Find authorization check in BAPI implemented in a program

Dear ,
How can we find the authoruty check in a program in which a BAPI is used.If we search authority check in program click search button and find authority then only the authorization check implemented in program except BAPI is shown not in BAPI.
Kindly send me solution ASAP.
Regard,
Yatendra Sharma
Edited by: yatendra sharma on Mar 19, 2009 12:42 PM

Hi Yatendra,
                  May be this code works out for you .It is just a dummy code.Try using Authority Check.Hope your query resolves soon.
authority check
PERFORM <AUTHORITY CHECK> USING <TABLE>.
IF NO_AUTHORITY NE SPACE.
   PERFORM BAPIRETURN TABLES RETURN
                           USING u2018VALUE1'
                                  u2018VALUE2'
                                  u2018VALUE3'
                                  VALUE4
                                  VALUE5.
    EXIT.
ENDIF.
Have a best day ahead.

Similar Messages

Authorization checking in BAPI

Hi,
I put in authorization checking for the 'Material group 1' field of a SD document. With this, only authorized users are allowed to change this field while other users without the authorization will not be allowed to change it. When i tested the authorization in VA02, it works fine. I was able to change it as i has been assigned with the required role/profile. On ther other hand, the other user without the role/profile was not able to change the field using VA02. I did another test using a Z program that calls 'BAPI_SALESORDER_CHANGE'. The Z program will change the 'Material group 1' field using 'BAPI_SALESORDER_CHANGE'. My initial thought was me with the required role/profile when running the Z program, will be able to change the field while the other user without the required role/profile will not be able to change it when running the Z program. However, the result shows that both users (with/without the role/profile) was also able to change the field using the Z program. Is there anyway to control the BAPI so that it works the same as in VA02? Thanks much for your advice.

In your coding change
IF sy-tcode = 'VA02'.
to
IF T180-TRTYP = 'V'.
Then your coding will also work with BAPI. Try putting a break point before the If clause and execute the BAPI, you can see it yourself.
SAP will set T180-TRTYP = 'H' for create, = 'V' for change and = 'A' for display.
T180-TRTYP is a SAP recommended field to be used in user exits to know if the document is being created, changed or displayed
If sy-tcode = 'VA02' will not work with BAPI as you are actually not executing transaction VA02.
Also just disabling screen fields for input will not have affect on the BAPI call.
You would need to ensure it through separate coding

Authorization check at diff levels

I need this functionality:
several authorization checks should be implemented.
· Selection on Plant level (authorized yes or no is then taken care within the authorization role)
· When this was successful, check further whether User is authorized for Change, or only for Display mode. When User is only authorized for Display mode, the different buttons e.g. Approve Cancel are not visible at all or great out. (this is as well then on user level maintained via authorization role)
How should we do this using ABAP?
Regards

Check with below link :
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/a92195a9-0b01-0010-909c-f330ea4a585c
Thanks
Seshu

How to find which custom program uses authorization checks

Hi all,
I have been asked to find out which custom ABAP program in our organization is using Authorizations checks and which is not.
Since there are thousands of custom programs I will need to automatize this process somehow. But I am not an ABAP expert and I will need some help.
Could any of you give me an idea of what would be the best strategy to find out if authorization objects/checks exist in a number of ABAP programs? (would a simple text search do?).
Many thanks,
Aldo

If you are looking out for Authorization related to Execution of any program, then look for entries in table TRDIR where field SECU (Authorization Group) is not blank.
Below SAP documentation may help you:
Authorization Group
Authorization group to which the program is assigned.
The assignment of a program to an authorization group plays a role when the system checks whether the user is authorized to:
Execute a program
--> Authorization object S_PROGRAM
Edit a program (-Include) in the ABAP Workbench
--> Authorization object S_DEVELOP
Programs that are not assigned to an authorization group are not protected against display and execution.
Security-related programs should, therefore, always be assigned to an authorization group.
Report RSCSAUTH can also be used to assign programs to authorization groups. This report is documented in detail.

ADFC-0619: Authorization check failed implementing popup through taskflow

Hi All,
I receive the error ADFC-0619: Authorization check failed: '/WEB-INF/main-task-flow-template.xml#main-task-flow-template' 'VIEW'. when accessing the taskflow that will show as a popup as described in this blog: http://andrejusb.blogspot.com/2013/03/reusable-adf-region-with-dialog.html. I created a sample application and I have it working as expected. The sample app has no security configured. When I put the functionality into our main app the error occurs. I have checked the jazn-data.xml and have granted a role to both the task flow and the web page.
Our app is setup where I have a task flow template that most taskflows inherit from. The calling page is inherited from the template which uses page fragments. The taskflow for the popup is not inherited from the template and does not use page fragments.
I am using 11.1.1.6. The error happens when deploying to the Integrated server as well as a local WLS. I read a few forum posts on this subject and some folks removed the anonymous role. I have this role defined but is is only used for my login page so I don't want to remove it from there.
Appreciate the help as this is blocking me from working on the functionality within the popup.
Thank you - Rudy

Resolved. Our Application is setup as described by Jobinesh in the book "Oracle ADF Real World Developer's Guide". In this case we have a separate application called "Common", within that we have projects for the ADFFrameWorkExtension, CommonModel, CommonUtilities and CommonUI. The CommonUI project contains the main-task-flow-template and errorPage.jsff as well as the MainTemplate.jspx. Each of these projects are deployed as a jar and imported into the main project.
In the jazn-data.xml under Resource Grants, Resource Type = Task Flow, check the option to "Show task flows imported from ADF libraries". This showed the main-task-flow-template which I granted the anonymous-role view action.
When I run it now shows the popup.

Authorization Check in Ad Hoc Query

Hi Experts,
When a user is given access to an infoset via the query user group, he/she will be able to see all infotypes that are associated with the infoset. The user will actually be able to select the fields, construct the query, and only hit the authorization error when they execute the query.
This is not ideal from a user perspective as the user might spend a lot of time constructing the query only to find out later that they are not able to execute it due to authorization restrictions. Is there a way to restrict upfront to show the user only the infotypes and fields they are authorized to when constructing the query? Please advice.

You need to do this in your infoset ...
You can use the following procedures if you want to change the behavior of the SAPDBPNP logical database:
You can program the logical database not to skip personnel numbers. The data is, nevertheless, only made available to the relevant reports for the authorization check There is no direct way to access the data that was not read by the authorization check. This procedure is meaningful for the first example, but not for the other two examples. The relevant report implements the setting as follows:
INITIALIZATION.
PNP_SW_SKIP_PERNR = 'N'.
It is conceivable in examples 2 and 3 that the evaluation would be possible for a certain period but not for a longer selection period. Normally, the logical database always selects all the data of an infotype and checks the authorization. If you want the system to read and check only the data of the selection period, you can use the RP_SET_DATA_INTERVALL macro (for the START-OF-SELECTION period) for this.
The data is not requested immediately (addition MODE N for the INFOTYPES statement) and is checked by the report itself. The report uses the HR_READ_INFOTYP and/or the HR_CHECK_AUTHORITY_INFTY function modules from the HRAC group to check the data and decides itself how to react to missing authorizations.
Procedures 1 and 2 are available for SAPDBPNP and are not supported by SAPDBPAP. Procedure 3 is always available. Procedure 3 is the only way of solving problems with the authorization check if a report requires only one subtype of an infotype and if users should not be able to access the other subtypes of the infotype
-Saquib

Authorization check flow

Hello Folks,
I wonder if some one can help clearing a doubt of mine.
The standard definition one finds on the net for Authorization check maintenance in SU24 for transactions is:
CM = Check performed AND object added in PFCG when tcode added to the role.
C = Check performed BUT object not added in PFCG when tcode added to the role.
N = No check OR check will return sy-subrc = 0 even if the user does not have the authorization.
U = Unknown. A check will may be hardcoded in the program, or maybe not.
My take on the above definitions is:
example object: V_VBAK_AAT
if
CM for V_VBAK_AAT the object is included in the role while working with PFCG.
As per the definition check performed on object and object added.
Question 1: Even if the object is maintained as CM it would not make a difference if the check is not coded in the program (authority-check). Would it?
If
C check performed but object not added
Question 2: If a check is going to be made on this object, why not include it in the role i.e mark it as CM? I was once told that these are objects that are most commonly used and hence from a BASIS point of view that the roll buffer will have that much less authorizations to load. But that does not ring true to me.
If
N - check will return value 0 thereby allowing the user through even though he does not have the authorization to do so
Question 3: Why suppress a check that is coded into the prgram in the first place. After all, the whole idea of Security is "any authorization not explicitly assigned" means NO AUTHORIZATION
For the last couple of years that i have been working on this, i have accepted this, as one would, the bible :-)...
But now i wonder if there will be some enlightenment....
Regards,
Prashant

>
Prashant Pasala wrote:
>
> Question 1: Even if the object is maintained as CM it would not make a difference if the check is not coded in the program (authority-check). Would it?
no, it wouldn't. the check has to be coded.
>
Prashant Pasala wrote:
> Question 2: If a check is going to be made on this object, why not include it in the role i.e mark it as CM?
>
because you would have many obsolete objects in your role, depending on the setup of your applications, the org-structure and several other things (mostly in configuration), whether an extension-set is active, a special IS used ...
>
Prashant Pasala wrote:
> Question 3: Why suppress a check that is coded into the prgram in the first place. After all, the whole idea of Security is "any authorization not explicitly assigned" means NO AUTHORIZATION
>
here one can only guess. one scenario might be: due to a bug in a SAP standard BAPI you deactivate the check until you get a correction from SAP. you have to do this to keep up the business ...
Edited by: Mylene Euridice Dorias on Mar 11, 2008 3:59 PM

Authorization Checks in Z programs

Dear Experts,
Fist of all, thanks for your time. We're being asked to review each Functional Specification in the company to suggest to the developement team the standard objects that should be included in the code in order to restrict the access within each developement. My understanding was that, as an standard practice, developers only use bapis, standard functions or call transactions in their code, for which we should be covered, as SAP includes standard object checks in them (so when using a bapi associated to VA01, the objects in the code for VA01 are being checked). The exception for this are reports, for which we have a Z object with most of the Organizational Values like Company Code, Plant, etc to allow restrictions to take place (and developers are supposed to include this check in this code).
My first question is: is it true that bapis, standard functions and call transactions use the regular standard objects when being executed?.
If this is the case, is there any point in suggesting the objects to be checked to the developers?. It looks as if this would be redundant, as SAP is making sure they're being checked when bapis, standard functions and call transactions are executed...(exception made for reports, as mentioned)
Thanks a lot for your help!!
Best regards,
CMPT

Hi,
It is always a good idea for the Z transaction review to be performed by the Security consultant. After all it will be his responsibility later on to restrict access to the transaction. You can always ask for the functional consultant's help with understanding the use of the transaction
In case the custom transaction has been created similar to or is an enhancement on a standard SAP transaction, then it is always a good idea to have at least the same authorization checks for the Z txn also.
For new developments you need to ensure that the authorization checks need to be implemented based on the functionality of the txn and the data it manipulates. For eg., if you have a Z-txn to make changes to purchase orders, you need to ensure that the program checks for change activity for Purchasing Org, Purchasing Group and Plant values and any other authorization relevant data.
The auth objects to be used depends entirely on the data and the functional module the custom program belongs to. I generally prefer to use SAP standard objects where possible. Else create new auth objects as per requirement.
Regards,
Sanju

Authorization checks programmatically

Hi,
Is it possible to do authorization checks programmatically inside
Weblogic server in such a way, that the checks goes all the way down to
the AuthorizationProvider implementation?
In effect, I need some API to call, that in the end, calls the SPI
implementation of authorization, the isAccessAllowed() call on
AccessDecision.
I see this is supported for Authentication through the
weblogic.security.services.Authentication class (the login(...)
method). But I see no such service method for Authorization?
Any help?

I am looking for the same too.
Please update here if you find something.
Thanks,
Sam

Authorization check for posting a specified movement type on certain plant

<h5>Iu2019m posting goods movements using BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE, I have to check If the user has authorities for posting for a specified movement type on certain plant.
How do I implement it, do I need to create a authorization object with ACTVT, WERKS and BWART, what will be value of ACTVT in this case?
Or is there any other way through which the BAPI can automatically check for authorization.</h5>

Just to bring to your notice that authorization check is done by the BAPI. Please check the function module.
AUTHORITY-CHECK OBJECT 'M_MSEG_WMB'
              ID 'ACTVT' FIELD '03'
              ID 'WERKS' FIELD I_MSEG-WERKS.
     AUTHORITY-CHECK OBJECT 'M_MSEG_BMB'
              ID 'ACTVT' FIELD '03'
              ID 'BWART' FIELD I_MSEG-BWART.
Regards,
Lalit MOhan Gupta

HR ABAP Custom Authorization Check

Hi all,
We know that Implicit authorization check is carried out. The system determines whether the user has the authorizations required for the organizational features of the employees selected with
GET PERNR.
I have a question, if we create a custom authorization then, whether this custom authorization is checked or not.
Thanks in Advance.

There is no difference in the coding of the check, which as RJ has stated needs to be somewhere at the correct coding location... otherwise it is going no where.
Some special differences are:
- The object class of the custom object in SU21 => Authorization objects in HR cannot be deactived context specifically in SU24. You can create custom objects within SAP classes.
- Depending on the transport type of your system, you will have to maintain transaction SU24 with a check indicator for the object - so make in known that the transaction has the capability to check the object. This does not affect "customer" systems, but is still a very good practice for the same reason that SAP forces it in their own development systems.
- Additional object checks in SE93 (which are typically "plausibility" checks) are not subject to this restraint. The check is always there, and your ability to bypass it is limited if you check the tcode authority of the caller at initialization of the (called) coding context. CALL TRANSACTION will skip this check, unless the called transaction is sy-tcode already (as it is in variant transactions... which urban legends claim to be secured to use for CALL TRANSACTION).
This concept is to a large extent influenced by SAP's own development guidelines and "settings" - but it is advisable to understand them and the intended authorization concept - to be able to create consistent customer implementations of SAP products.
Of course there are exceptions to the rules... but they generally cause problems and sooner or later need to be corrected as well when the auditors get hold of them....
Cheers,
Julius
Edited by: Julius Bussche on Apr 27, 2009 9:03 PM

CRM - Process Flow of Authorization Check in Business Transactions

Hello Folks:
I have implemented CRM security using Process Flow of Authorization Check in Business Transactions.
What I have in place:
CRM_ORD_OP (inactive, don't want access to own documents)
CRM_ORD_LP (inactive, not using standard org level values Distribution Channel, Sales Group, Sales Office, Sales Organization, and Service Organization.)
CRM_ACT (active)
CRM_CMP (active)
CRM_ORD_OE (active, restricted to display with dummy value ' ' for Distribution Channel
Sales Group, Sales Office, Sales Organization and Service Organization, as we are not restricting on them)
CRM_ORD_PR (active and restricted to display)
Issue:
Restrictions to display for documents works fine when using CRM backend system and the system throws out a message that you are not authorized to change. But, when i come in through Portals (PCUI), i dont get the display at all and it throws out a message insufficient access authorizations.
Traces on backend CRM reveal failing on change access for CRM_ORD_LP and CRM_ORD_PR, which we dont want to give out b/c we dont want to provide change for documents.
OSS notes to SAP have resulted in no results....please advise what is wrong here.
Thanks
KT

Thanks for the Priyanka for the reply, but what you mention is not correct.
BSP errors are different from what I am refering to.
The issue is still open...and looks like a SAP bug, which even they havent been able to fix so far.
Regards,
KT

Document search error in webshop(Error in authorization check: user unknow)

Hi All
actually we have implemented the document search functionality in webshop to access all the documents in webshop who have created order in the webshop.
actually when i am logging into the portal with userid "skumar" after that there was role called "Document Search" when i click that document search role then the document search will be opened, based on the selections in the selection criteria then the documents will be displayed generally.
actually come to my error when i select in the selection criteria "order acknowledgement" and i select the one more column called "period" after that i click the search button then i am getting the error as follows.
<b>Error in authorization check: user unknown.</b>
Can you please help me where to check the authorizations in the system for accessing the documents.
Regards
Sunil

Hi Sunil generally this kind of error will occur when you choose acknoledgement
for Future Periods,eventhough input is past date if the same problem occurs you should check for Su05 Internet USer authoriasations
Reward if helpful
Venkat

