Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

There were a couple of use cases I've dealt with. In one scenario, I had to import on-premise users to my Azure AD. We had a couple of mobile applications where we were using the authentication feature from Azure AD. 

We needed to create a new infrastructure for one of the clients and everything had to be taken care of by the Azure infrastructure. In that case, we used Azure AD for all kinds of user management tasks, as well as authentication.

We simply use Azure AD and everything is taken care of instantly. You need not worry about user management. Everything is taken care of by Azure AD itself. You just simply have it in your application and everything is done out-of-the-box.

Azure AD, overall, is quite good for securing your applications as well as the infrastructure. 

I like that they provide most of the authentication flows out-of-the-box, so you do not need to do anything specific to tackle any authentication flows.

Azure AD has affected our organization's security positively. In terms of the application, it's quite good. There was very minimal leakage. We had a single instance and that user was already compromised. Otherwise, it's quite good.

Azure AD provides two types of features. One is Azure AD Excel and is already B2C. Out of both versions, Azure B2C requires some improvement, in terms of user management and role management, et cetera.

I've used the solution for approximately one to one-and-a-half years.

The stability is quite high - if we are talking about Azure AD and not Azure AD B2C.

The scalability capabilities are quite high. We have somewhere around 5 million users, and it was doing quite well even with that number.

I haven't interacted much with technical support, however, during one of the instances where we required some help, which was not related to the Azure AD, they provided us quite good support.

I have tried one competitor, IdentityServer. It is basically an open-source solution. In terms of comparison, Azure AD is quite solid. When it comes to IdentityServer, you need to manage everything on your own. You need to host everything and you have to take care of the whole application life cycle with that identity cycle. In the case of Azure AD it's an almost managed service.

I found the initial setup process quite straightforward.

In terms of implementation, Microsoft provides very good documentation of how to kick off Azure AD. You just need to follow those instructions and it will be done in a couple of clicks.

They do have a tier of service that is free that supports many people. You can also purchase a license and costs can be reduced on the Microsoft side.

My previous organization has a very close relationship with Microsoft.

I would advise users to go with Azure AD, if possible, and to try to avoid the B2C version at the moment, as quite a few good features are already in the preview. Once those preview features are done, you can go with the B2C version. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Containerization is mainly what I've been dealing with lately. I've been trying to provide solutions with Active Directory and cloud resolutions so that Edge services can communicate properly to the main data centers.

We use Active Directory for global authentication.

The advantage of Azure Active Directory is that it's a cloud environment, so just about anybody can get to it. As long as you can get to the cloud, you can get to the internet. You can authenticate offshore resources to client services, which is what my present company does. That kind of authentication is much more advantageous as an Active Directory solution.

If you want to replicate a website at the frontend in Azure, it's very easy to do it globally.

As soon as you authenticate to the web storage, where you hit the frontend, then you can redirect to whatever resources locally that are duplicated.

It doesn't function the same way as Active Directory inside of a physical infrastructure. Even VMware Active Directory doesn't function the same way in the cloud. Cloud is all flat. That's one of the disadvantages. You can authenticate through Active Directory through Federated Services, but it's mainly like an IIS web frontend and bulk storage.

It's all record based.

I've dealt with Azure Active Directory for about three years.

It is a cloud solution.

Stability-wise, it is much more secure and stable than AWS. Oddly enough, a lot of people think that AWS has many more regions and sites. It's actually not true. Azure has far more. There's a good reason why the government jumped right on Azure and uses it for their internal resources.

It is very scalable.

Microsoft technical support is very responsive. If you buy the enterprise package, then when you call them, they will jump right in and help you out.

When one of our clients had a ransomware outbreak, Microsoft helped them solve quite a lot and helped them get up and running.

The initial setup is very straightforward. Microsoft is very good about helping you get things set up, and they're very responsive.

We evaluated AWS AD. AWS support will provide bits and pieces, but Microsoft will jump in and help out. Of course, you have to pay the price for the corporate support, but who wouldn't want that, especially when your whole environment is a Microsoft environment.

It works really well, and I would rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten. You need good training, and Microsoft will provide that for free as part of their package.

When a customer is trying to synchronize user information from their on-premises environment to the cloud, they might be encountering a series of errors or they may not be able to achieve what they are trying to achieve. They will raise a ticket so that somebody can help resolve the problem or clarify the situation and explain what the workflow should be like. That's where I often come in.

