10 votes3 comments · Azure Information Protection » Applications and File Types · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Please be aware that there is often a reason why a file is not able to be classified without protection. Basic file types us txt (and therefore CSV and other renamed txt files) do not support custom metadata. The only way to do this is to do unnatural things like use alternate file streams and require a client endpoint, neither of which is a great option.
But we would love to understand what file types you would like supported beyond what is today, our goal is to work with the application vendor and provide native integrations.
An error occurred while saving the commentDuane Gran commented
At present it seems that you can't label all types of documents. I'm not sure what the technical restriction may be but there are plenty of document types that can be sensitive that aren't authored in MS applications.
My reason for wanting this functionality, in addition to protecting against egress of certain documents, is to use AIP for retention policy labelling. I'm interested in scripting something to label documents older than a certain age as marked for removal and then support an additional "exception" retention flag that people could use if a document should be removed. In this way via scripts I could find all documents slated for removal that haven't been explicitly marked by our user community to be retained longer.
Perhaps I'm trying to use AIP in a way outside of its intended venue but it would be nice to have one labeling system for both sensitivity and retention policy.
174 votes15 comments · Azure Information Protection » Windows Integration · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →Under Review · AdminEnrique Saggese (Principal Program Manager, Information Protection CxE, Microsoft - Azure - Msip) responded
We released a few months ago the integration of AIP with WIP which addresses this scenario to some extent (by allowing the users to see an overlay icon for documents with specific labels) but we are investigating adding more granularity to this capability, so we are reactivating it in order to get more feedback.