MikeN

My feedback

  1. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Storage » General  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  2. 108 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    8 comments  ·  Support Feedback  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN commented  · 

    I agree. Support doesn't even listen when you add a message saying that the ticket can be closed, they try to follow up anyway. It seems Microsoft likes to waste money by having their employees needlessly respond to tickets that can be closed.

    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  3. 39 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  4. 594 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    28 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
    MikeN commented  · 

    I would suggest that the vNET integration needs to support inbound traffic. The current vNET integration is outbound only. A couple of reasons for this is we would like to require that developers connect to a VPN in order to connect to FTP to satisfy a MFA requirement. IP restrictions do not work as there is no way to restrict FTP access to particular IP addresses while allowing HTTP access from the internet. Additionally we'd like to inspect HTTP traffic by routing it through a network security virtual appliance. Ideally the app service should be assigned an internal IP address on your vNET so you can do both of those things as if they were running on a virtual machine within the vNET.

  5. 2,947 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    121 comments  ·  Storage » Files  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hi folks,

    We have shipped a public preview of integration with AAD DS: https://azure.microsoft.com/blog/azure-active-directory-integration-for-smb-access-now-in-public-preview/

    What we have in preview is a first step along a much larger roadmap for integration with AAD/AD for authentication and authorization. As the blog post says, this initial preview is really about Windows cloud VM access to the Azure file share with an AAD identity. Future refreshes to this feature will add non-Windows (Linux, macOS, etc) support, and the ability to mount the Azure file shares on-premises with your AAD identity. You can learn more about this in our Ignite session as well (at around 22:00): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMzh2M66E9o

    We’ll keep you updated on our progress. In the meantime, don’t hesitate to continue posting feedback on this feature below.

    Thanks,

    Will Gries
    Program Manager, Azure Files

    MikeN commented  · 

    Is there any rough estimate for a roadmap goal of when you'll be able to mount a drive from user endpoints running Windows and MacOS that are not Virtual Machines running in Azure? This is a requirement to seriously consider using Azure Files to replace on-premises SMB/CIFS shares.

    MikeN supported this idea  · 
    MikeN commented  · 

    I agree, also security logs for this should be able to sent over to Azure Log Analytics. This prevents organizations that have strict security requirements from using Azure Files. Many organizations have a security requirement to maintain access logs to all files to have an audit trail of what user accounts are accessing what data.

  6. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Storage  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  7. 9 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Azure Active Directory » Conditional Access  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
    MikeN commented  · 

    This is now available in Preview for Windows computers, it requires a registry edit on the client side to enable it. Still no support for controlling the OneDrive Sync client via conditoinal access for MacOS. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/onedrive/enable-conditional-access

  8. 813 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    MikeN commented  · 

    It would be good for the Azure AD team to provide an official update on this. Some users are stating that "Authentication Administrator" works, others say it does not.

    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  9. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Thanks for the valid suggestion. Your feedback is now open for the user community to upvote which allows us to effectively prioritize your request against our existing feature list and also gives us insight into the potential impact of implementing the suggested feature

    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  10. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Azure Active Directory » Conditional Access  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Thanks for the valid suggestion. Your feedback is now open for the user community to up-vote & comment on. This allows us to effectively prioritize your request against our existing feature backlog and also gives us insight into the potential impact of implementing the suggested feature.

    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  11. 215 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    MikeN commented  · 

    I just wanted to provide feedback that this is very much a needed feature.
    It seems like a pretty bad engineering oversight when the service was first designed.

    Best practices 101 says that you should never assign permissions to individual users, you assign permissions to groups and add users to the groups.

    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  12. 3,066 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  13. 3 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Azure Monitor-Log Analytics  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Thanks for the valid suggestion. Your feedback is now open for the user community to upvote & comment on. This allows us to effectively prioritize your request against our existing feature backlog and also gives us insight into the potential impact of implementing the suggested feature.

    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  14. 29 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Networking » Other  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  15. 671 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    95 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  16. 480 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    18 comments  ·  Networking » Load Balancing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. 17 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Networking » Virtual WAN  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  18. 55 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    There is planned work to address this scenario. We don’t feel that backup codes provide a good security option as they’re often misplaced. Also, it’s hard to have users print them out and have them when they’re needed. Instead, we are looking at a time-limited passcode that could be generated either by the user (just in time when it’s needed) or by an admin (for example a helpdesk agent). The organization admin would have control over when a user could generate these codes. The code can be used for a limited time, then it will no longer be valid.

    Note – for areas with limited cellphone connectivity (or roaming charges), the code generated in the authenticator app will allow MFA login. The time-limited passcode is meant to stand in if the user temporarily forgot/lost their phone.

    Richard

    MikeN supported this idea  · 
  19. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    MikeN shared this idea  · 
  20. 208 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    under review  ·  34 comments  ·  Azure Active Directory » Domain Services  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    MikeN supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base