382 votes32 comments · Azure Active Directory » Multi-factor Authentication · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
For requiring additional factors with Windows Hello for Business, please see – https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/identity-protection/hello-for-business/feature-multifactor-unlock
For why PIN is better than a password, please see https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/identity-protection/hello-for-business/hello-why-pin-is-better-than-password
For Authenticator app sign in to Azure AD, please see https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/authentication/howto-authentication-phone-sign-in
As always, other feedback is welcome
Thanks for the feedback! We are interested in collecting feedback on this request – please vote for it if this is something you like to see.
We’re also interested in learning more what people want to use the SFTP/FTPS for and which protocol they prefer. Please feel free to leave us a comment letting us know more detail!
Program Manager, Azure Files
Any news on this?
We need SFTP for in / out transfers with multiple 3rd parties.
This remains on our long-term backlog as something we want to offer
We are evaluating what we can do to address this feedback and would very much appreciate your continued votes and suggestions on it.
One alternative to mounting the share on-premises over port 445 is Azure File Sync, which enables you to create a cache of an Azure file share on an on-premises Windows Server. Azure File Sync only sends data over the Azure Files HTTPS (using the File REST APIs). You can learn more about Azure File Sync here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/storage/files/storage-sync-files-planning
Please don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any additional questions!
Program Manager, Azure Files
At this point our recommendation is to move resources into a new Resource Group with the new name.
I've just hit this problem too. Microsoft should be able to provide automatic groups of Windows Update and Azure regions for easy inclusion in NSG rulesets.
We have been considering all of the risks and investigating the steps required to ensure we implement this feature with high positive impact and low to no negative impact.
After this investigation we have decided we will enable Pay-As-You-Go customers the option to configure a spending limit on a Pay-As-You-Go subscription, with appropriate safeguards and measures to prevent both service abuse and production service failure.
We have not yet finished determining the details of what this feature will look like, nor do we have a timeline for release, but we have heard your voices and have added this feature to our backlog.
Thanks for your continued feedback,
-Adam (Azure Billing Team)
Come on Microsoft, the ability to delegate a capped spend to departments or projects is pretty fundamental to controlling costs & making azure viable in a range of scenarios. You may have bottomless money bags but most of us don't.
It's clear from the thread that there is customer demand for this feature, so why has there been no response for almost 2 years?
This remains on our long-term backlog as something we want to offer.
Any news on this one? The lack of per-subnet DNS settings is a big limitation. I note that https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/best-practices-network-security suggests putting DMZ & internal subnets in the same VNet, but doesn't cover this point.
We're about to deploy a DMZ in Azure & it looks like a separate VNet is the only way to get DMZ hosts using a DMZ DNS server.