moving away from passwords and utilizing Windows Hello for Business integrated with Entra. The majority of our users do not even remember their passwords and instead use passwordless authentication through Entra with Windows Hello for Business.

Since the beginning, when it was called Azure Active Directory and then switched to Entra, I observe that the amount and pace of changes, new updates, and features coming from Microsoft is definitely higher and faster than it was at the beginning. We basically see new features every day, so the innovation coming with Entra and new use cases that we can apply with it is significant.

I am not aware of any changes in our organization's approach to defending against token theft and nation-state attacks since implementing Microsoft Entra ID.

I would advise another organization considering using Microsoft Entra ID to definitely check it, conduct a POC, and most likely proceed with it because in my personal opinion, it does not get any better than that. I have given this review an overall rating of ten.

Microsoft Entra ID houses all of our users, and we conduct all of our identity and SSO and protection through it. Our sign-in logs go through Microsoft Entra ID, so we have everything, and it's how we build all of our access policies and how we determine who can access what from where and what we trust and what we don't trust.

I probably appreciate the identity protection capabilities of Microsoft Entra ID the most. The implementation of Microsoft Entra ID has had an impact on our secure access to applications or resources in our environment; it's everything because that's how all of our users access everything.

Microsoft Entra ID's integration capabilities influence our zero trust model philosophy heavily because it handles everything. Our organization's approach to defending against token threats and the efficiency of its actions has been pretty consistent since implementing Microsoft Entra ID.

We perform Microsoft Entra ID protection, and we use all of their identity and sign-in risk capabilities to help us determine what's suspicious activity, and then autonomously, they're blocking it or requiring some extra method of authentication to verify that it is someone legitimate.

The peace of mind from a security perspective and knowing that we have all the data that we need to, along with the assurance that people are only accessing resources when they need to and where they are, is everything.

I would appreciate seeing provisioning with HR systems improve in Microsoft Entra ID because they have capabilities out of the box for Workday and Bamboo, but we don't use those. Making the streamlined process of being IT hands-off whenever HR does their thing, and it just automatically populates would be ideal. We've built something ourselves, but it's a lot of maintenance to keep up with it, and it's not ideal to have to manage everything ourselves.

I've been using Microsoft Entra ID for all six years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as good; it very rarely goes down. I haven't experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues with Microsoft Entra ID.

Microsoft Entra ID scales well with the growing needs of our organization; there are no scalability issues. I have not expanded usage of Microsoft Entra ID.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate my customer service and technical support as good, at a seven or eight. I give it a seven or eight because the people that I deal with are knowledgeable; obviously, it's a complicated platform, so not everyone's going to know everything, so you can't really give them a ten out of ten. For the vast majority of issues, we can get answers to whatever we need to. I don't have any negative issues to evaluate regarding my customer service and technical support experience.

Positive

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID, I wasn't using another solution to address similar needs.

My experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID is that it was easy; Microsoft makes it so that it pretty much does it itself, so there's really not much that you have to do. The deployment of Microsoft Entra ID was easy, as it comes with your 365 tenant, so there's not much that you have to do.

I have seen a return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID at 100 percent.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing regarding Microsoft Entra ID is that it's just our regular Microsoft licensing, so we don't really license Entra directly; we just get it as a part of the product suite that we receive.

We didn't consider other solutions before selecting Microsoft Entra ID; it was a clear choice.

I think we've actually had more identity-related security incidents since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, but I don't think that's because more issues are actually happening; we just have better insight on compromises and we're able to act on matters better. I don't think we're aware of more, so it makes it look as though that's happening more, but it's primarily increased visibility.

The implementation of device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator has been good; it's pretty easy for the users to employ. We're not doing hard passkeys, but some people have started adopting the Authenticator passkeys, and they work well. We mostly use the Authenticator application, and no one has any complaints.

The real challenge I face is the sync between objects and getting that set up, but once that's established, it's pretty self-running, and you don't really have to do anything with it.

My advice to another organization considering using Microsoft Entra ID is that if you're using any other part of the Microsoft tech stack, there's really no reason for you not to. I would rate this product a ten out of ten overall.

My primary use case for Microsoft Entra ID is service principal management for API access and infrastructure access to Azure and similar systems. We also use it for single sign-on into some applications, such as SAML and OIDC applications.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID that I find most valuable include the ability to define service principles and assign permissions. This aspect is valuable but also difficult to manage. This is because it gives teams permission to self-service and access the infrastructure. We can assign fine-grained permissions, so there is a proliferation of service principles. There are many of them, making it difficult for us to streamline management.

