Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

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.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

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.

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.

Other

We use Microsoft Entra ID for risk management of our users and compliance policies. We focus on automating processes, managing user identities, and placing them in appropriate groups with specific access roles. 

We do a lot of risk management for our users. We have a lot of compliance policies and custom assignments. We try to automate as much as possible. There are a lot of policies that take our users, identify where they should be, what back roles they should have, and put them where they need to be.

The management and risk assessments have become much easier. We can identify and address potential security threats quickly, especially given our mobile college student population. We have a lot of college students who are very mobile. It works with our CyFlare and security suite. This integration lets us know right away when we have somebody trying to impersonate. We get the notification right away. We can assess our risk factors and automatically put that user in a high-risk area. We can then initiate a contact to know what is going on. Are they in Mexico and Davenport, Iowa at the same time or did they put a VPN in?

We have a much better level of comfort. Everybody does not have admin rights. We need such a level of control considering the number of users that are out there. We had to get that in a bundle, and they have done a good job with that.

Microsoft Entra ID has allowed us to move forward with the zero-trust model. Unless you have control over your users and your authentication mechanisms, you have no control. It is our main portal coming into our security suite. They would not get to the security suite till they got through Microsoft Entra ID.

We have just stepped into the passkey. We like its simplicity. Our users are much happier that they are not thumbprinting, fingerprinting, and typing code numbers in. We are still a little leery, just because it could be a stolen device or stolen pass. Once they have that device in their hand, they are already halfway there. Between Entra ID, our policies and risk assessments, and the passkey system, we are on our way.

Implementing Microsoft Entra ID has not changed our organization's approach to defending against token theft and nation-state attacks a whole lot. Our security team has things locked down, and we have our network segmented, so you cannot jump. We do penetration testing almost daily. We have Entra ID and Defender. We monitor all that through API connections. We monitor any phishing and risk factors for our users and any anomalies in baselines.

So far, we find it working very well in terms of the detections, the risks, the events, and the logs that it sends us. Intercepting these attacks in the middle, seeing that the keys have been hit, and going into a more managed identity has helped. It gives us a feeling of security.

There has not been any reduction in the incidents. We have the same number of incidents, maybe an increase. However, we are catching them, and we know where they are coming from, so we can be more proactive instead of reactive.

Identity management with policies stands out as the most valuable feature. It offers a hands-off experience, providing full control over user access. The granular control, such as preventing logins from specific locations, enhances security significantly.

They are already improving it on a daily basis. They are all the time taking things away and adding things. I went through Update Manager which has all the automated, hot patching. With all the different things that Microsoft has been doing and adding, they are on the right path. It is moving so fast that keeping the knowledge on the IT side, for the people who have to use it, is going to be a bit difficult. 

Microsoft's biggest challenge is the documentation. The challenge lies in keeping documentation up-to-date due to rapid changes. Troubleshooting requires workarounds and research. I try to convert everything to graphs. There are a lot of commands that they say work in graphs but are not there yet. They are not functioning as expected. So, we have to try a workaround. It takes a little bit more research.

I have been using it for about four years.

It is becoming increasingly stable as time progresses.

Its scalability is impressive, aided by Microsoft's efforts to expand its data centers. It is growing so fast. It is growing faster that they could build the buildings and stuff them full of computers.

Our experience with Microsoft support has been good, despite occasional challenges caused by unexpected deprecations.

Positive

Prior to Entra ID, there were different systems such as Intune and Azure portal. Entra ID was integrated as part of the natural progression.

We are in the process of moving completely to the cloud. We are satisfied with the cloud and going all in. The process has been up and down because things are changing so fast. That is just the nature of IT. I have been in this for 30 to 40 years.

I implemented the system myself, gaining information from Microsoft documentation. At the school, I handled implementation without a reseller.

I have been at this job only a year. I was in the public school district. In the public school district, we had it for three years, and the return on investment was not requiring as many people to monitor and track intrusions. It reduced the need for hands-on monitoring and intrusion tracking, minimizing personnel requirements. We were not watching firewall logs and traffic the way we used to all day long. There has been about a 20% decrease in people required.

