In all cloud models – IaaS, PaaS, SaaS, user is always responsible for data. Microsoft is responsible for service, but data is something that client should take care of. Microsoft says “Microsoft 365 Backup helps your organization recover from data corruption events like ransomware attacks or accidental deletions”. That is exactly the point… Backup is a part of disaster recovery and business continuity concepts and should always be taken seriously. So let us go deeper in Microsoft’s “Microsoft 365 Backup ” offering.
Usually I do not retell what is already documented and explained by Microsoft itself or by other Microsoft 365 MVPs and gurus. What I do is I go beyond and share some insights from researches and real-world practices or at least highlight what seemed to me interesting or important.
SharePoint backup
What to backup
At the step 1 “Choose selection method” of the SharePoint backup policy creation, we have a choice: “How do you want to select sites to back up?” and our options are:
Upload a list of sites in a CSV file
Using filters
Select sites individually
First option – “Upload a list of sites in a CSV file” – you’d create a list of up to 50,000 sites as CSV file (example provided, but it’s just one column with sites Urls no header) and upload it.
Third option – “Select sites individually” is also straightforward . Good news – you can search (filter) sites by name or url.
Second option – “Using filters” seemed like the most promising, but a) you can only use “Site name or URL contains” and “Site last modified”, and b) Only existing sites that match these filters will be added to this policy. If new sites are created that match these filters, they won’t be added to the policy automatically. You can add or remove sites by setting the policy scope again later.
Thinking that first and third options are static by definition, that means the policy is not actually a policy, it’s just a master that produces a static SharePoint backup configuration.
Worth to highlight:
Literally we can modify only what to include, we cannot modify “Retention”, i.e. how exactly sites are backed up. Microsoft says: “Backups are initially kept for 14 days. After 14 days, the latest backup from each week will be kept for one year after it was created.”
Some sites within the scope might already be included in other policies. If so, they will not be added to this policy again.
Each policy is a static backup configuration that includes static list of sites selected during the policy setup.
SharePoint backup limitations:
CSV list cannot have more than 50,000 sites (but you can have more than one policy)
Sometimes a restored SharePoint site looks like it’s connected to a Microsoft 365 group (and Teams), but it’s actually a standalone site. So just restoring a deleted SharePoint site that was previously connected to team is not enough, there is some more work to be done. This article explains (from SharePoint admin standpoint) how that could happen and how to fix the broken SharePoint site to restore it’s lost connection to group and teams (the right way).
Scenario
A Teams-connected SharePoint site was deleted by one of the team owners during a cleanup. They didn’t see any useful content in Teams channels or files, so they deleted the team—along with the connected SharePoint site.
However, some team members had been using the SharePoint site directly (not through Teams). Two months later, they tried to access the site and received a 404 error. They contacted IT support to ask what happened and whether the data could be restored.
IT support found that the team was deleted by someone who had already left the company. Fortunately, the SharePoint site was still in the recycle bin (retained for 90 days), so it could be restored. But the Microsoft 365 group and the team (with chat messages, etc.) were already permanently deleted (retention is only 30 days).
After restoring the site, it appeared to be group-connected, but the group no longer existed.
Symptoms of a Broken Connection
Site permissions show ownership by a group, but clicking the group name does nothing.
Searching for the group in Microsoft 365 returns no results.
PowerShell shows a RelatedGroupId, but that group ID doesn’t exist in Entra ID.
The site behaves like it’s group-connected but lacks full functionality.
Normal Teams-Connected Site vs. Standalone Site
Let us test it from scratch. I will create a new team called “Test-Broken-Team-Site”.
Here is how the normal teams-connected SharePoint site looks like. When you hover your mouse over the site name, a pop-up window appears showing team details.
When you go to the site permissions – you can see that the site is owned by group “SiteName Owners”:
If you click the group name, another pop-up window appears with more information, including group members:
You can see that IsTeamsConnected property is true and GroupId and RelatedGroupId are specified and the site owner is the same group Id with “_o” suffix.
Compare this with the same request against a standalone site:
IsTeamsConnected property is false, Group id is “00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000” and the site owner is the real user id.
