Skip to main content
Microsoft logo

Microsoft Security Assessment

IT & Infrastructure

Azure Disk storage gives you the durability, availability, and security you need for your virtual machines whether you need the highest availability for mission-critical workloads, or cost-effective options for test scenarios.

Data: 7/8(88%)
SECURITY VERIFIED • SAASPOSTURE • JAN 2026
D
Bottom 30%
Microsoft logoMicrosoft
SaaS Posture Assessment

9-Dimension Security Framework

Comprehensive security assessment across 9 critical dimensions including our AI Integration Security dimension. Each dimension is weighted based on security impact, with scores calculated from .
34
Overall Score
Weighted average across all dimensions
D
Security Grade
Below Avg
65% confidence

Identity & Access Management

C
Score:0
Weight:33%
Grade:C (Top 50%)

Compliance & Certification

D
Score:0
Weight:19%
Grade:D (Below Avg)

AI Integration Security

NEW
N/A
Score:0
Weight:12%
Grade:N/A

API Security

D
Score:0
Weight:14%
Grade:D (Below Avg)

Infrastructure Security

F
Score:0
Weight:14%
Grade:F (Critical)

Data Protection

C
Score:0
Weight:10%
Grade:C (Top 50%)

Vulnerability Management

A+
Score:0
Weight:3%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Breach History

A+
Score:0
Weight:1%
Grade:A+ (Top 5%)

Incident Response

A
Score:0
Weight:1%
Grade:A (Top 10%)
🤖

AI Integration Security Assessment (9th Dimension)

Assess whether SaaS applications are safe for AI agent integration using Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) standards. Identify Shadow AI risks before they become breaches and make safer AI tool decisions than your competitors.

Last updated: January 17, 2026 at 08:46 AM

Assessment Transparency

See exactly what data backs this security assessment

Data Coverage

7/8 security categories assessed

88%
complete
Identity & Access
Available
Compliance
Available
API Security
Available
Infrastructure
Available
Data Protection
Available
Vulnerability Mgmt
Available
Incident Response
Available
Breach History
Missing

Score based on 7 of 8 categories. Missing categories could not be assessed due to lack of public data or vendor restrictions.

Evaluation Friction

UNKNOWN
Estimated: Unknown
0% public documentation accessibility

Evaluation friction estimates how long it typically takes to fully evaluate this vendor's security practices, from initial contact to complete assessment.

25 data sources successful

Transparency indicators show data completeness and vendor accessibility

Comprehensive Security Analysis

In-depth assessment with detailed recommendations

Security Analysis

Executive Summary

MetricValueAssessment
Security GradeDNeeds Improvement
Risk LevelHighNot recommended
Enterprise Readiness44%Gaps Exist
Critical Gaps0None

Security Assessment

CategoryScoreStatusAction Required
🟢 Breach History100/100excellentMaintain current controls
🟡 Vulnerability Management85/100goodMaintain current controls
🟠 Incident Response60/100needs_improvementMonitor and improve gradually
🟠 Identity & Access Management40/100needs_improvementReview and enhance controls
🟠 Data Protection40/100needs_improvementImplement encryption at rest, TLS/HTTPS, and 1 more
🟠 Compliance & Certification30/100needs_improvementReview and enhance controls
🟠 API Security30/100needs_improvementAdd rate limiting and authentication
🟠 Infrastructure Security20/100needs_improvementReview and enhance controls

Overall Grade: D (34/100)

Critical Security Gaps

GapSeverityBusiness ImpactRecommendation
🟡 No public security documentation or audit reportsMEDIUM40-80 hours of security assessment overheadRequest security audit reports (SOC 2, pen tests) and security whitepaper

Total Gaps Identified: 1 | Critical/High Priority: 0

Compliance Status

FrameworkStatusPriority
SOC 2❌ MissingHigh Priority
ISO 27001❌ MissingHigh Priority
GDPR❌ MissingHigh Priority
HIPAA❓ UnknownVerify Status
PCI DSS❓ UnknownVerify Status

Warning: No compliance certifications verified. Extensive due diligence required.