I just now started looking at it. Our CIO and CFO have brought us into the fold to show us what we are spending. From a pricing standpoint, with all the services that we get, we are okay. I do not see a problem with the pricing structure. We are getting our money's worth.

Microsoft Entra ID deserves a ten out of ten rating.

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.

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

I have demo tenants where I test lots of features, such as creating test accounts and managing permissions.

Many organizations are shifting to a zero-trust model where nothing is trusted by default, and we explicitly add permissions as needed. Entra has some of those metrics, like risky sign-on. You can set up conditional access policies to ensure users can't access it from unknown locations. 

I can look at the logs to see how often my users are flagged as risky and fine-tune my policies to balance usability and security. The biggest implementation barrier with many test accounts is ensuring passwords aren't shared. Using MFA has also helped us ensure the test account is mapped to a single person. 

A lot of these features from Entra ID were implemented in our tenants. The biggest issue we've seen is that these passwords are leaked because someone shared them in a group when they were not supposed to. I think a lot of the policies that Entra has introduced lately around condition access for access management have helped us mitigate that.

I like how Entra allows you to upload a CSV file with user details for bulk user creation. This is useful for automation. Entra has made it easy to manage identity and access by integrating with all Microsoft services. Everything is managed in a single place, eliminating the need for another application.

It was super easy to understand how the basic functions work. The documentation on learn.Microsoft.com was sufficient to get most tasks done. 

The device-bound IDs in Microsoft Authenticator help us fight phishing, which is traditionally made possible by individual passwords. With passkeys, we eliminated the need for passwords to be stored and remembered. These test accounts aren't used daily, so people write the passwords down, and it's insecure. These phishing-resistant ensure we mitigate those risks. 

We've become more aware of token theft and state attacks. For example, if the demo tenant can access our internal resources and code still in development, we ensure that all these user IDs are authenticated. Entra can delegate and control access to apps, helping to close those attack vectors. 

Entra could be improved by enhancing self-service options for end users, such as making password reset options more accessible. This would simplify the user experience for end users.

I have used Entra ID for about a year.

For both the stability and scalability, it's pretty good. I've never had any issues with users trying to log in.

Both the stability and scalability of Microsoft Entra ID are pretty good with no reported login issues.

We have not needed to contact customer service due to sufficient public documentation. This suggests good technical support.

Positive

We used Keycloak for access management and single sign-on and some of the AWS native IAM solutions. Keycloak is open-source, so it's vendor-agnostic and can be integrated with any custom app you build, whereas you run into vendor lock-in with Entra. However, Entra is natively integrated with all Microsoft products, and we've migrated to using an exclusively Microsoft ecosystem. 

The documentation on Microsoft's website was sufficient to understand the setup for basic functions, making the initial setup straightforward.

We did everything in-house without involving any integrator, reseller, or consultant.

Entra is bundled with every new tenant you set up on Azure, so we don't need to pay for extra solutions to manage the fundamental aspects of user management and accounts.

I rate Microsoft Entra ID nine out of 10. It fits my purpose perfectly, and I seldom need to search for alternatives due to its comprehensive functionality.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

We primarily use Microsoft Entra ID in hybrid scenarios where we are undergoing digital transformation. We had on-premises Active Directory that we transitioned to Entra on the cloud, enabling users to authenticate with their regular credentials.

We have a complex scenario with several applications, and we're trying to achieve SSO for most of our applications, but some of our legacy applications don't support SSO or modern protocols. Our core applications are ready for SSO or to be federated. We've centralized our authentication process using Entra ID, so we can collect sign-offs from the users and filter using conditional access. 

Our identity solutions are mature because we started with FIDO and YubiKeys. It's easier to implement now that we aren't sticking to a device. We aren't increasing our costs to add another asset to the user that we can use on their mobile phone. Technologically, FIDO is excellent, but Microsoft Authenticator is even better. 

Entra ID is integrated with Sentinel. It's ingesting logs from Entra ID, and we have playbooks to mitigate any identity-based risks. We could figure out our authentication flows and detect any misbehavior through integration with Sentinel. Entra ID enriches this process with logs, sign-outs, and remediation information.