Joining devices with Entra ID and the integration of Intune is cool. It's an easy integration. We use a different MDM, but we are looking into Intune integration. If that works, things will be simple for us.

It is difficult to manage Microsoft Entra ID because we did not lock it down initially, which meant that by default, any user with an account into Microsoft Entra ID could provision permissions for themselves and access Azure infrastructure. We discovered later that we needed to lock it down, resulting in close to a million service principals due to knowledge gaps within our team. 

With our integration of Microsoft Entra ID and federation to Okta, our identity provider, there is now a lot of overlapping functionality. However, to support different operating systems for our use case, we still use Okta. The issue arises when authenticating apps through Okta; it sees authentication requests from the Office 365 umbrella of apps without identifying the specific app. Moreover, there is a persistent token involved when logging in through Microsoft Entra ID, which prevents redirection to the identity provider for authentication, leading to certain limitations.

Their support needs improvement. The UI can also be better. The menu options are very confusing at times. Coming from a different product, which is very similar, it's not intuitive. The UI isn't great. It doesn't look modern at all. The UI could look a lot different. It can be more snappy and more intuitive.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for approximately four to five years.

The stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID are satisfactory. We have a stage environment, and although the UI appears quite slow, there are no issues with downtime.

Microsoft Entra ID scales effectively with the growing needs of our organization, as we have never faced any challenges with its scalability.

We have about 40,000 users and a lot of AD groups. 

I would evaluate Microsoft support as three out of ten. Microsoft support does not engage right away. They usually try to deflect, buy time, and often do not address the problem immediately. They tend to take excessive time and pin the blame on other components or products involved. We have had notoriously bad experiences with Microsoft support, with cases remaining open for extended periods, leading us to sometimes give up and seek solutions ourselves.

Negative

We also use Okta as our IDP. We have had it for a long time. 

Microsoft started adding more and more features to Azure AD, then it became Entra ID, but it is not our default IDP. There is not a huge difference between them, but Okta support is great because they are a much smaller company compared to Microsoft. They are much more responsive. Their support is definitely way better than Microsoft's support.

I didn't do the deployment. Another team did it. I guess it was easy. 

We have a hybrid setup. Our AD is on-prem.

We have not yet seen an ROI. We are yet to properly leverage Entra ID features. We can't fully blame Microsoft there, but there are definitely some integration pain points.

We have not looked into any other identity solutions.

I would rate Microsoft Entra ID a seven out of ten. It can play well with other products. The integrations can be simple, and the UI can be better.

We are hybrid, so we mainly use Microsoft Entra ID for control of users that we've synced out to the cloud.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID that I like the most include the dynamic grouping, which is pretty cool.

The integration capabilities of Microsoft Entra ID have influenced my zero-trust model positively since we can actually tie in single sign-on, which has been nice.

I can't think of any metrics or data points off the top of my head to demonstrate the impact of Microsoft Entra ID integrations, but it's helped simplify logins for the end users, which is good.

Our organization's approach to defending against token theft and phishing attacks has actually changed since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, as we are working on going passwordless using YubiKeys.

The passwordless feature of Microsoft Entra ID has been nice; it's super slick since users don't have to know their password anymore. We are still working on putting it in, but it has helped reduce help desk calls where users would ask about not knowing their password, which has been pretty nice.

The centralized management with the single sign-on feature of Microsoft Entra ID has been huge, and that aspect has been nice as a data point demonstrating the ROI.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID such as token replay detection, attack-in-the-middle detection, or verified threat actor ID protection haven't had a specific impact on defending against threats for us; however, we have worked with companies that have gotten hacked, and if they were on passwordless, that would have stopped that.

I can't think of any improvements for Microsoft Entra ID off the top of my head, but I would like to see more features brought from on-prem Exchange into the cloud, which would be huge, and also with Office, there are features that we just don't have anymore, raising the question of whether we will get these.

I've been using Microsoft Entra ID for about seven or eight years.

I would assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as fair; I've experienced downtime and crashes, especially when trying to use PowerShell, and there have been times where it has crashed as a whole due to something on their end, which sometimes gives us issues.

Microsoft Entra ID scales with my growing needs pretty well.

I have expanded usage of Microsoft Entra ID, and the process has been pretty smooth; we've expanded into using some of the cloud features when it comes to VMs and other resources. Though it's more in the testing phase compared to being in production, so far it's been pretty easy.