My support scope is focused on the synchronization aspect of Azure Active Directory. My specialty covers scenarios where customers have information in their on-premises environment and they want to synchronize their Active Directory information into the cloud with Azure Active Directory.

In addition to getting on calls and assisting customers to resolve issues, we also try to help educate customers on how to achieve the best results with Microsoft products.

In terms of the security posture of my customers, in the area of my specialization—the synchronization of information from on-premises to the cloud—there's an aspect we call TLS. There was a version of TLS that was not really secure, but Microsoft has now pushed and made sure that everything running in its platform uses a higher version, TLS 1.2. That means that when you are doing directory synchronization, your machine and your product need to be TLS 1.2 enabled. Microsoft is always working on enforcing the use of the most secure means to carry out whatever workloads customers are running. While my day-to-day job does not involve an emphasis on security, the areas that do involve security elements are emphasized to make things work effectively.

It also helps when you're troubleshooting. If you have an issue, it's easier for a user to look at it and say, "Okay, this is the problem," and to work on it.

An aspect of Azure's synchronization technology is called the provisioning service. It's the technology that takes user information from Azure AD into third-party applications. If a company has hundreds of users that already exist in the cloud, and it now wants to enable those same users to be present in third-party applications that their business uses, like Atlassian or GoToMeeting, the provisioning technology can assist in achieving that.

Over the years, the performance of this particular technology has greatly improved. I have seen its evolution and growth. Customers see much more robust performance from that technology and it gives them an easy way to set up their environments. The product has been designed quite well and customer feedback has also been taken into consideration. You can even see the progress of the process: how the user is being created and sent over to the third-party application.

Recently, Microsoft has developed lightweight synchronization software, the Cloud Provisioning Agent, to do the job of the preceding, heavier version called AD Connect. You can do a lot more with AD Connect, but it can take a lot of expertise to manage and maintain it. As a result, customers were raising a lot of tickets. So Microsoft developed the lightweight version. However, there are still a lot of features that the Cloud Provisioning Agent lacks. I would like to see it upgraded. 

The Cloud Provisioning Agent cannot provision a lot of the information that AD Connect does. For starters, the lightweight version cannot synchronize device information. If you have computers on-premises, the information about them will not be synchronized by the Cloud Provisioning Agent. In addition, if you have a user on the cloud and he changes his password, that information should be written back to the on-premises instance. But that workflow cannot be done with the lightweight agent. It can only be done with the more robust version.

I believe the Cloud Provisioning Agent will be upgraded eventually, it's just a matter of time.

I've been using the Azure Active Directory platform for a little over three years. I started supporting the product in October of 2018.

Our company is a Microsoft partner. When Microsoft customers raise tickets, most of these tickets get routed to partners like us. I follow up on and assist customers when they have issues that relate to my area of expertise.

Azure AD is solid because of the way the product is designed and because the people who support it are very good.

Microsoft is a very big organization. Whenever they put products on the market, they take things like scalability into consideration. They make sure the life cycle of the product matches the demands and the usage of customers. This product should have a long life in the market.

Microsoft technical support is great. Fantastic. Microsoft is looking to push the capabilities of its products, to enable customers to achieve more.

In general, there has been improvement in the way the technology can be used by end-users. Their feedback has been taken into consideration and that has helped a great deal.

Azure AD has features that have been developed purely for the security of users. It has things like Conditional Access policies and MFA. But the nature of the support that I provide in Azure AD doesn't focus on security. While Azure AD gives a company a holistic way to manage user profiles, I don't usually work on security aspects. But I do know that, to a large extent, the solution is built using the latest security.

The provisioning service I support has authentication methods. There has been a push by Microsoft to move customers away from certain authentication mechanisms that are not very strong in terms of security, and to make sure that secure standards are being enforced. I have looked at integrations set up by customers where they have only done the basic minimum in terms of security. Microsoft had to push those customers towards a much more secure setup. So customers are getting better security.

Overall, the effect of the product on my customers' experience has been good. I generally come into the picture when customers are having an issue. Most customers I've interacted with don't understand some information or why the product is designed the way it is. When I explain that it has to be this way so that they can do what they need to do, the customer feedback comes in at about an eight out of 10.

My primary use case with Azure Active Directory is configuring applications, for example Edge, on premises and doing synchronizations with ADFS in a hybrid environment.

I have used it in a lot of application integrations. I set authentication for the hybrid and cloud applications for the services that we acquire.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its authentication security. That is Azure Active Directory's purpose - making cloud services' security and integration easier.

