Skip to main content
グループ

Official: Shield and Security Center

This group is the official discussion forum for customers and partners who are using Salesforce Shield, including Platform Encryption, Event Monitoring, Field Audit Trail, and Data Detect; and Salesforce Security Center. It's a forum for customers to provide feedback, requirements and share ideas. Customers may also leverage this group to collaborate with each other on best practices. This group is maintained and moderated by a salesforce.com employee(s). The content received in this group falls under the official Safe Harbor. Please also see our official Salesforce Customer Community Terms of Use.

We installed the Transaction Security Policy Accelerator in my org. We use Own and the daily backup schedule is triggering thousands of alerts for 'Detect API Access from Unapproved Third Party Apps' policy (We have the action configured to send email notifications). I am unable to configure an exclusion in the custom metadata 'Approved API Client' because I cannot obtain the client name in this case. Any guidance?

3 件の回答
  1. 9月26日 2:45

    Hi Ajay, 

     

    Client and ConnectedAppId being blank here is expected, documented behavior for this call pattern — not something you're missing or misconfiguring. 

     

    - Client: "The service that executed the API event. If you're using an unrecognized client, this field returns 'Unknown' or a blank value." 

    - ConnectedAppId: populates only when the call goes through an OAuth 2.0 authentication process. A SOAP login()-based session (which is what your middleware is using with the Partner WSDL) doesn't go through OAuth, so this field is genuinely null for that auth pattern — there's no hidden client name to retrieve, because Salesforce never captured one for this login method. 

     

    So "Approved API Client" custom metadata, if it's keyed on ApiEvent.Client, structurally can't match this traffic — there's nothing populated to match against for a SOAP login-based integration user. 

     

    Practical fix: base the exclusion on the integration User instead of the API Client. Since your middleware authenticates as a dedicated integration user for this backup job, update your exclusion logic (or the Apex behind the TSP Accelerator's policy condition, if it's exposed for editing) to check ApiEvent.UserId/Username against an approved list, rather than Client/ConnectedAppId. This is the standard workaround for legacy SOAP login integrations specifically because Client/ConnectedAppId are documented as unreliable for that auth path. 

     

    Worth knowing for the medium term: Salesforce is moving away from SOAP login()-based API access generally — the "Allow any API Client" permission (used to let SOAP login calls bypass API Access Control) is being deprecated. If this integration can be migrated to an OAuth-based flow (Named Credential/External Client App using JWT Bearer or OAuth Client Credentials instead of SOAP login), ConnectedAppId would actually populate, and you'd get proper client-based governance going forward instead of working around a field that will never populate for this auth method. 

     

    Given this touches the TSP Accelerator's underlying policy logic, this is also worth raising directly with your Salesforce account team/Shield specialist — they can confirm the exact supported way to add a User-based exclusion within that specific Accelerator's metadata model, since the accelerator's custom metadata schema may need a field added rather than just a different value plugged into the existing one.

0/9000

I am unable to install an AppExchange package in one of our Salesforce sandboxes. The installation does not complete successfully giving me the error "Not Authorized" after my MFA when i tried to login with my sandbox  

 

Failed URL after login => 

{  

https://iis.digital.salesforce.com/services/oauth2/callback?state=eyJpaXN....QifQ&error=invalid_social_token&error_description=Could+not+acquire+access+token+from+authorization+code.

 

} 

 

 

Get

 

 

2 件の回答
  1. 7月16日 17:44

     

    Got a Workaround: To bypass the AppExchange login flow, log into the target org first in the same browser, then paste the URL into the address bar. Because you authenticate directly to your own org here, this path skips the AppExchange/Trailblazer OAuth handshake entirely, which is what was throwing the invalid_social_token error.