On a scale from one being the worst and ten being the best, I would rate my customer service and technical support from Microsoft a three.

I would give that rating of three because the last ticket that I had open with them was open for about seven months, and I messaged them multiple times; it got stuck in a queue waiting for somebody to pick it up. I couldn't open a different ticket because that one was already in, and then after about seven months, they sent me something that said they were sorry and that my ticket got put into the wrong queue, so they went ahead and closed it and asked me to submit a new ticket.

Neutral

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID, I was using another solution to address similar needs that included just on-prem AD and then ADFS for single sign-on.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID as pretty seamless for the most part; however, when it goes down, it is a bit of a pain, and we have noticed challenges with the documentation since they're constantly changing information, leading to dead links that don't go anywhere, making it hard to do something when the knowledge base isn't up to spec.

My overall experience with the deployment of Microsoft Entra ID has been pretty good.

An example of my deployment experience includes migrating all mailboxes from on-prem out to the cloud, which was pretty seamless, and the users and setting up the connect piece was honestly pretty easy for the most part.

I've seen a return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID.

Prior to selecting Microsoft Entra ID, I honestly considered staying on-prem; there wasn't really anything else, maybe Google.

What stood out in the evaluation process for Microsoft Entra ID, both positively and negatively, was that we already had on-prem, so it was a no-brainer to just keep going that way with them.

The implementation of device bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator has affected my organization's approach to phishing resistant authentication positively, as it's going pretty well, but it has helped us find applications that don't support it, which means we have to either work with the vendor or find a solution for that.

Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, I haven't observed any changes in the frequency of identity-related security incidents in the organization; one thing that confuses everybody is where they keep changing the name. If they would just stick to one thing, that would be nice, but it is what it is.

My advice to another organization considering Microsoft Entra ID is to make sure that you build it out properly, leverage dynamic grouping as much as you can, and use proper naming schemes so you know what your groups do. I would rate this product a six out of ten overall.

My main use cases for Microsoft Entra ID are all access to anything and everything Microsoft.

What I like most about Microsoft Entra ID is how it's the continuation of what was started with Active Directory to the cloud.

The impact that Microsoft Entra ID has had on my secure access to apps or resources in my environment includes the integration with the Microsoft Authenticator and the multifactor authentication.

The features of Microsoft Entra ID benefit my organization by really having everything right there; it's cloud-based, and I don't have all that dependence on infrastructure. It's somebody else's problem, essentially.

Microsoft Entra ID could be improved with more out-of-the-box integrations with other parties.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for six years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID as it has never let me down; it's always there.

I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues with Microsoft Entra ID.

Microsoft Entra ID seems to scale with the growing needs of my organization, and I haven't found a limit; it seems to do everything we want it to do.

We really haven't expanded usage of Microsoft Entra ID beyond that initial deployment; it's really focused on the Microsoft products, and it seems to work fine.

Prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID for the school, I was not using another solution to address similar needs.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, or licensing for Microsoft Entra ID was easy.

I would describe my experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID as easy, very easy; I think the hardest part was really just getting everybody's cell phone numbers so they could enroll.

My experience with deployment of Microsoft Entra ID was pretty easy; I had a one-pager I gave out to the staff that walked them through the process of receiving a text, clicking it, and installing the app. I think we had to hand-hold only a very small number, maybe 10%.

I don't know if it's more return on investment with Microsoft Entra ID; it's more so that it was a necessity.

It was easy with Microsoft Entra ID because it was baked in already with our current license level, and I didn't feel that we had to add a lot in many cases to get what we wanted out of it.

In my evaluation process for Microsoft Entra ID, nothing really stood out to me, both positive and negative; I already knew of the technology, so when it came up, it was the perfect fit.

The advice I would give to other organizations considering Microsoft Entra ID is that it's solid, but the only criticism I would give out of everything I've said so far is to keep working on those integrations with third parties. I think that's key because not everybody is all Microsoft. I rate this product a 9 out of 10.

Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, I can't say that we've really had any changes in the frequency and nature of identity-related security incidents in my organization.

My organization's approach to defending against token theft and nation-state attacks has not changed since implementing Microsoft Entra ID.

The implementation of device-bound passkey in Microsoft Authenticator has affected my organization's approach to phishing-resistant authentication, and I would say it's been very effective.

It's been effective with Microsoft Entra ID because I work for two organizations, and in the education sector, we've set it up in a way where if you're on campus, you don't have to do multifactor authentication. As soon as you walk off campus, though, we have conditional access set up where you've got to do your MFA through the Microsoft app, and it has really cut down on students getting into teachers' accounts and similar incidents.