In terms of what could be improved, I would say its interface is not very flexible, as opposed to AWS.

The services are very clear, but the user admin interface needs to be better. That's all.

I have been using Azure Active Directory for more than five years.

In terms of stability, sometimes the more applications you integrate, the more it becomes a little bit unstable. The synchronization engine is key because that's what 365on-premises is for. The main thing that Azure supports is Microsoft native 365 and the other services that come with it.

It is scalable. It is just that Microsoft likes complex licensing. They should make it more  straightforward.

We just have the admins using it, that's about 20 people.

Microsoft tech support is not the best, but they're okay.

The initial setup is not that complex. Maybe I'm the wrong person to ask, though, because I am already an old AD person and I understand it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would not rate Azure Active Directory as a bad product, I would rate it as an 8.

The primary use case of the solution is for application security and user access management.

Azure Active Directory has improved our organization because it is one of the key components and is being used by almost most companies for identifying and access management on the cloud or on-premise infrastructure.

The solution has a variety of tools. Two of the most valuable features are the ability to create users and to replicate the user account from on-premise to the cloud. 

The solution could be improved when it comes to monitoring and logging as these are the most critical areas in case something was to go wrong.

Additionally, the available zones should be in all regions, such as in AWS, they have higher availability in all regions.

I have been using Azure Active Directory for approximately ten years. 

I find the stability of the solution to be very good. The solution has improved a lot in this area.

The solution is very scalable and is easy to scale.

The technical support is great. 

I have previously used Amazon Load Balancer and AWS. 

The initial setup of the solution is very easy.  

I rate Azure Active Directory a ten.

We are using it for central management, MDM, SSO, MFA, applying policies.

In terms of the features that I have found most valuable, it is cloud based so it is always updated, that part you don't have to take care of. It is public cloud. It is actually AD as a service, so it's a kind of an infrastructure. It is more infrastructure as a service.

We had some issues with the migration of users from the local user accounts to Azure AD. It was more like a local issue and had nothing to do with the Azure AD itself. It works fine for SSO, the Single Sign On. We were not able to do the integration very easily with ADP, so that was a challenge, but later on it was resolved. We had to do a lot of things to have that on the configuration. Some systems do not integrate very well with Azure AD. We thought of going for Okta, but later on we were able to achieve it, but not the way we wanted. It was not as easy as we thought it would be, the integration was not very seamless.

Additionally, it would be great if they added support for more applications in terms of integration for SSO. That's the only thing that I find missing for Azure AD.

We have been using Azure Active Directory for the last six months. We didn't do any migration from on-premise Active Directory to Azure AD on the cloud. What we did when we were setting up the computers was to join users to Azure AD and apply some conditional policies and everything works fine. We don't have any issues. The only thing we face are some problems with some computers because they were using it locally and we had a lot of data. So when we did the migration to Azure AD, we also had to move all the user settings data, the complete user profile, to the Azure AD account, as well. That was a challenge, but I was able to use ProfWiz to move data between user profile.

There are not any bugs or glitches that I can recall. So far everything is working well.

Scalability is one of the reasons we selected Azure Active Directory. It scales very well.

For now there are almost a hundred users using it, but we are adding more.

We contacted support only one time and it was not related to SSO. We had some questions about their subscription and it was good.

When I was working with another company, we were using on-premise Azure Active Directory. We didn't want to invest in the infrastructure to maintain it, to get the license, so it was not very cost effective for us. We had a meeting with the management and saw that Azure AD would be very cost effective, scalable, and more secure, especially in terms of SSO and MFA, which were some of our requirements. We didn't want Active Directory on premise. It was not easy to do the migration.

The initial setup is not very difficult, especially if you start using it straight away. But if you do the migration, I think that might be a challenge. Fortunately, we started directly from Azure AD, we didn't have to do any migration from Azure AD On-premise to the cloud. It was pretty straightforward and easy. We didn't face any difficulties.

It depends on their requirements and what they are trying to achieve. One shoe does not fit all feet, so that's why it might be different from company to company. For us, it met all our requirements. It was very scalable, which is huge, and just always available. You don't have to be very worried about maintaining your own hardware, your own infrastructure, updating the servers from time to time or caring about securing your on-premise infrastructure. Azure AD is a good solution. I am satisfied with it so far and everything works great.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Azure Active Directory a nine.

We're using Azure Active Directory for MFA.

It is very usable and easy to use.

It is easy to manage. I can manage systems with policies and automate our systems. Any professional system can be easily integrated with Azure Active Directory. It is widely used with Windows versions. 

