Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Implementing Microsoft Defender for Cloud to enable cloud security posture management, workload protection across VMs, containers, databases, and storage, configure security recommendations, and set up adaptive security controls with automated remediation.
.claude/skills/implementing-azure-defender-for-cloud/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Do not use for non-Azure workload protection exclusively (use AWS Security Hub or GCP SCC), for application-level security testing (use Azure DevOps DAST/SAST), or for identity-specific protection (use Microsoft Defender for Identity).
Enable the appropriate Defender plans for each workload type requiring protection.
bash# Enable Defender for Cloud CSPM (foundational posture management) az security pricing create --name CloudPosture --tier standard # Enable Defender for Servers az security pricing create --name VirtualMachines --tier standard \ --subplan P2 # Enable Defender for Containers az security pricing create --name Containers --tier standard # Enable Defender for Storage az security pricing create --name StorageAccounts --tier standard \ --subplan PerStorageAccount # Enable Defender for SQL az security pricing create --name SqlServers --tier standard # Enable Defender for Key Vault az security pricing create --name KeyVaults --tier standard # Enable Defender for App Service az security pricing create --name AppServices --tier standard # Verify all enabled plans az security pricing list \ --query "[].{Plan:name, Tier:pricingTier, SubPlan:subPlan}" -o table
Enable automatic deployment of monitoring agents to VMs and containers.
bash# Enable auto-provisioning of Log Analytics agent az security auto-provisioning-setting update \ --name default --auto-provision on # Configure Log Analytics workspace for data collection az security workspace-setting create \ --name default \ --target-workspace "/subscriptions/SUB_ID/resourceGroups/RG/providers/Microsoft.OperationalInsights/workspaces/SecurityWorkspace" # Enable Defender for Containers auto-provisioning components az security setting update \ --name Sentinel \ --setting-kind DataExportSettings # Verify auto-provisioning status az security auto-provisioning-setting list -o table
Retrieve security recommendations and prioritize remediation based on secure score impact.
bash# Get the current secure score az security secure-score list \ --query "[].{Name:displayName, Current:current, Max:max, Percentage:percentage}" -o table # List all active security recommendations az security assessment list \ --query "[?status.code=='Unhealthy'].{Name:displayName, Severity:metadata.severity, Category:metadata.category, ResourceCount:status.cause}" \ -o table # Get recommendations sorted by severity az security assessment list \ --query "[?status.code=='Unhealthy'] | sort_by(@, &metadata.severity)" \ -o table # Get detailed recommendation with remediation steps az security assessment show \ --name ASSESSMENT_ID \ --query "{Name:displayName, Description:metadata.description, Severity:metadata.severity, Remediation:metadata.remediationDescription}" # List recommendations by control az security secure-score-controls list \ --query "[].{Control:displayName, CurrentScore:current, MaxScore:max, NotHealthy:notHealthyResourceCount}" \ -o table
Enable compliance standards and monitor adherence across subscriptions.
bash# List available regulatory compliance standards az security regulatory-compliance-standards list \ --query "[].{Standard:name, State:state}" -o table # Enable specific compliance standards az security regulatory-compliance-standards update \ --name "CIS-Azure-2.0" --state "Enabled" az security regulatory-compliance-standards update \ --name "PCI-DSS-4.0" --state "Enabled" az security regulatory-compliance-standards update \ --name "NIST-SP-800-53-R5" --state "Enabled" # Get compliance status for a specific standard az security regulatory-compliance-controls list \ --standard-name "CIS-Azure-2.0" \ --query "[].{Control:id, Description:displayName, State:state, PassedResources:passedResources, FailedResources:failedResources}" \ -o table # Get failing assessments for a control az security regulatory-compliance-assessments list \ --standard-name "CIS-Azure-2.0" \ --control-name "2.1" \ --query "[?state=='Failed'].{Assessment:id, State:state}" -o table
Configure alert notifications and automated response workflows.