My main use cases involve daily usage as a system technician, running InTune and Microsoft Entra ID, mainly for endpoint and user management. The main metric demonstrating the impact of the integrations is that we use Microsoft Entra ID for all of our devices. When assigning or removing users, if a user is terminated, or a device is lost or stolen, we use it to remove and manage all endpoints. User migration occurs when we have new hires or terminations, and most of that is what I actively use it for.

The user-friendliness of Microsoft Entra ID is what I appreciate the most. Everything is organized, simple, and straightforward. Even new technicians can come into it and know what they're looking for. The simplicity is a major factor.

Microsoft Entra ID has not had much direct impact on my secure access to apps or resources in my environment since we have been using it from day one, so it has not really changed much, but everything I need is accessible from there.

These features of Microsoft Entra ID have worked and benefited my organization. For my day-to-day role, endpoint management, user management, and policy management within our enrollments for our devices are directly involved between Entra and InTune. It is the main housing unit for everything that I do in my role.

Currently, I don't have any main suggestions for how Microsoft Entra ID can be improved; it has worked for what we needed it to. Since it is already quite simple, I would recommend keeping it as is.

In my current field, I have been working for about five years, and I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for at least four of those five years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Microsoft Entra ID overall as good. If anything does come up, Microsoft is great about notifying us; we get alerts if anything goes down, and we find out before it happens for the most part. We haven't had many issues; most of it is quite stable.

I definitely cannot say we have experienced no downtime, crashes, or performance issues. Recently, we had one issue that lasted for a few hours during the day. We went straight to Microsoft health and notified the issue, and then Microsoft came with a workaround for it quite quickly. Generally, if there are issues, there is a quick turnaround on either a repair or an alternative solution.

Microsoft Entra ID scales well with my organization's growing needs; we use it daily and don't plan on changing it.

I would say we have expanded usage of Microsoft Entra ID. My experience with the expansion has been smooth on my end. I'm not the engineer directing it, but everything has been smooth in my role.

I would rate customer service and technical support as a seven to eight on a scale from one to ten. I give it a seven to eight because most of my interaction is with the end user and managing their system, ensuring everything is up and running for them to do what they need to on their jobs daily. I would evaluate my experience with customer service and technical support as great; I have never had any complaints.

Positive

To my knowledge, Microsoft Entra ID is the only solution we have worked with; I'm not sure of any other alternatives we looked at. That is the only solution I have used to address similar needs prior to adopting Microsoft Entra ID.

My experience with deploying Microsoft Entra ID has been straightforward; everything works well.

Most of my experience with developing Microsoft Entra ID pertains to setting up new policies when we get new features and upgrades, and we are always looking at ways to improve. I do have an engineer who mainly handles that, but as a technician, I go in and maintain and manage it. I haven't seen any specific challenges on my end regarding the deployment.

My experience with the deployment of Microsoft Entra ID has been quite straightforward. Anytime we get new devices in, the new policies are managed through InTune right to the devices, and it all rolls right out. I haven't had any issues.

From what I understand, there has been a return on investment. They have at least spoken to it. I don't have specifics, but I know it's a positive notion.

Unfortunately, I don't have information on the pricing, setup cost, and licensing on my end.

Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, the most change I have observed in the frequency of identity-related security incidents in my organization has been as policies get updated. A few more features show up in there that we can edit to strengthen the policies as a whole from a security outlook. Most of it is that as they change, we can go in and look again to see if there is any way we can strengthen our current policies. I couldn't think of any specific metrics or data points at the moment regarding the changes I have observed.

My organization's approach to defending against token theft or nation-state attacks hasn't changed much after implementing Microsoft Entra ID. The following features of Microsoft Entra ID—token replay detection, attacker-in-the-middle detection, Verified Threat Actor ID, and Microsoft Entra ID Protection—haven't had a lot of specific impact that I'm aware of for the most part. We could say that there are no specific data points or examples at the moment.

The implementation of device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator has affected my organization's approach to phishing-resistant authentication by ensuring that we use MFA and the passwordless device token specifically. All access is limited, and we have them set up for specific policies based on certain groups for different access, and it's all managed through there for us.

I would advise another organization considering utilizing Microsoft Entra ID to give it a shot if they're not already. It has been great and smooth; we haven't had many issues, and if we do, they are fixed quite quickly. With the support of Microsoft on our side, it's worth trying out. I would rate this product an overall eight out of ten.