We have an internal strategy for leveraging all Microsoft solutions. We avoid bringing in third-party applications to solve some gaps and try to address everything exclusively within Microsoft. Microsoft is the only vendor that can deliver the full lifecycle in one solution.

We are always working with cutting-edge solutions. For instance, we were struggling with Zoho support for SSO, and now we no longer use this domain. We are selling commercial vehicles, so it matters how reliable and trustworthy we are. No one wants to buy something from a company that doesn't protect customer data. We need something that makes an attacker's life harder. 

With Entra, we can provide a safe environment where we don't need to rely on users to secure their environment. We have plenty of security pillars to protect the company internally and externally. Using a zero-trust strategy, we reduced the differences between users, enabling safe navigation and asset use.

In my opinion, Microsoft sometimes releases products too early without providing enough documentation. Our team works with innovative solutions like verified ID, identity governance ,and lifecycle workflow.

When we started with lifecycle workflows, we had only two integrated worklows. Still, we couldn't find much of the information we needed in the documentation about our use case or how to leverage IDs in our proof of concept. 

Entra constantly releases new features, and other companies are releasing products at the same pace as Microsoft, so it's trickier. We started implementing a product called Next Identity that provides modern authentication methods like FIDO and push notifications. In 2023, we couldn't see how verified ID would help us. Now, verified ID has been integrated, and we can realize it, but at the time, we couldn't.

I have been using Entra ID for almost three years.

The solution is robust and stable, though we acknowledge the risk of potential backend outages from Microsoft, which could affect us significantly.

The solution is really scalable. We manage more than 100,000 devices and 300,000 user objects in Entra, indicating a high level of scalability in our environment.

We have always worked with Microsoft. Initially, we operated using on-premises Active Directory until we moved to Microsoft 365 and started using Azure AD at that time. Our parent company requires us to use Microsoft, but Entra is a core solution. 

The initial setup involved syncing our identities to the cloud and building a robust tenant as part of the company group. We adhere to a strict blueprint requiring the use of Microsoft solutions.

We have an internal hub in Lisbon focused on innovation and implementing solutions like Verified ID and identity governance.

I rate Microsoft Entra ID nine out of 10. 

Hybrid Cloud

Microsoft Azure

I am currently using Microsoft Entra ID and have been working as a user and administrator for nearly two years. It serves as an ID management tool which used to be called Active Directory on on-prem servers. With the transition to the cloud, it became Microsoft Entra ID.

The features I find most useful in Microsoft Entra ID include sign-in logs, device management, and application registration. With the Entra ID dashboard, I can access logs easily without needing to remote into servers. This tool is excellent for integrating third-party applications through application registration, making it easy to configure for single sign-on seamlessly. It supports conditional access across various Microsoft applications, enhancing secure access.

There should be guidance on features, especially security features, in Entra ID and whether they are sufficient on their own. The solution could become expensive when paying extra for enhanced security features, so Microsoft needs to offer better clarity on this matter.

I have been using Microsoft Entra ID for almost two years.

In terms of stability, I can say it is ninety-nine percent stable. The remaining one percent instability is mainly due to the hybrid setup.

I have no complaints regarding scalability for Microsoft Entra ID.

The customer service and support are excellent. I experienced a fast resolution within half an hour for an issue by the first line engineer on a Severity A case, which shows support is very good even with minimal licenses.

Neutral

I am not aware of the solutions used prior to Microsoft Entra ID, as I have been involved for the last two years only.

Since it is a SaaS model, everything is set up, and I just need to configure it according to my needs.

We did not require any integrator, reseller, or consultant for the deployment as we managed it internally, using Microsoft's extensive documentation for guidance.

Microsoft Entra ID is reportedly quite expensive for each user regarding security features. The renewal cost is particularly high according to the teams managing purchases.

I have only been involved with Microsoft Entra ID and am aware of another identity management solution called NetIQ, but Microsoft Entra ID is prioritized.

Users should prepare technically before using Microsoft Entra ID, especially in understanding ID management and security integration with applications. Microsoft Entra ID is regarded as the best ID management suite for integrating applications using SAML 2.0 for single sign-on. My total rating for Microsoft Entra ID is nine out of 10.

Hybrid Cloud

Other