Voted Best Answer
Jan 19, 2017 - 12:49 PM
Oh yeah, it's much better than MAP.... assuming that you're Microsoft.
If one considers Microsoft as the 'evil empire' of audit requests, then the Movere tool is the Death Star.
(I've got a bad feeling about this....)
We've helped MS SAM partners complete audits -via MAP - only to have Microsoft come back and 'asking' to deploy the Movere utility.
What makes Mover different - in part - is that it focuses on collecting more 'indicators' that infer 'out-of-scope' use of SQLServer, from VMWare' High mobility' history to usage/access patterns of users that would suggest a requirement of CALs and/or the valditiy of 'non-production' or hotswap.
In the hands of Microsoft, the Movere data tends to put the client into a 'leveraged' position where the customer feels obliged to justify the data that 'implies' non-licensed. In more than one instance, we've seen customers 'cave-in' under the time, effort and fear of legal repercussions.
I wouldn't be 'suspicious', but I would definately be wary of why Microsoft would be paying more for than Movere deployment; they may sense an opportunity to make a lot of 'lost revenue' from unintended - but unlicensed - SQLServer configurations. If you understand the SQLServer usage rights, and know that you are operating within those bounds, no fear.
Anything less, and I would suggest you consider legal counsel to determine whether you should deny the request, and what constitutes effective data surrender- without putting your business operations at risk - in order to comply to the MBSA/VLA.
( and - no - there's no 2 meter exhaust port to shut down the Movere tool)
Steve at AssetLabs