M-Files Cloud vs. Self-Hosted: Are You Really Better at Protecting Your Information?

We don’t want our data in somebody else’s cloud. We want to keep control of our information.

I’ve heard this argument, or variations of it, many times when discussing ECM architecture with customers. It’s a perfectly legitimate concern. Information is one of an organization’s most valuable assets, and nobody wants to lose control over it.

However, there is a question that may be more important:

Are you actually better equipped to protect your information than a specialized cloud provider?

As cybersecurity threats become increasingly sophisticated, perhaps it’s time to reconsider some of our assumptions about cloud and self-hosted solutions.

Let’s use my favorite topic as an example: M-Files.

The illusion of control

For many organizations, hosting their own ECM platform feels like the safest option. The servers are in their own infrastructure, their IT department manages them, and they decide how everything is configured.

There is a reassuring feeling of control.

But control comes with responsibility.

Running M-Files on your own infrastructure means taking care of much more than the application itself. You need to manage operating system updates, SQL Server security, network configuration, firewall rules, backups, monitoring, vulnerability management and disaster recovery.

And this is just the infrastructure.

You also need to maintain the M-Files environment, apply updates, monitor its health and ensure that security patches are installed in a timely manner.

Let’s be honest: how many organizations have the resources and processes to manage all of this properly?

I’ve seen environments where updates are postponed because nobody wants to risk breaking something. Backups exist, but restoration procedures have never been tested. Monitoring is configured, but nobody regularly checks the alerts.

The infrastructure belongs to the organization, but does that really make it secure?

Self-hosted: more responsibility than you might think

Self-hosting M-Files provides flexibility and control. You decide where the servers run, how the infrastructure is designed and how the different components communicate.

For organizations with mature IT and security teams, this can be a perfectly valid approach.

However, security is not a one-time configuration exercise.

It requires continuous attention:

• Patch management: Ensuring that Windows Server, SQL Server and M-Files are kept up to date.
• Infrastructure security: Managing firewalls, network segmentation and server hardening.
• Identity management: Enforcing strong authentication, multi-factor authentication (MFA) and appropriate access policies.
• Monitoring: Detecting suspicious activities and responding to security incidents.
• Backup and recovery: Protecting backups against ransomware and regularly testing recovery procedures.
• Business continuity: Ensuring that services can be restored within acceptable timeframes.

Each of these topics requires expertise, time and investment.

Another aspect worth considering is that cybersecurity threats don’t wait for your next maintenance window.

The ENISA Threat Landscape 2026 report confirms that ransomware remains one of the most impactful short-term threats, and that the exploitation of vulnerabilities and attacks targeting digital dependencies continue to affect European organizations.

In other words, ensuring the security of operating infrastructure is becoming increasingly challenging.

M-Files Cloud: outsourcing infrastructure, not responsibility

This is where M-Files Cloud changes the equation.

M-Files Cloud is a fully managed environment hosted on Microsoft Azure. The M-Files Cloud Operations team handles infrastructure operations, reducing the need for customers to maintain the underlying server infrastructure themselves.

This changes the distribution of responsibilities.

Rather than managing the servers, operating systems and underlying infrastructure, your organization can focus more on the application, users, access rights and information governance.

There are clear advantages:

• A specialized team handles infrastructure operations.
• You don’t need to maintain your own M-Files server infrastructure.
• You benefit from the capabilities of the Azure infrastructure.
• Scalability and availability of infrastructure are managed as part of the cloud service.
• This allows your internal IT team to focus on other business priorities.

However, let’s not confuse outsourcing with eliminating risk.

Moving to the M-Files cloud does not mean that security becomes somebody else’s responsibility.

You are still responsible for important aspects of your environment, such as user permissions, identity management, authentication policies, information classification, and how users access and share information.

For instance, M-Files Cloud cannot prevent an employee from having unnecessarily broad access rights if those rights have been configured incorrectly.

The infrastructure might be secure, but your information governance can still be a mess.

Cloud is not a magic security solution

There is another side to the discussion.

When moving to the cloud introduces dependencies that organizations must understand and accept.

For example, what would happen if the cloud service became unavailable? What are the recovery objectives? Where is the information hosted? What are the contractual commitments? How will the organization retrieve its information if it decides to leave the service?

These are all legitimate questions.

Using the cloud also means relying on external providers and their security practices. A security incident affecting a provider or one of its dependencies can affect multiple customers.

This is why choosing a cloud solution requires more than just looking at a security certification or a provider’s marketing materials.

Organizations should review the service’s actual documentation, contractual commitments, data residency options, backup and recovery arrangements, incident notification processes, and exit strategy.

There is no such thing as zero risk, whether your servers are in your own data center or in Azure.

Self-hosted on Azure: is that the best of both worlds?

One interesting alternative is to host M-Files on a cloud infrastructure, such as Microsoft Azure, yourself.

At first glance, this seems like the perfect compromise.

You benefit from Azure’s infrastructure while retaining control over your M-Files environment.

However, it’s important to note that hosting M-Files on Azure does not make it M-Files Cloud.

It remains a self-managed deployment.

You still need to manage the M-Files application, virtual machines, operating systems, security updates, and monitoring and recovery procedures.

Essentially, you are moving your data center to someone else’s data center while keeping most of the operational responsibilities.

This approach may be appropriate for organizations with specific architectural or regulatory requirements, but it should not be mistaken for a fully managed cloud service.

So, which approach should you choose?

I don’t believe there is a one-size-fits-all answer for every organization.

Self-hosted M-Files is the right choice for organizations with strong internal IT capabilities, specific infrastructure requirements, or regulatory constraints that justify maintaining their own environment.

M-Files Cloud is a good option for organizations that want to reduce infrastructure management, benefit from specialized cloud operations, and focus their resources on their core business.

However, I would approach the decision from a slightly different perspective.

Rather than asking where the servers should be located, I would ask:

• Do we have the expertise necessary to securely operate this infrastructure?
• Are we able to apply security updates quickly and consistently?
• Do we have the appropriate monitoring and incident response capabilities?
• Are our backup and recovery procedures tested regularly?
• Do we have clear requirements regarding data residency and compliance?
• Should we invest our resources in managing infrastructure?

The answers to these questions should influence the architectural decision much more than the simple preference for cloud or on-premises hosting.

Maybe it’s time to rethink what control really means

As an ECM consultant, I often explain that implementing M-Files involves more than just installing a platform. It’s about managing information, understanding business processes, and establishing proper governance.

I believe the same principle applies to infrastructure.

Having your own servers doesn’t automatically make your information safer. Having everything hosted internally doesn’t guarantee better security, either. Moving to the cloud doesn’t mean you can forget about cybersecurity.

Security is not about where your servers are located. It’s about how well you manage the risks and responsibilities associated with them.

Sometimes, the smartest decision is to stop managing infrastructure and let specialists take care of it.

This doesn’t mean giving up control of your information.

It means understanding where your responsibilities bring the most value.

Perhaps that’s the question we should ask before deciding where to host our next M-Files vault.