ESS: Who's Who Authorization Checks

Hi,
I am testing the ESS iView (tcode PZ01) in the Portal and it seems to be restricting the search results by my authorizations. I am not getting a full list of people in the system. Anyone know how to turn-off this authorization check?
I noticed this only happens when I changed the ESS Who's Who customizing in the IMG for PZ01. If I uncheck the checkbox 'Output fields list', then it checks authorzations. I'm thinking this has something to do with using the BAPI vs. using the query infoset, as the documentation states.
Message was edited by:
Kenneth Moore

Old post but I have had a similar issue and it was caused by P_ORGIN
Infortype 0105 subtype?????
Seem if the subtype is restricted then they are not displayed if subtype populated in the HR record.

Authorization check

Hi ,
i new to authorization so i need help ,
i go to transaction SU21 and i choose some object for example:
Object R_CPM_BSC
Text Authorization Object SEM: BSC Elements
Class SEM Strategic Enterprise Management*
Author STASTNY
Field name Heading
SEMSCARD Scorecard
SEMOBJTYPE Scorecard Elements: Object Type
SEMOBJKEY Scorecard Elements: Object Key
ACTVT Activity
And when i push on permitted activities i get:
R_CPM_BSC Authorization Object SE
ACTVT Activity
activists
01 Create or generate
02 Change
03 Display
04 Print, edit messages
1. i have always just permitted activities for ACTVT ?
if i wont that user just have display Authorization how i have to write it like below?
AUTHORITY-CHECK OBJECT R_CPM_BSC
ID ACTVT FIELD '03'
thats it i don't use the other fields?
Regards

Hi,
In general different users will be given different authorizations based on their role in the orgn.
We create ROLES and assign the Authorization and TCODES for that role, so only that user can have access to those T Codes.
USe SUIM and SU21 T codes for this.
Much of the data in an R/3 system has to be protected so that unauthorized users cannot access it. Therefore the appropriate authorization is required before a user can carry out certain actions in the system. When you log on to the R/3 system, the system checks in the user master record to see which transactions you are authorized to use. An authorization check is implemented for every sensitive transaction.
If you wish to protect a transaction that you have programmed yourself, then you must implement an authorization check.
This means you have to allocate an authorization object in the definition of the transaction.
For example:
program an AUTHORITY-CHECK.
AUTHORITY-CHECK OBJECT <authorization object>
ID <authority field 1> FIELD <field value 1>.
ID <authority field 2> FIELD <field value 2>.
ID <authority-field n> FIELD <field value n>.
The OBJECT parameter specifies the authorization object.
The ID parameter specifies an authorization field (in the authorization object).
The FIELD parameter specifies a value for the authorization field.
The authorization object and its fields have to be suitable for the transaction. In most cases you will be able to use the existing authorization objects to protect your data. But new developments may require that you define new authorization objects and fields.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04s/helpdata/en/52/67167f439b11d1896f0000e8322d00/content.htm
To ensure that a user has the appropriate authorizations when he or she performs an action, users are subject to authorization checks.
Authorization : An authorization enables you to perform a particular activity in the SAP System, based on a set of authorization object field values.
You program the authorization check using the ABAP statement AUTHORITY-CHECK.
AUTHORITY-CHECK OBJECT 'S_TRVL_BKS'
ID 'ACTVT' FIELD '02'
ID 'CUSTTYPE' FIELD 'B'.
IF SY-SUBRC 0.
MESSAGE E...
ENDIF.
'S_TRVL_BKS' is a auth. object
ID 'ACTVT' FIELD '02' in place 2 you can put 1,2, 3 for change create or display.
The AUTHORITY-CHECK checks whether a user has the appropriate authorization to execute a particular activity.
This Authorization concept is somewhat linked with BASIS people.
As a developer you may not have access to access to SU21 Transaction where you have to define, authorizations, Objects and for nthat object you assign fields and values. Another Tcode is PFCG where you can assign these authrization objects and TCodes for a profile and that profile in turn attached to a particular user.
Take the help of the basis Guy and create and use.
Thanks
Vikranth

Find authorization check in BAPI implemented in a program

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for