Deleting the team and the site
I also posted some messages in the general team channel and created some test documents. Now let me delete the team. Any team owner can do this via:
What users will see after the team deletion:
“404 FILE NOT FOUND” error upon any attempt to go to the SharePoint site via browser:
The deleted group under “https://myaccount.microsoft.com/groups/deleted-groups”:
From the admin standpoint the deleted resource looks like.
The group appears under “Deleted Groups” in Entra ID and Microsoft 365 Admin Center (note that the group can be restored within 30 days):
The site appears under “Deleted Sites” in SharePoint Admin Center (retained for 93 days and marked as group-connected with a team), and the site is marked as Microsoft 365 group connected and with a team:
Restoring SharePoint site
After 30 days the group is deleted permanently, including teams stuff, but SharePoint site is still retained. So we can go ahead and restore SharePoint site from the SharePoint admin center. It warns us that “We couldn’t find the Microsoft 365 group connected to this site. Restoring the site will not restore the group.”:
Ok, for the restored site – let us look at the site memberships. You’ll see the site is still owned by the Microsoft 365 group—but the group no longer exists. 🙁
That is the reason that users (team members) will not get access to the site automatically once the SharePoint site is restored. But let us get the SharePoint site PowerShell object:
GroupId is zeroes, which is good, IsTeamsConnected if false, which is correct, but the RelatedGroupId is still the same (as if it is a channel site) and the owner is the same.
Note: the site’s status described above is not always lake that. I’m not sure why, but in my practice so far some sites are getting restored with GroupId specified (and running ahead, in such cases this solution does not work).
User experience
(I provided access for myself to this site as admin).
The home page (site root) looks like something in between a Teams-connected and standalone site. There is no Teams icon and no pop-up window when hovering over the site title. But there is a “Conversation” menu we usually have on group-based sites (by the way, it fails if you click on it, because it’s supposed to send you to the group in Outlook… so you’ll get “Sorry, something went wrong” – “Invalid group ID or group alias.”)
Site settings page looks like the group-based site settings page. Compare standalone site settings page:
and broken teams connection site settings page… Specifically, you still do not have the “Users and Permissions” section (as it is supposed to be handled via Teams and group membership).:
And here is one more difference. On a regular standalone site when you are clicking on a gearbox – you can see “Connect to new Microsoft 365 Group” link which would allow user to convert this standalone site to a teams-connected site. Unfortunately, there is no such option on the broken site.
So what should we do? Can we re-connect this site to teams or make it true standalone site? Would this broken site stay as broken forever?
Is there a fix for broken teams connection in SharePoint site
First of all, you can’t change GroupId or RelatedGroupId directly—they’re read-only.
Let us try to change site primary site owner (remember it was a group) and see what has changed:
The only 🙂 problem: it says the site is team-connected, but it’s not.
If you click on a Teams icon near to the site title – it’ll give you “We’re still setting up the Microsoft Team for this group” “Please come back in a few minutes”. This message might last forever…
Ok, we have a m365 group and a group-based site without a team. Can we create a team from an existing group? Yes. Let us try it.
When you create a team – there is a link “More create team options”. It leads us to the list of options and one of them – create a team from group. There will be a list of groups and one of them would be our “New Team/Group for a broken site”. Select it. It say OK, a new team created.
Now let us see what we got.
It seems like it worked! Now we have a consistent full-functioning group-based site connected to team.
At the SharePoint site – teams icon redirects us to a team channel. In the teams app – the team is listed among other teams. Entra Id displays all the services correctly. Teams admin center can see the team and all the settings look good. SharePoint admin center also displays a team correctly. You might want to update “Don’t show team email address in Outlook”.
Standard Channels Confusion
One thing that might confuse users is channels. Long ago when you create a team – a channel named “General” was created by default. Not far ago Microsoft changed creating team experience – now you need to provide a name for channel. As you know – channel is a folder in the default document library. So our “broken” site has a folder “Test-Broken-Team-Site” that used to be a sole channel. When we created a team from an existing group (group with site) – a new default main channel was created named “General”, so under SharePoint we can see two folders, and under teams we can see only “General” channel.
But all our data was under the old folder. Can we fix it? I think of two options.