     

    Production:

    https://login.salesforce.com/packaging/installPackage.apexp?p0=04tal00000738jNAAQ

     

    Sandbox:

    https://test.salesforce.com/packaging/installPackage.apexp?p0=04tal00000738jNAAQ

0/9000

Hello, 

 

I have deployed and activated several TSPs from TSP Accelerator. Some of them works with no issue, I can see that I have received email notification when rule was executed: 

For example for Monitor Internal Logins that Bypass SSO, Detect Privilege Escalation. 

However, for the following TSPs, I don't receive email notifications:  

Detect Login As Events - to test this rule I simply login as another user. 

Detect High Risk Data in List View, Detect High Risk Data in Report Export - I have email field configured for Account and Email in the Data Sensitivity Level as Confidential. And Confidential is marked as High-Risk in Data Sensitivity Picklist Values. To test it I create list view or Report (and do export) with Email field. 

Detect Report Exports by Unapproved Profiles - I have two profiles configured in Approved Profiles for Report Export metadata. I login as user with profile that is not in the list and create report and do export. 

 

I checked the configuration, metadata, confidential data settings, rules are activated, email notification configured to be sent to the expected user. 

 

I would appreciate any help to understand why the email notifications are not sent. 

 

Thank you

4 件の回答
  1. 7月14日 18:18

    As a troubleshooting step, you may query the Event Log Object (ex. LoginAsEvent, ApiEvent, etc) returning the PolicyOutcome and PolicyId (or traverse to the policy object itself, ex Policy.MasterLabel) to determine if the policy is being evaluated.  

    And as another step, you may review the policies in the

    open source repository to understand the logic and determine what may be causing the results in your org. 

0/9000
Tom Bassett (Vera Solutions の Senior Solution Architect) Forum Ambassador
26 件のコメント
  1. 7月7日 7:21

    good 

     

0/9000

I have installed TSP accelerator in my sandbox and I configured all the steps described here: https://appexchange.salesforce.com/image_host/98eee350-a701-43e5-bbca-a45b2f42f292.pdf

 

When I go to TSP Accelerator and click Deploy for example for the following rule : 

Detect High Risk Data in API Queries.

I get an error : 

Deployment Failed

Deployment failed - Status 400: Bad Request - You don't have sufficient access to perform this action. 

I would appreciate any help on understanding from where this error might come from.  

 

2 件の回答
  1. 6月25日 17:59

    As the error message suggests, this is a permissions issue with the user authorized in the TSP_Accelerator Named Credential. I'd recommend reviewing that user's profile and permission sets to ensure they have the permissions needed to create Transaction Security Policies. As mentioned here https://help.salesforce.com/s/articleView?id=005321565&type=1, there is a new permission "Modify Transaction Security Policy" that is required to create, update, delete, enable, or disable TSPs. This new permission is now included in the TSP Accelerator Permission Set that is included with the package.

0/9000

Hello.  

I have a customer who has deployed the TSP. After activating the policies, they had an error in production environment when executing a custom flow they ave implemented, with the following error message :

"Can't perform callout because of pending uncommitted changes related to a process, flow, or Apex operation. Commit or roll back the work, and then try again. For more information, contact your Salesforce administrator."  

What may be the root cause of this error ?  

The policies if they have some DML opeartions, should not they do in a async manner so that we don't any issue DML operations hitting during a callout action?  

Have you any idea how to solve it without touching customer's custom flow implementations ? 

Thank you

1 件の回答
0/9000

On Wednesday 3/25 Salesforce sent an email (Subject: Action Needed: Upgrade the Security of Your Salesforce Experience), the second section of the email was titled "New Security Control Requirements Beginning June 2026".  The list includes:

  1. Require Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)
  2. Ensure all System Administrator users adopt Phishing-Resistant MFA for login
  3. Restrict Login IP Addresses in Profiles
  4. Enable a Transaction Security Policy (TSP) that Restricts Large Data Exports
  5. Avoid Connecting from Anonymizing Proxies and High-Risk IP Addresses

And "We will be announcing a roadmap of additional security control requirements and timelines in the near future

." 

