Join our Newsletter — 33% off our NHI Course
Home› Glossary› Governance, Ownership & Risk› Directory.ReadWrite.All
Governance, Ownership & Risk

Directory.ReadWrite.All

← Back to Glossary
By NHI Mgmt Group Updated October 28, 2026 Domain: Governance, Ownership & Risk

Directory.ReadWrite.All is an application permission that allows an app to read and modify directory data through Microsoft Graph or a similar directory API. It can cover users, groups, and other directory objects, so access should be tightly governed, consented, and reviewed as a privileged application entitlement.

What Directory.ReadWrite.All Actually Grants

Directory.ReadWrite.All is a broad application permission, so the core issue is not simple read access but tenant-wide directory modification authority. In practice, it can let an app enumerate and change directory objects that underpin access, collaboration, and administration.

Because the permission applies at the application layer, the main security question is whether the app truly needs directory-wide authority or can be redesigned around a narrower permission set. The larger the scope of directory objects, the more careful the approval and review process should be.

Why This Permission Is So Sensitive

This permission is sensitive because directory data is a control plane for identity and access. If abused, it can be used to change users, groups, service principals, app role assignments, or related settings that affect who can get in and what they can do.

That makes it materially different from ordinary data access. A compromised app with this entitlement can become a pathway to privilege escalation, persistence, or broad administrative disruption rather than just data exposure.

NHIMG’s how to find high-privilege Microsoft Graph application permissions is useful here because this permission belongs in the same class of high-impact Graph entitlements that deserve active review and tiering.

How Organisations Should Evaluate Exposure

Exposure review starts with inventory. Teams should know which enterprise applications, service principals, and automation jobs hold this permission, then determine whether those apps are internet-facing, externally callable, or integrated into critical workflows.

The next question is consent provenance. If the permission was granted through admin consent, inherited through a platform integration, or added long ago and forgotten, the organisation should treat that as a review trigger. Vendor documentation and Microsoft Graph permission references should be used to confirm exactly what the app can do before any change is made.

Review should also consider whether the app’s actual behaviour matches the entitlement. A low-function automation task with directory-wide write access is a common sign of overpermissioned design rather than legitimate need.

Containment, Monitoring, and Cleanup

When the permission cannot be removed immediately, the safest response is to reduce the blast radius around the application itself. That usually means limiting who can administer the app, constraining where it can run, and enforcing strong secret or certificate hygiene around the credentials it uses.

Monitoring should focus on directory mutations that should be rare, such as sudden changes to groups, service principals, app registrations, or user properties. If suspicious activity is detected, review the app’s recent sign-ins, consent changes, token use, and any new role or ownership assignments tied to it.

After remediation, organisations should verify that no persistence was established through newly created credentials, delegated ownership, or backdoor directory objects. For a permission this powerful, post-change review matters almost as much as the permission removal itself.

Risk and Threat Considerations

Directory.ReadWrite.All is attractive to attackers because it can turn one compromised application into a tenant-level modification path. The danger is not only data theft, but also the ability to alter directory state in ways that support persistence, privilege escalation, or follow-on access.

Failure mechanism: If an app credential, token, or deployment pipeline is compromised, the attacker may use the permission to create or modify directory objects, add privileged assignments, or weaken identity controls without needing a user’s interactive session.

Impact: The result can be broad identity compromise, altered access paths, and difficult-to-detect administrative tampering across the directory.

Standards & Framework Alignment

This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.

OWASP Non-Human Identity Top 10 addresses the attack and risk surface, while NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 sets the governance and control requirements practitioners need to meet.

FrameworkControl / ReferenceRelevance
NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5AC-6 — Least PrivilegeDirectory-wide write access should be minimized to only what the app needs.
IA-5 — Authenticator ManagementCompromise of app secrets or tokens turns this permission into a powerful abuse path.
AU-6 — Audit Record Review, Analysis, and ReportingDirectory mutations and consent changes need review because they can indicate misuse of this permission.
Recommendation — Limit the application to the narrowest directory permissions required for its function. Manage application credentials tightly and rotate or revoke them when abuse is suspected. Review directory and consent audit events for unexpected modifications tied to the app.
OWASP Non-Human Identity Top 10NHI-05 — Overprivileged NHIApplication permissions with excessive directory authority are a direct overprivilege risk.
Recommendation — Reduce app permissions to the minimum viable directory scope.

Practitioner Guidance

Why practitioners should care: Treat this permission as a privileged application entitlement, not as a routine integration setting. Its approval should require a clear business case, explicit ownership, and periodic review against actual app behaviour.

What to watch for: Pay close attention to apps with this permission that are rarely used, externally managed, or able to act without human oversight. Those are the cases most likely to become orphaned, overtrusted, or abused.

Practitioner takeaway: If the app does not truly need directory-wide write capability, remove the permission and replace it with the narrowest viable alternative.

Free weekly newsletter

Subscribe to the NHI & AI Identity Journal

The latest on NHI and Agentic AI security – articles, research, breaches, news and events every week.

Bonus 33% off our NHI Course when you subscribe.

NHIMG Editorial Note
Reviewed and updated by the NHIMG editorial team on October 28, 2026.
NHI Mgmt Group — the #1 independent authority on Non-Human Identity, IAM, and Agentic AI security. nhimg.org