Option 1 – add a tab to the channel – so we can see the existing folder under the main channel:
Option 2 – moving content of the “old” folder to a “new” folder, then you can delete the old folder and rename channel to the original name.
Private and Shared channels
The other thing that went wrong is private and shared channels. As you know, these channels are created as standalone sites related to team (site object has GroupId as zeroes, but RelatedGroupId would be an Id of the main site’s group id.). These sites are not getting restored automatically when a main site is restored. Moreover, in the SharePoint admin center those site are not visible under deleted sites.
The good news is these sites are visible with PowerShell. And you can restore the site with PowerShell:
The site will be restored, but, again, with broken connection to team. And I’m afraid it cannot be re-connected to a team, so it has to stay broken standalone site (or converted to a new-group-based which is a preferred option and if you like – with a team.
Summary
Quick Step-by-Step Recovery Guide
Restore the site via SharePoint Admin Center
Verify that the site connection is broken Check properties IsTeamsConnected, GroupId, and RelatedGroupId. Ensure group is permanently deleted.
Set yourself as a new primary site collection admin
Connect to a New Microsoft 365 Group via PowerShell “Add-PnPMicrosoft365GroupToSite”
Create a New Team from the Group. In Teams, go to Create Team > More Options > Create from Existing Group. Verify Everything Works.
Handle Folder/Channel Conflicts.
Option 1: Add it as a tab in the new “General” channel.
Option 2: Move content to “General” folder, delete old folder, and rename channel.
Channel sites (private channel, shared channel) are not restored and connected automatically.
In this article I will share what I would recommend to configure on every new Microsoft 365 Tenant.
The Challenge: Why Many Microsoft 365 Tenants Become Unmanageable and Inefficient Over Time
Many organizations adopting Microsoft 365 quickly discover that while the platform offers immense power, its default configuration often leaves crucial features disabled. These “dormant” functionalities, designed to enhance data governance, search capabilities, content management, and user experience, remain untapped. The real problem arises when a tenant matures: as users populate SharePoint sites and OneDrive accounts with vast amounts of information, and as collaboration intensifies, attempts to enable these critical features become incredibly complex, disruptive, and even risky. Retrofitting governance, re-indexing content, or restructuring information architecture on an existing, data-rich tenant can lead to compliance headaches, data inconsistencies, user frustration, and significant administrative overhead. SharePoint administrators frequently struggle with the technical debt accrued from these missed initial configurations, spending countless hours trying to bring order to an environment that could have been optimally set up from day one.
Consider the following.
Ownerless resources
Having an owner for every Microsoft 365 resource should be enforced from day one.
Relatability: It immediately speaks to the pain points experienced by many SharePoint admins (“unmanageable,” “inefficient,” “struggling with it,” “technical debt”).
Highlights the “Why”: It explains why these features are off and why it’s a problem to turn them on later.
Emphasizes Proactivity: It sets the stage for your solution, which is about proactive setup.
Strong Call to Action (Implied): It makes the reader understand that your KBA will provide the solution to avoid these common pitfalls.
SharePoint Site Ownership Policies comes with SharePoint Advanced management or Copilot and is part of Site Lifecycle Management. In a nutshell, it does 1) Identify sites that don’t meet organization’s ownership criteria, 2) send notifications to find new site owners or admins and 3) automatically mark sites in read-only (or just report). Below is my deep dive in this policy.
I will not retell what is already documented by Microsoft, but you can find some gotchas below.
Notification emails start coming in a few minutes after you activate the policy. From email address is SharePoint Online <no-reply@sharepointonline.com> .
Here is how a notification email looks like (in case site has one owner and need another one):
Site Name (title) is mentioned 4 times. There are 3 links in the email (SharePoint logo, site title and “Go to site” button) – all lead you to the root of the site that needs an owner.
The email template is not customizable at the moment (June 2025) and might mislead a little, as it says “Site Name” needs a site owner. but site does have an owner. Policy want an existing single owner to assign as second owner, which is said further in smaller font and not much people are able to force themselves to read. (Update: we expect Microsoft released Site lifecycle management policies v 2 before Sep 2025).
