When Microsoft's Documentation Conflicts With Testing
The documentation says shared channels don't support cloud attachments - that's not what I saw.
For reasons I’m not going to get into today, I was reviewing the limitations on collecting cloud attachments with Purview eDiscovery Premium when I came across one I hadn’t seen before.
Teams shared channel messages and posts don’t support modern attachment link extraction. Users need to include the shared channel site and include the file manually as part of their collection.
In all my years of testing cloud attachments, I had never heard or seen this before, but I also knew that changes to shared and private channel messages may have affected things over the last year, so maybe I had missed it.
By the way, there are also some other interesting limitations listed there that may be worth knowing before you run into them in a real-world scenario. For me, the other key ones were these, but you might have others:
Encrypted emails and messages don’t support modern attachment extraction.
Advanced indexing isn’t applied to cloud attachment files referenced within emails or messages. This limitation means the content of the cloud attachment file itself isn’t processed by advanced indexing or OCR.
Cloud attachment collection doesn’t collect folder links or OneNote notebooks.
But, as you’ll see, I’m not 100% convinced of anything in this list now, because my experiment with a shared Teams channel collected the cloud attachments just fine.
I only ran the query against the Teams mailbox, and I tried three variations of linked attachments: uploading a file from my device, using the “add cloud files” option to copy a file from OneDrive, and copying/pasting a OneDrive link in the post body.
All three were collected using the Add to Review Set option.
I would think that contradicts the clear language from this documentation above, right?
Here are the details:
