Siemserva reads your Entra ID configuration the way an attacker and an auditor both would, then helps you remediate what actually matters.
Microsoft Entra ID is the identity control plane for Microsoft 365: users, groups, app registrations, sign-in, and the policies that govern access. Conditional Access sits at its center, the engine that decides who gets in, from where, on what device, and with what assurance. Entra surfaces the settings and the logs. Independently grading your Conditional Access design for coverage gaps and bypasses, ranking identity risk, and mapping it all to compliance is where Siemserva goes deep.
Siemserva runs standalone for full Microsoft 365 posture across configurations, logs, and CVEs, or right alongside Microsoft Entra ID.
| What Microsoft Entra ID does well | Where teams want more |
|---|---|
| The identity control plane for Microsoft 365: users, groups, app registrations, and sign-in. | Entra surfaces settings and logs; it does not grade your Conditional Access design for coverage gaps and bypass paths. |
| Conditional Access, multi-factor authentication, and authentication strengths. | Finding users who sign in outside any policy takes manual log analysis. |
| Privileged Identity Management and Identity Protection on premium licensing. | Mapping identity posture to MCSB, CISA SCuBA, and EIDSCA baselines is manual. |
| Rich sign-in, audit, and provisioning logs. | Standing privilege and risky policy exclusions are easy to miss. |
| Capability | Microsoft Entra ID | Siemserva |
|---|---|---|
| Conditional Access policy inventory | Yes | Inventory plus gap analysis |
| CA coverage gaps and bypasses | Manual | Detected and ranked |
| MFA and authentication strength review | Partial | Across users, apps, and admins |
| PIM standing versus eligible privilege | Surfaced | Analyzed and ranked |
| Identity compliance mapping | Manual | MCSB, SCuBA, EIDSCA, ZTA |
| Risky users and sign-ins triage | Premium signal | Ranked with evidence and fix |
Comparison reflects general capabilities at time of writing and is provided for research. Vendor features change; verify current specifics with each vendor.
Every finding, and the full graph behind it, is yours. Through the Senserva SDK and the Claude MCP you get complete access to the underlying Siemserva data, so you can query it, extend it, and build your own checks, reports, automation, and integrations on top. Nothing is locked away in a vendor cloud, and the data stays with you.
Siemserva does not just record pass or fail. It models your target environment, the identities, devices, applications, policies, and how they relate, as a queryable graph. That makes the data a foundation for new work: custom analysis, threat hunting, and automation, not a static checklist you read once and set aside.
Conditional Access is where Microsoft 365 enforces Zero Trust in practice. Each policy weighs signals, who the user is, the application, the device state, the location, the client app, and sign-in risk, and then applies grant controls (require MFA, require a compliant or hybrid-joined device, require an authentication strength) and session controls (sign-in frequency, persistent browser, app-enforced restrictions). Used well, it is a precise, layered gate. The challenge is that the policy set grows organically, and its real-world effect is the sum of many overlapping rules, which is hard to reason about by reading them one at a time.
Most Conditional Access weakness is not a single bad setting, it is coverage. A policy in report-only that never got enabled. A cloud app or a group of users that no policy actually targets. Broad exclusions added to fix a one-off and never removed. Guests and external identities outside the MFA baseline. Break-glass accounts that, by necessity, sit outside controls and therefore need their own compensating monitoring. Seeing coverage as a matrix of users by applications by conditions, and surfacing the cells with no protection, is the only reliable way to find these gaps.
Requiring MFA is table stakes; the current questions are how strong and how universal. Authentication strengths let policies demand phishing-resistant methods, FIDO2 security keys, Windows Hello for Business, or passkeys, for the scenarios that warrant them, while legacy authentication protocols that cannot enforce MFA (older Exchange and mail clients) should be blocked outright. Gaps show up as admins or service accounts exempt from MFA, weak fallback methods that undercut a strong policy, and legacy auth left open on even one application.
Entra ID Identity Protection scores sign-in risk (impossible travel, anonymous IPs, token anomalies, leaked credentials) and user risk, and Conditional Access can respond automatically, step up to MFA on medium or high sign-in risk, force a secure password change on high user risk. The value is in the response being wired up and tuned, not just the signal existing. Reviewing confirmed-compromised and at-risk accounts, and confirming that risk policies actually act on them, closes the loop between detection and enforcement.
Standing administrative access is one of the largest avoidable risks in a tenant. Privileged Identity Management (PIM) makes high-privilege roles eligible rather than active, so admins elevate just in time, with MFA, approval, and justification, and the grant expires. The findings that matter are permanent Global Administrators that should be eligible, roles activated without strong controls, too many people holding sensitive roles, and custom roles carrying more permission than their use requires.
Identity is the most heavily benchmarked part of Microsoft 365. The Microsoft Cloud Security Benchmark (MCSB), CISA's SCuBA baselines, the Entra ID Security Configuration Assessment (EIDSCA), and the Microsoft Zero Trust Assessment all prescribe concrete identity controls, MFA everywhere, legacy auth disabled, privileged access managed, risk policies enforced. Mapping each finding to the specific control it satisfies or fails turns a security review into audit-ready evidence against the frameworks you actually answer to.
No. Entra ID is your identity platform; Siemserva independently audits its configuration, especially the Conditional Access design, ranks the risks, and maps them to compliance.
It evaluates coverage across users, applications, and conditions, checks MFA enforcement and authentication strengths, legacy authentication blocking, risk-based and session controls, and reviews exclusions, then flags coverage gaps and bypass paths. It is read-only and never changes your policies.
Yes. By analyzing sign-in activity against your Conditional Access policies, it highlights access that falls outside policy coverage so you can close the gap.
No. Siemserva reads identity configuration through Microsoft's APIs with least-privilege, read-only access. There are no agents and nothing is modified in your tenant.
No agents and no cloud service. Siemserva runs on Windows or Mac and reads your tenant through Microsoft's APIs. You can explore the whole product first on the free Advanced Microsoft 365 Security Simulator, with no access to your environment at all.
Siemserva is built for AI from the ground up and also runs fully without it. Turn it on for AI-enhanced reports and to run the product from Claude, or the AI of your choice, via our market-leading MCP. You bring your own model, so there is no AI markup, and the rich data model keeps calls and cost low.
"Senserva cut my tenant hardening effort by 80%. Setup takes minutes, results are immediate. If you work with Microsoft 365, Intune, or Entra ID, this is the tool you didn't know you were missing."
Timo Becirovic, Municipal IT Consulting, ITEBO GmbHSee exactly what Siemserva finds on a rich, realistic simulated tenant, no access to your environment needed. Launch it right after install, or ask for a free key. Teams report cutting Microsoft 365 and Azure hardening time by up to 80 percent.
Launch the Simulator, freeWe use Google Analytics cookies to understand site traffic. No findings, scan data, or tenant data are sent. Privacy policy.