What I really do not like here is that even for group-based sites (e.g. teams) the policy asks to add a “site owner“, though it should be “team owner”. The only difference is if the site is a teams-connected site – there is a subtitle “Connected to Teams”:
I’d also assume that some users will need additional instructions – how to add a second owner to the site. There might be a confusion in terminology – who is the site owner, like “there are plenty people in ‘My Site Owners’ group – why am I asked to add one more?”
In case the site does not have owners and the policy is configured to send messages to site members and/or manager, here is an example of the email notification:
Basically, the difference is it says “Would you like to be a site owner?” vs “Identify an additional site owner to ensure compliance.” and the button says “Become a site owner” vs “Go to site“.
You cannot forward this email to other users (you can, but content will not be the same). Here is the example:
There are other cases an email comes as “This email contains actionable items that aren’t supported by this client. Use a supported client to view the full email.”
TBC:
Sites regulated by policy
Configuring the policy, we can choose site template – e.g. Classic sites, Communication sites, Group connected sites without teams, Team sites without Microsoft 365 group and Teams-connected sites to scope down the policy with the kind of sites the policy will be applied to.
We know, that template site was created with does not actually guarantee the kind of site in it’s current state. E.g. we can convert classic site to a group-based site or we can create site with no team and later create a team for the site.
With that said, Question: what Microsoft means by “Sites regulated by policy” – template site was created with or current site category?
Owners vs Admins
Another moment I’d like to clarify is what Microsoft means by owner and admin, as configuring the policy
Under the “Who should be responsible for each site?” we can specify “Site owners” and/or “Site admins”
Under the “Who should be notified (via email) to assign or claim site responsibility?” we can not only specify “Current site owners” and/or “Current site admins”, but also “Manager of previous site owner and admin” and “Active members”
We know that for group-based sites “Group owners” of the Microsoft 365 group associated with site is actually goes to site collection administrators and nobody is added to SharePoint “site Owners” group by default. At the same time at the SharePoint site you can add users to site collection admins and/or to the default SharePoint “site Owners” group (the one with “Full Control” permissions. Moreover, nothing prevents us to create a SharePoint group “Site Business Owners” with e.g. read-only permissions to the site or e.g. create a SharePoint group “Board Members” with “Full Control” permissions to the site.
So, question: who according to Microsoft’s policy implementation are considered as site owners and site admins? Does it change for different types of sites?
SharePoint Advanced Management includes Inactive Site Policies under Site lifecycle management. Effective content lifecycle management is a key pillar of SharePoint governance. It plays a vital role in optimizing storage, preserving data integrity, and ensuring regulatory compliance. By systematically removing inactive or outdated sites, it also enhances security. Additionally, it supports successful Copilot implementation by ensuring that the information accessed is both accurate and current. So, how exactly this Inactive site policy works and what is the difference between Entra Id groups expiration policy and SharePoint Inactive Site Policy.
SharePoint Inactive Site Policy vs m365 Groups Expiration Policy
The Groups Expiration Policy has been a feature of Azure AD (Entra ID) for quite some time. It is included at no additional cost. This policy automatically notifies group owners about upcoming expirations and provides options to renew or delete the group. Since all self-created Teams teams and Viva Engage communities are backed by SharePoint sites and managed through Microsoft 365 Groups, this policy also plays a significant role in SharePoint governance ensuring that information stored in SharePoint remains current and properly maintained. I have an article Microsoft 365 group expiration policy deep dive.
Inactive Site Policy is a feature of SharePoint Advanced Management (SAM), which is an add-on and require premium SharePoint license. It also Identifies inactive sites, Sends notifications to site owners and can automatically archive or make sites read-only. Sound like very similar to to groups expiration policy.
Key differences
Feature
Groups Expiration Policy
Inactive Site Policy
Where to configure Who can configure
Entra Id Groups Admin
SharePoint Admin center SharePoint Admin
Scope (policy is applied to)
Microsoft 365 Groups (including group-based sites, like teams, yammer)
SharePoint Sites (including both – group-based and non-group-based sites)
Who is notified
Group Owners
Site admin (group owner), site owners (*) TBC
Notifications come from email
msgroupsteam@microsoft.com
no-reply@sharepointonline.com
What if resource is active
group is automatically renewed, no emails sent
policy is not triggered against active sites
Can admin download report (list of inactive groups/sites)
No
Yes
Period of inactivity configuration
Configured in days, should be greater than or equal to 30 days
Options are: 1, 2, 3 or 6 months
Actions available (Options provided) to a resource owner
renew the group delete the group
certify site learn how to delete a site
What happens with resources owner did not take action (or with orphan resources).