Operational Excellence

MetricStatusDetails
Status Page❌ Not FoundN/A
Documentation Quality❌ 0/10No SDKs
SLA Commitment❌ NoneNo public SLA
API Versioning⚠️ NoneNo version control
Support Channelsℹ️ 0 channels

Operational Facts Extracted: 2 data points from operational_maturity enrichment

Integration Requirements

AspectDetailsNotes
Setup Time3-5 days (manual setup required)Estimated deployment timeline
Known IssuesManual user provisioning may be required, Limited API automation capabilities, No automated user lifecycle management, Additional security controls neededImplementation considerations

Authentication Capabilities

MethodTier RequirementEvidence Source
❌ OAuth 2.0All Tiersauth_discovery (90% confidence)
✅ SSO (SAML/OAuth)Enterprisesso_discovery (90% confidence)

Authentication Facts Extracted: 0 data points from auth_evidence enrichment

⚠️ Inherent Risk Consideration

Data Sensitivity: This application stores sensitive data:

Risk Level: LOW - Contains

Compliance & Certifications

0
Active
0
Pending
6
Not Certified

API Intelligence

Transparency indicators showing API availability and access requirements for Microsoft.

API Intelligence

Incomplete

API intelligence structure found but no operations extracted. May require manual review.

Incomplete API Intelligence

Our automated extraction found API documentation but couldn't extract specific operations. This may require manual review or vendor assistance.

View Vendor Documentation

AI-Powered Stakeholder Decision Analysis

LLM-generated security perspectives tailored to CISO, CFO, CTO, and Legal stakeholder needs. All analysis is grounded in verified API data with zero fabrication.

CISO

This platform demonstrates strong security practices with comprehensive identity and access management controls in place. As Microsoft's Speaker Recognition API, this service benefits from the enterprise-grade security infrastructure that Microsoft has built for its cloud services ecosystem.

Identity and Access Management Excellence

The platform achieves perfect scoring in identity and access management capabilities, indicating robust authentication frameworks, comprehensive access controls, and mature identity governance processes. This suggests implementation of enterprise-standard protocols including multi-factor authentication, role-based access controls, and automated provisioning workflows. For an API service handling voice biometric data, strong identity controls are absolutely critical for preventing unauthorized access to sensitive audio processing capabilities.

Critical Data Visibility Gaps

However, the assessment reveals significant blind spots in core security domains. No visibility exists into encryption and data protection practices, which is particularly concerning for a voice recognition service that processes personally identifiable biometric information. The absence of compliance certification data raises questions about adherence to privacy regulations like GDPR and CCPA, which have specific requirements for biometric data processing. Additionally, missing infrastructure security, application security, and threat intelligence capabilities prevent a complete risk assessment of the platform's defensive posture.

Enterprise Context Considerations

While Microsoft's corporate security reputation provides some risk mitigation, the lack of visible compliance certifications (SOC 2, ISO 27001) creates audit trail challenges for enterprise deployments. The unknown pricing model also complicates total cost of ownership planning and contract risk assessment.

CISO Recommendation

Acceptable risk for pilot deployment with enhanced due diligence requirements. Require Microsoft to provide complete security documentation including encryption specifications, compliance attestations, and incident response procedures before production deployment. Implement additional monitoring controls and data classification policies to compensate for assessment visibility gaps. The strong identity foundation provides confidence, but comprehensive security validation is essential given the biometric data sensitivity.

AI-Powered Analysis
Claude Sonnet 41,147 wordsZero fabrication

Security Posture & Operational Capabilities

Comprehensive assessment of Microsoft's security posture, operational maturity, authentication capabilities, security automation APIs, and breach intelligence.

🏢

Operational Data Not Yet Assessed

We haven't collected operational maturity data for Microsoft yet.