 

First, yay for the forthcoming roadmap!!!  Very exciting, eager to track this and hope it will be maintained ongoing! 

 

Regarding #2 (phishing-resistant MFA for System Admins), any additional information on this, particularly as it relates to SSO?  Will MFA through SSO still meet this requirement, or does Salesforce have plans to enforce Salesforce Authenticator for System Admins, even if SSO is in place? 

 

Regarding #4 (TSP for large data exports via ReportEvent), we eagerly await more details on this one, with some trepidation.  Some analytics tools (e.g., Power BI) rely on a report-connector to integrate for some use cases, so a TSP policy that drives "stepped up" authentication sounds low-impact for reports accessed by human users, but would likely be high-impact when unattended users are involved.  I hope Salesforce is considering such scenarios when the additional communication is provided, and will also provide targeted guidance on how to handle to avoid disrupting business.   (Along with adequate lead time to test the changes.) 

 

Thanks!

3 件の回答
  1. 5月18日 19:17

    Salesforce did create a couple help pages as follow ups to these questions.  The first link below summarizes all the June changes.  The second link is specific to the Phishing resistant MFA stuff.  These were posted May 5 and May 6 respectively.   

     

    June overview  

    https://help.salesforce.com/s/articleView?id=005317465&type=1

     

     

    Phishing resistant MFA 

    https://help.salesforce.com/s/articleView?id=005321563&type=1

     

     

0/9000
2 件のコメント
0/9000

Hi Everyone!

 

Just started using Einstein Data Detect and had a question on the limits of running scans.

 

Is there a capacity limit for how many fields objects and fields you can run in one scan?

 

Also, will running a large scan impact system performance and if so how much?

 

Love the product btw!

5 件の回答
  1. 3月30日 9:15

    Following up on this thread from a long time ago- Data Detect has since evolved and it's now part of the Shield app since Sept last year. It requires no installation and just needs assignment of a user permission. It currently supports scanning upto 100 objects (all fields) in a single scan which is set to increase dramatically in upcoming releases. There is no performance impact of this scan and provides you with ALL the results of the scan vs only 50 results per field in the Data Detect managed package. Scheduled scans are coming soon too! 

0/9000

🚀 New Salesforce Labs App Available on AppExchange: Transaction Security Policy Accelerator

 

Implement Transaction Security Policies Faster and Easier

 

If you’re using 

Shield or Event Monitoring, we just launched a new Salesforce Labs app called Transaction Security Policy Accelerator that helps you deploy best-practice Transaction Security Policies in a few clicks. 

 

Transaction Secruity Policy Accelerator lets you deploy proven, ready-to-use Transaction Security Policies—including the same types recommended in Essential Transaction Security Policies

—directly into your org. Instead of manually building policies in Setup, you can install them in minutes. 

 

The app:

  • Includes a library of best-practice TSPs organized by common security use cases
  • Lets you deploy these policies in a few clicks
  • Provides guidance on why each policy matters and what setup is required
  • Help you activate value from Event Monitoring and Shield faster and more consistently

 

👉 AppExchange Listing

👉 Interactive Walkthrough Demo 

 

We’d love your feedback, feel free to try it out in your org and share your thoughts! 🛡️

10 件のコメント
  1. 3月27日 18:31

    Storage Impact: 

    Event Monitoring storage is "free"/included.  However, several of the TSPs function by using a custom object where a record is created for every event that comes in.  While events did not have an impact on platform storage previously, now they do.  Some of the events being monitored are high-volume in some orgs, and the impact to storage could be meaningful. 

    The potential storage impact isn't highlighted in the User Guide at all, and the only mention I see is when activating certain TSPs an optional last step that is given (which is manual): 

    "Optional: Activate the TSP - Delete Record Access Records Flow to delete unnecessary Record Access records" 

     

    Thank you for delivering a record cleanup process, but the importance of this flow and the potential storage impact seems like something documentation should stress more.

0/9000