Notifications is sent to a specific email address, group is deleted
site is archived or set to read-only or nothing
Inactive site policy user experience
Here is how the email notification looks like:
Note that
The email subject includes “Action required” and site title (name). It always says “… has been inactive for more than a month” even if the policy configured for “6 months”. It shows SharePoint logo, which might mislead “teams-oriented” users. Site title is not clickable, so site admin/owner cannot just click site link but have to navigate to site manually. When user clicks button “Certify site” – a message “The action completed successfully” pops up at the bottom of the email for a few seconds and then disappears. The email itself does not change, so when a user opens the same email again – there is no visual evidences the action was taken.
At the bottom of the email Microsoft mentions tenant name.
The email template is the same for all kinds of policies – it does not matter if the policy action is configured configured as “do nothing”, or to automatically enforce archive site or set it to read-only. I.e. email just says “Select Certify site to confirm if it’s still in use, or consider deleting it if the site is no longer needed.”. Email does not inform users that site will be set to read-only or archived.
Also there is no link where a user can get more info on the subject, but Microsoft says that inactive sites policy email template will be customizable – in the Site lifecycle management policies v2 expected summer 2025.
Admin – Inactive sites report
You can download a csv report of inactive sites generated by policy. Report includes fields: Site name, URL, Template, Connected to Teams, Sensitivity label, Retention Policy, Site lock state, Last activity date (UTC), Site creation date (UTC), Storage used (GB), Number of site owners, Email address of site owners, Number of site admins, Email address of site admins, Action status, Total notifications count, Action taken on (UTC), Duration in Read-Only.
There is no GUI to see the list of inactive sites (you can only download a csv file), but there is a magic button “Get AI insights”.
Get AI insights
Here are insights I have seen so far:
Inactive sites with significant storage usage
Multiple sites owned by the same account
Sites with Multiple Owners
Sites inactive for over a year
Inactive sites policy behavior
Policy sends emails immediately after policy activation. That means if you have thousands of inactive sites you might hit a 10k exchange limit of daily emails sent.
If a user owns multiple inactive sites – he/she will get multiple emails.
You can scope the policy down by site template, sensitivity label and creation source if you want different behavior for different types of sites, e.g. if you want to setup longer period of inactivity for one type of sites and shorter for others… not sure when it makes sense…
Implementing an Inactive sites policy
First of all – It is highly recommended to take care of ownerless sites (find owners) before triggering an Inactive sites policy.
If you have a relatively new tenant – you probably have not much inactive sites, so turning the policy on should not be a problem. The older your tenant is the more inactive sites you have. For older tenants you probably already have a lot of inactive sites – ant that could be a problem. So we’d need to take care of initial policy implementation, and after some time it will just work so we could forget about it.
There is no way to pilot this policy with pre-selected scope of sites or users. You can scope the policy down by site template, sensitivity label and creation source, but you cannot scope the policy down the way only sites or uses you want to be a testers or pilot project members will be the target of the policy.
In small orgs there should be no problems implementing this policy. Still I would start from just getting a report. There is a “How long after the last activity should a site be considered inactive?” configuration, so I’d start from the longest – 6 months, then move to the shortest you need. Medium orgs could get some ideas from recommendations to large orgs below.
In large orgs you might
trigger a spike in number of tickets submitted by users who needs help
hit a maximum sending limit with Exchange Online which is 10,000 email recipients per day
So it would be crucial for enterprises to avoid an initial surge and start from smaller number of recipients, and gradually let the policy work at a full strength. One of the options to achieve that would be
configure the policy for reports only, get inactive sites report
select sites owner and admins in a separate list – then select only unique ones – so every user will get only one email, split this list into small chunks
communicate to site owners (by chunks) – using enterprise-approved “send from” email and enterprise-branded email template saying that the policy is gonna be implemented, you might receive an email (like this one – screenshot), you can trust this email and click buttons. A list of site urls user owns must be included in the email, so user could visit these sites (Optionally) you can instruct users how they can delete sites if site is no longer needed or archive sites if they are not sure if it is still needed or not
If so – it’d
forewarn users so they would know to do and not be surprised and would create less tickets
users might choose to delete or archive sites which would also
users would visit their inactive sites and trigger sites activity, and that should dramatically decrease number of emails sent to users initially, on the day one of policy implementation ideally – if users visit all sites – you’d have no inactive sites, so you’d just turn the policy on with no fear
then you’d wait for a couple of weeks, get new report to ensure that you have much less inactive sites – and you’d just enable the inactive sites policy (starting from the longest period – 6 month of inactivity)
This article is for SharePoint or Microsoft 365 admins focusing on governance and information protection. If you have SharePoint Advanced Management (SAM, aka SharePoint Premium) licensed or you got at least one Copilot for Microsoft 365 license (as having m365 Copilot license automatically enables SharePoint Advanced Management in tenant), then under reports – Data access governance (in SharePoint admin center) – you can not only get Content shared with ‘Everyone except external users’ (EEEU) reports, but also initiate access review. Let us look more closely at this functionality and discuss the pros and cons..
First of all, report does not provide you with all SharePoint content shared with “Everyone except external users”. Report helps you with what was shared with EEEU in the last 28 days. That drastically limits usage of this feature. I.e. you should first get initial report on the all content shared with EEEU, and somehow take care of it by other means (consider How to Find Content Shared with Everyone in SharePoint and Teams), and only then you can use this Microsoft’s content shared with EEEU report and access review.
You can share content with EEEU or directly – by adding EEEU to resource permissions directly or by including EEEU into SharePoint group. So content shared with EEEU reports come in two flavors – “Specific files, folders and lists” and “Site membership”
“Specific files, folders and lists” user experience
When you initiate access review from the “Specific files, folders and lists” type of report – users (site admins/owners) get email notification that says “You have sites with specific files, folders or lists shared with ‘Everyone except external users’. This means everyone in your organization has access to this content. Review the items shared for potential oversharing and manage their access.“
Scrolling down, in the email, site owner can see a list (table) of incompliant sites with the following columns: Site name, privacy, sensitivity, external sharing and “Items shared”. Site name is clickable and sends user to the root of the site.
Below the list of sites there is a button “View shared items” that sends user to the special system page – “https://orgname.sharepoint.com/teams/site01/_layouts/15/siteaccessreview.aspx/<id>” where he/she can see list of SharePoint items shared with EEEU. Columns are: (item) Name, Shared on (date), Shared by (email), Action (manage access). Item name and manage access are clickable.
If an item is a library item – e.g. document or a folder – it is displayed correctly – with icon according to the doc type and doc name. Clicking on the doc name – an actual document opens so you can review it’s content.
If item is a list item – it is displayed incorrectly – no icon, no meaningful info about the item (it is displayed as “”). Clicking on the link – a warning icon and message “Can’t preview this file. Open the file or download it to view in your desktop app”. Buttons “Open” and “Download” are there but not helpful as well.
Clicking on “Manage access” opens almost standard “Manage access” dialogue you can have via “manage access” item context menu, but with no “…” more options at the top right:
which makes this dialogue screen useless, as you can only provide additional access to the item or remove all access. You cannot remove EEEU from access without three dots “More options”.
Manage Access from the Policy:
Regular Manage Access:
“Stop sharing” literally removes all permissions to the item except owners
Under the “Groups” tab – you’d see that the item is shared with “Everyone except external users” but you will not be able to remove just this group from access…
By clicking on a group name – site owner will be able to change this group permissions, but the option “No direct access” is not selectable…
“Site membership” user experience
In the case with a “Site membership” report, text would be slightly different: “You have sites where ‘Everyone except external users’ has been added to the site membership. This means everyone in your organization has access to this site. Review site permissions for potential oversharing and manage access.“, which makes sense.
Right after that, in the email, site owner can see a list of incompliant sites with the following columns: Site name, privacy, sensitivity, external sharing and “Groups with org-wide access”. Site name is clickable and sends user to the root of the site.