bash# Create security contact for alert notifications az security contact create \ --name "SecurityTeam" \ --email "security-ops@company.com" \ --phone "+1-555-0199" \ --alert-notifications on \ --alerts-to-admins on # List active security alerts az security alert list \ --query "[?status=='Active'].{Name:alertDisplayName, Severity:severity, Time:timeGeneratedUtc, Status:status}" \ -o table # Create workflow automation for high-severity alerts (Logic App trigger) az security automation create \ --name "high-severity-alert-response" \ --resource-group "security-rg" \ --scopes "[{\"description\":\"Full subscription\",\"scopePath\":\"/subscriptions/SUB_ID\"}]" \ --sources "[{ \"eventSource\":\"Alerts\", \"ruleSets\":[{ \"rules\":[{ \"propertyJPath\":\"Severity\", \"propertyType\":\"String\", \"expectedValue\":\"High\", \"operator\":\"Equals\" }] }] }]" \ --actions "[{ \"logicAppResourceId\":\"/subscriptions/SUB_ID/resourceGroups/security-rg/providers/Microsoft.Logic/workflows/alert-response\", \"actionType\":\"LogicApp\" }]"
Configure advanced workload protection features for runtime security.
bash# Enable Just-In-Time VM access az security jit-policy create \ --resource-group "production-rg" \ --name "jit-policy" \ --virtual-machines "[{ \"id\":\"/subscriptions/SUB_ID/resourceGroups/production-rg/providers/Microsoft.Compute/virtualMachines/web-server-01\", \"ports\":[ {\"number\":22,\"protocol\":\"TCP\",\"allowedSourceAddressPrefix\":\"*\",\"maxRequestAccessDuration\":\"PT3H\"}, {\"number\":3389,\"protocol\":\"TCP\",\"allowedSourceAddressPrefix\":\"*\",\"maxRequestAccessDuration\":\"PT3H\"} ] }]" # Request JIT access when needed az security jit-policy initiate \ --resource-group "production-rg" \ --name "jit-policy" \ --virtual-machines "[{ \"id\":\"VM_ID\", \"ports\":[{\"number\":22,\"endTimeUtc\":\"2026-02-23T15:00:00Z\",\"allowedSourceAddressPrefix\":\"10.0.1.50\"}] }]" # Review adaptive application control recommendations az security adaptive-application-controls list \ --query "[].{Group:displayName, Recommendation:recommendationAction, VMCount:vmRecommendations|length(@)}" \ -o table
| Term | Definition | |------|------------| | Microsoft Defender for Cloud | Azure-native security platform providing CSPM and cloud workload protection (CWP) across Azure, hybrid, and multi-cloud environments | | Secure Score | Numerical measure of an organization's security posture based on the percentage of security recommendations that have been implemented | | Security Recommendation | Actionable guidance from Defender for Cloud to improve security posture, prioritized by severity and secure score impact | | Defender Plan | Workload-specific protection tier (Servers, Containers, SQL, Storage, etc.) that enables advanced threat detection for specific resource types | | Just-In-Time VM Access | Feature that reduces attack surface by blocking management ports (SSH/RDP) by default and granting time-limited access on request | | Adaptive Application Controls | Machine-learning-based allowlisting that recommends which applications should be allowed to run on VMs |
Context: An enterprise with 20 Azure subscriptions needs to enable Defender for Cloud with server, container, and SQL protection while establishing a compliance baseline against CIS Azure 2.0.
Approach:
Pitfalls: Defender for Servers P2 costs per server per hour. For environments with many VMs, costs can escalate quickly. Use Defender for Servers P1 for development subscriptions and P2 only for production. Auto-provisioning of agents may conflict with existing agent deployments managed by SCCM or other tools.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Deployment Report
=================================================
Organization: Acme Corp
Subscriptions: 20 (12 production, 8 non-production)
Deployment Date: 2026-02-23
DEFENDER PLANS ENABLED:
CloudPosture (CSPM): 20 / 20 subscriptions
Servers P2: 12 / 20 (production only)
Containers: 12 / 20 (production only)
SQL: 12 / 20 (production only)
Storage: 20 / 20 all subscriptions
Key Vault: 20 / 20 all subscriptions
SECURE SCORE:
Current: 62% (baseline)
Target: 80% within 90 days
COMPLIANCE STATUS (CIS Azure 2.0):
Compliant controls: 78 / 142 (55%)
Non-compliant controls: 52 / 142
Not applicable: 12 / 142
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Critical: 8 recommendations affecting 34 resources
High: 24 recommendations affecting 89 resources
Medium: 56 recommendations affecting 234 resources
Low: 34 recommendations affecting 112 resources
SECURITY ALERTS (Last 7 Days):
High severity: 3
Medium severity: 12
Low severity: 28| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-03 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted, and 22 counted toward the lift figure. The other 1 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +43 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.