Four years ago, we had an issue with Azure AD. We wanted to reverse sync from Azure AD to on-prem Active Directory, but we couldn't achieve this. Azure AD could connect only in one way, for example, from your site to Azure. If you needed to do the reverse and connect from Azure to on-prem, there was no way to achieve it. We asked Microsoft, and they told us that they don't support it.

Their support should be faster and more knowledgeable and customer-friendly.

I have been using this solution for maybe four years.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. I don't know about the number of users that we have currently, but at the time I managed its synchronization, there were maybe 800 users. 

We're not satisfied with their support. We couldn't get support from Microsoft directly, and we made an agreement with a company. We weren't satisfied with their support. They were very slow and not friendly. They couldn't solve our problems because our program was very complex.

I didn't use any other solution. I only use Active Directory and Azure AD.

I installed hybrid Exchange. It was very easy for us. Its installation took a very short time. There was a connector system on Exchange, and we just had to set up the connection. It was very easy.

I installed it myself.  

Its maintenance is very cheap and easy. We have only two engineers to manage Azure AD and Azure Exchange.

We have an agreement with Microsoft, and my company pays yearly.

It is a very good product. I plan to keep using it because it is very easy to manage.

If you use an application in Azure and you want single sign-on for Azure products, you should prefer using Azure AD. You should synchronize your on-premise Active Directory to Azure AD. We synchronized Active Directory with Azure AD for single sign-on. For example, if a worker wants to sign in on your computer with the same user ID and password, he or she can connect to Azure services. Azure AD provides support for this.

I would rate Azure Active Directory a nine out of 10. 

I am a cloud engineer, and I do a lot of administrative work that involves creating new infrastructure for our applications. Whenever I create infrastructure, I have to install it on our Active Directory and then set it up. This is how it was that I started working with Azure Active Directory.

Once the infrastructure is set up, I usually proceed to create user groups and user IDs inside Active Directory. After they are created, I set up and configure them based on the requirements of the organization, including the access required for different groups and users.

We deal with a lot of health information that we have to keep confidential, so having the Azure cloud security policies in place, such that nothing is exposed to the outside world, is helpful for us.

The security and infrastructure management features are the most valuable ones for us.

It offers multifactor authentication for setting up development pipelines.

Better deployment management and visibility functionality would be helpful. There is a lot of room for improvement in our infrastructure, and in particular, when we create something, we have to visit a lot of websites. This makes life more difficult for us.

When we deploy new infrastructure, it begins with a lengthy approval process. For example, as an administrator, I may receive an infrastructure request from one of our developers. The developer might need access to our front-end, where all of the servers are deployed. The problem is that we don't know exactly what has been deployed within our servers, so better visibility would be helpful.

It's a closed infrastructure, and every developer gets an individualized container. We don't know exactly which features have been provided to them and it's a roundabout process to log back into Active Directory and see exactly what permissions have been assigned. It requires returning to a specific feature and looking at the specific user.

I have been working with Azure Active Directory for just over three and a half years.

This is a highly reliable solution and we plan to continue using it.

Right now, we have 5,000 users that are deployed on Azure Active Directory. Every internal user account that's been created has some sort of multifactor authentication attached to it.

Right now, there isn't a plan to increase our usage. I think we have reached our maximum capacity and if we have to add on something else, then we have to use another tenant or figure out a different way to do it.

We have a team of 15 people who deal with tickets related to this solution.

We constantly have the chance to engage with Microsoft regarding Azure Active Directory. They provide full-time support, so for any issues that we face, we just create a ticket. When we have issues, we quickly get someone from the Azure support team to help us out.

Prior to using Azure Active Directory, we had our own Active Directory. Once we started migrating our applications to Azure, we began moving away from our traditional implementation.

The initial deployment process takes a couple of days for us, although exactly how long depends upon the type of deployment. If you have new deployments then I suggest creating an automated script that will kick it off because this will save time. If on the other hand, there is something that is already deployed and it needs to be redeployed, it doesn't take longer than a couple of hours.

It only takes one person to deploy. It is done on a ticket basis, as requested by people like our developers.

This product provides added value to the company.

In summary, this is a good product and it has been helpful for us, but without doing the proper research, I wouldn't recommend starting with Azure Active Directory. Migrating all of your user accounts and then your resources from different domains to an Azure Active Directory is a huge task. It means that you have set up to create everything from scratch, so without doing proper research, you may run into problems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.