Then there is a button “View SharePoint groups” that sends user to the special system page – “https://orgname.sharepoint.com/teams/site01/_layouts/15/siteaccessreview.aspx/<id>” where he/she can see list of SharePoint groups (clickable) with EEEU as members.
By clicking on a group name – admin opens standard SharePoint “People and Group” membership page: /_layouts/15/people.aspx?MembershipGroupId=X, which is nice, because from this screed a site owner can simply remove this group from the access list using Actions-> Remove:
siteaccessreview.aspx page
User can navigate directly to the reviews page: “https://orgname.sharepoint.com/teams/site01/_layouts/15/siteaccessreview.aspx” and if there were reviews initiated by SharePoint admins – and it’ll work – admin will see all access reviews initiated for this site – columns are: Review name, Description, Requested on (date), Status, reviewed by (email) and admin comment. In case no reviews were initiated against tie site – “You have no reviews to take action on” will be displayed. That’s good.
Complete review
On the bottom of the siteaccessreview.aspx page you’ll see “Complete review”
Click on it, add comment (optionally) and confirm:
SharePoint Admin is able to see the status of every site access review stats – pending or completed – in GUI and in the .CSV report saved.
Admin experience: GUI only
Once you got report – you can initiate access review. All must be done in GUI, click-click-click selecting sites… But what if you have thousands? There is no PowerShell cmdlets or API for this functionality, which really limits your ability to implement it gracefully, especially in large Microsoft 365 environments and automate it.
Download detailed report
Report “Specific files/folders/lists…” does not include files, folders, list – i.e. it does not include what exactly is shared with EEEU. Report includes site id, url, name, template, is it teams-connected, sensitivity (?), privacy, external sharing, primary admin name and email, and number of items (?) shared with EEEU.
So technically you can communicate to site owners, but you’d need to rely on them to figure out what content is shared with everyone.
Email template
When you initiate Site access review – an e-mail notification is send to site owners. This e-mail is not customizable at all. The only admin can do is to add a message (for every “initiate Site access review” action). But the email looks really similar to the site lifecycle policies email notification, and Microsoft is working on version 2 of the policies with a customizable email template.
This email comes from “SharePoint Online <no-reply@sharepointonline>” address (not customizable), so comes “from outside of your organization” and can be considered as scam.
Microsoft’s logos and other graphics are blocked by default and e-mail includes a button “View shared items” – enough red flags for users to consider it as spam. Keep this in mind.
The good news is e-mail contains site name – so site owner can recognize it at act accordingly.
Usage scenarios
Small tenants
In small Microsoft 365 environments – yes, this functionality probably can be used “as is” (and should be used). Especially for new tenants – I’d recommend enable reports and use this feature on a regular basis.
Medium-size tenants
I’m not sure. It depends on your governance rules and company culture.
Enterprises would not like it
I’m very pessimistic if this functionality is useful in large environments. Reasons are:
In enterprises usually all the communication must follow approved templates, branding and so on. Currently SAM DAG does not support custom templates (though there are rumors Microsoft is working on it)
User experience of “reviewing shares with everyone”… and “managing permissions” designed very poorly… You SharePoint users need clearness and simplicity. Existing UX makes everything wort. In enterprise you do not want to deal with thousands of tickets from site owners who could not figure it out
In enterprises you’d think of automation. Currently all is just GUI.
if your tenant is not new – you already have a lot of overshared content. This functionality covers only new shares, so you still need to come up with your custom solution (idk – PowerShell scripts?) to deal with oversharing. But once you designed your custom solution – why don’t you continue to use it?
It says “Unable to create” and “We were unable to create this agent due to an error. Try again.” or “Unable to update” and “We were unable to update this agent due to an error. Try again.”
Cause: In my case the cause was my license was assigned a few hours before, so it seems like it takes some time for Microsoft to populate updates. In the other case I troubleshooted it turned out user did not have a license assigned (license was removed), but “Create an agent” button was available.
Solution: Ensure you have a license for Microsoft 365 copilot assigned and (ideally) wait 24 hours. Microsoft: “If you recently purchased a license or started a free trial, it may take up to 24 hours for the license to take effect.”
