Printing is Changing
Why Microsoft Is Changing Printing — and Why You Shouldn’t Enable It Yet
For more than 25 years, printing on Windows has worked in largely the same way. While devices have become faster, smarter, and more secure, the underlying Windows printing architecture has remained fundamentally unchanged.
That is now about to change.
Microsoft has introduced Windows Protected Print Mode (WPP) — a significant shift in how printing is handled within Windows. While the intention is positive, the implications are substantial, particularly for organisations using managed print solutions, multifunction devices, or secure print workflows.
At BAYtek, we strongly recommend not enabling WPP until you have spoken with us. Here’s why.
Printing Hasn’t Really Changed in 25 Years
Since the late 1990s, Windows printing has relied on a model built around:
Vendor-supplied printer drivers
The Windows Print Spooler service
Deep system-level access to allow advanced print features
This approach has enabled:
Finishing options (stapling, hole-punch, booklets)
Secure print / follow-me printing
Accounting, auditing, and job tracking
Device management and monitoring
While this model has been powerful, it has also:
Required highly privileged drivers
Increased attack surface
Been difficult to fully secure at scale
High-profile vulnerabilities such as PrintNightmare highlighted these weaknesses and accelerated Microsoft’s decision to rethink printing from the ground up.
Why Microsoft Is Introducing Windows Protected Print Mode
WPP is part of Microsoft’s broader Zero Trust and Secure-by-Design strategy.
In simple terms, WPP:
Removes traditional third-party printer drivers
Blocks legacy print spooler behaviour
Restricts printing to a tightly controlled, sandboxed model
Relies on Microsoft’s modern IPP-based printing framework
The goal is clear:
Reduce security risk by eliminating legacy drivers and limitingsystem-level access
From a security perspective, this makes sense.
From an operational perspective, it is a major change.
What WPP Means in Practice
When WPP is enabled:
❌ Many existing printer drivers will no longer work
❌ Advanced device features may disappear
❌ Secure print, follow-me print, and accounting can break
❌ Print management platforms may stop functioning
❌ Multifunction devices may revert to basic printing only
In short, printing may still work — but not in the way your organisation relies on today.
This is particularly critical for:
Schools and MATs
Organisations using Canon, Ricoh, Xerox, or similar MFDs
Environments with secure or tracked printing
Sites with centralised print management
Why You Should Not Enable WPP Yet
WPP is not a drop-in replacement for the existing print model.
Enabling it without planning can lead to:
Service disruption
Loss of functionality
Increased helpdesk calls
Inability to print securely or efficiently
At present, many manufacturers and print management vendors are still:
Updating firmware
Developing compatible solutions
Defining supported feature sets
This is an evolving landscape — not a finished one.
Our Advice: Speak to Us First
At BAYtek, we are actively:
Assessing WPP readiness across supported devices
Working with manufacturers and vendors
Testing real-world scenarios in education and business environments
Developing migration and mitigation strategies
Before WPP is enabled in your environment, we need to:
Understand your current print setup
Identify dependencies and risks
Confirm device and software compatibility
Plan a controlled, supported transition — if and when appropriate
In Summary
Printing has relied on the same core Windows model for 25+ years
Microsoft is changing this to improve security
Windows Protected Print Mode is a fundamental architectural shift
Enabling it prematurely can break critical printing services
Do not enable WPP without professional guidance
If you have seen references to Windows Protected Print Mode in updates, policies, or security recommendations — pause and speak to us first.
We’re here to ensure your environment remains secure and operational, without unnecessary disruption.


Comments