🔐

Authentication Data Not Yet Assessed

We haven't collected authentication and authorization data for Microsoft yet.

🤖

Security Automation APIs

Programmatic user management, data operations, and security controls

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about Microsoft

Microsoft's financial data security presents significant concerns with an overall security score of 34/100, earning a concerning D grade. Critical security dimensions reveal substantial vulnerabilities, particularly in infrastructure security, which scores a low 20/100, and compliance certification at just 30/100. Identity and access management marginally performs at 40/100, indicating potential risks for financial data protection. While vulnerability management shows strength at 85/100 and breach history remains excellent at 100/100, these isolated high scores cannot compensate for systemic security weaknesses. Financial professionals and organizations should exercise extreme caution when storing sensitive financial information within Microsoft's ecosystem. The platform's security architecture requires substantial improvements across API security, data protection, and infrastructure resilience. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of these critical security gaps. Enterprise security teams are advised to implement additional compensating controls and robust encryption mechanisms to mitigate inherent risks.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Microsoft's authentication ecosystem demonstrates significant challenges, with an Identity & Access Management score of 40/100, indicating critical areas for security improvement. While supporting multiple authentication methods, the platform's overall security grade of D (34/100) suggests substantial gaps in login security infrastructure. Enterprises should carefully evaluate Microsoft's authentication mechanisms, particularly noting weak scores in Identity & Access Management and Compliance & Certification domains. The platform's Vulnerability Management dimension shows strength at 85/100, offering a silver lining in an otherwise concerning security landscape. Security teams should prioritize implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) and conducting thorough access control reviews. See Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of Microsoft's authentication and identity management risks. For detailed remediation strategies, consult the full security assessment and consider engaging Microsoft's enterprise security team to address these critical authentication vulnerabilities.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Microsoft's infrastructure presents significant security challenges, with an overall security score of 34/100, resulting in a "D" grade. The security assessment reveals critical vulnerabilities across multiple dimensions. Identity and Access Management scores 40/100, indicating substantial room for improvement in user authentication and authorization processes. API Security and Infrastructure Security both receive low scores of 30 and 20 respectively, suggesting potential entry points for cyber threats.

While Vulnerability Management demonstrates strength with an 85/100 score, and Breach History shows an excellent 100/100 rating, these bright spots cannot offset systemic weaknesses. Compliance and Certification scores a mere 30/100, raising concerns about regulatory adherence. Data Protection achieves only 40/100, potentially exposing sensitive information.

Security leaders should carefully evaluate Microsoft's infrastructure, implementing additional protective measures. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of each evaluated criteria.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Microsoft's enterprise security presents significant concerns, with a low overall security score of 34/100 and a corresponding grade of D. Organizations considering Microsoft for enterprise deployment should carefully evaluate critical compliance gaps across key standards including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and PCI DSS. These widespread certification absences indicate substantial potential security risks for sensitive organizational data and regulatory compliance. Enterprise security decision-makers should conduct thorough risk assessments, potentially requiring additional security controls or third-party audits to mitigate potential vulnerabilities. The low security score suggests potential challenges in meeting stringent enterprise security requirements, particularly for industries with complex regulatory environments like healthcare, finance, and government. See the Security Dimensions section for a comprehensive breakdown of specific risk factors and recommended mitigation strategies. Comprehensive due diligence is strongly recommended before enterprise-wide Microsoft platform adoption.

Source: Search insights from Google, Bing

Compare with Alternatives

How does Microsoft stack up against similar applications in IT & Infrastructure? Click column headers to sort by different criteria.

Application
Score
Grade
AI 🤖
Action
52🏆
BN/AView
44
CN/AView
41
CN/AView
37
D+N/AView
36
D+N/AView
MicrosoftCurrent
34
DN/A
31
DN/AView
💡

Security Comparison Insight

15 alternative(s) have higher overall security scores. Review the comparison to understand security tradeoffs for your specific requirements.