Track new rules updated in Rule Architect in CC 5.2 after upgraded frm CC 4

Hi ,
Can anyone of you guide me if we can track the rule changes done in sod tables.we have a scenario we have upgraded from cc 4 to cc 5.2.
I am not sure how many rules are there earlier..
Let me know if you need any more info here.
Thanks,
Tiru

Thank you for your reply.
The 5.2 risks are identical to 4.0 in every way. We certainly are comparing several users/roles and both sides to ensure information is accurate and identical.
We've seen a note to SAP but I've also come across a note, 1121447, "CC 5.2 - Update to Processing Logic of Rules"
[https://websmp130.sap-ag.de/sap(bD1lbiZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/spn/sapnotes/index2.htm?numm=1121447]
The note describes that the processing logic of Compliance Calibrator rules has been updated, so in a general sense, this potentially describes why I would be getting more violations in CC5.2 than CC4.0.
Has anyone had a chance to read this note? Has anyone come across this before?
Comments welcome!
Jes

Similar Messages

How do I set security on Leopard to prompt admin password before any changes - eg new instal , updates etc. Used to have this before recent upgrade to leopard

How do I set security on Leopard to prompt admin password before any changes - eg new instal , updates etc.
Used to have this before recent upgrade to Leopard and keen to keep this function

Run from a standard account and not an admin one.

Oracle 11.1.1.2: Oracle Business Rules: Update Business Rules on the fly

Hi,
I understand that in the latest Soa release (11.1.1.2), the rules, previously built on Jdeveloper can be changed from the em console.
I have installed everything, but cant find my way to any such facility. Kindly provide advice.
Regards,
Anand.

Hi Anand,
This facility is provided by SOA Composer not through EM.
Try accessing http://host:soa_server_port/soa/composer/
You will be able to define/edit rules on the fly using this SOA Composer

I use keynote 5.1 and am bombarded with popups asking me to update to KN 6. I tried 6 after upgrading to Maverick. Do not like it.

I use keynote 5.1 and love it. I tried Keynote 6 and do not like it.
My problem is that I am bombarded by popups asking me to
update to Keynote 6
This reduce my work speed to a snails pace.
Would be most delighted to find a solution to the problem.
Thanks

Is there a sim in the iPhone?
Has the iPhone been jailbroken or modified to work with other
than the original wireless provider?
If you can get that far, what does it say when you look at
Settings=>General=>About=>Carrier?

Update--Firefox still won't open at all after upgrading to version 4.0

I get an error message saying I have to restart to complete a previous installation. I tried the steps in the Knowledge Base which suggest deleting xpicleanup.dat, but multiple searches have been unable to find that file on my computer. Even so, I keep getting the same error message when I try to open Firefox.
Found another tip in the forums: I deleted a file 'firefox.exe.moz-upgrade' from 'C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox' directory and the installation / upgrade of Firefox went on fine
I tried this. Now it no longer says it needs a restart to complete a previous installation. It says it needs a restart to complete a previous uninstall. What do I do now? Help!

Firefox will not start
* https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Firefox%20will%20not%20start
* http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser_will_not_start_up
Check and tell if its working.

Unexpected risks after rule update

I wanted to updat RAR rules in dev GRC as per Q2 2009 rule update provided by SAP.
SAP recommendation for transaction FBV0 is:
remove auth objects F_BKPF_KOA and add F_BKPF_BUK with actvt 01 or 02.
As client wants to keep KOA active, I have done following in function AP02 and GL01, to test user risk analysis result in each case
case 1. KOA and BUK both active
case 2: KOA inactive and BUK active
I tested 5 users who have acccess to FBV0.
Among those, in case of 2 test users I found some unexpected results.
In case 1, both users have less number of risks where as in case 2(inactive KOA) I got more risks in user analysis in dev grc.
I am surprised, if I make an auth obj inactive, how can the new risks be generated. The new risks are related to FBV0 and functions AP02, GL01.
Other three users have same risks in both cases.
Can you suggest me what could be the reasons behind this.

In case 2, number of conditions are less : if any user satisfies the condition of BUK active - user will show respective risk. For specific 2 users, they may have authorization for BUK only, but not for KOA. So they are not showing the risks in case1. But in case 2, they have the required authorization to satisfy the risks for BUK only. When case1 is set as risk condition(bith KOA and BUK active) those 2 users can not satisfy the conditions to show rish as they may not have authorization of both KOA and BUK.

Problem when update distribution rules by "UpdateDistributionRule" method

Dear,
I want to use the "UpdateDistributionRule" method for updating (add new line) the existing distribution rules. I have tried the code from SDK help, but it does not work.
Here is the code from SDK help as below:
oCmpSrv = oCompany.GetCompanyService()
Dim oDLservice As SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRulesService = oCmpSrv.GetBusinessService(SAPbobsCOM.ServiceTypes.DistributionRulesService)
Dim oDL As SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRule
Dim oDLParams As SAPbobsCOM.IDistributionRuleParams
' Get distribution rule
oDLParams = oDLservice.GetDataInterface(SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRulesServiceDataInterfaces.drsDistributionRuleParams)
oDLParams.FactorCode = "1"
Try
    oDL = oDLservice.GetDistributionRule(oDLParams)
Catch ex As Exception
    MsgBox(ex.Message)
End Try
' Update distribution rule
oDL = oDLservice.GetDataInterface(SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRulesServiceDataInterfaces.drsDistributionRule)
oDL.FactorCode = "1"
oDL.FactorDescription = "Desc 1"
oDL.InWhichDimension = 1
oDL.TotalFactor = 40
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Add()
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(0).CenterCode = "1"
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(0).TotalInCenter = "10"
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Add()
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(1).CenterCode = "2"
oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(1).TotalInCenter = "30"
Try
    oDLservice.UpdateDistributionRule(oDL)
Catch ex As Exception
    MsgBox(ex.Message)
End Try
Regards,
On

HI,
Tried, but not work.
It shows - Invalid row number
Also, I try another like the following, but not work.
It shows - Enter valid amount in "Total"
Dim oCmpSrv As SAPbobsCOM.CompanyService
        oCmpSrv = oCompany.GetCompanyService()
        Dim oDLservice As SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRulesService = oCmpSrv.GetBusinessService(SAPbobsCOM.ServiceTypes.DistributionRulesService)
        Dim oDL As SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRule
        Dim oDLParams As SAPbobsCOM.IDistributionRuleParams
        ' Get distribution rule
        oDLParams = oDLservice.GetDataInterface(SAPbobsCOM.DistributionRulesServiceDataInterfaces.drsDistributionRuleParams)
        oDLParams.FactorCode = "DR001"
        Try
            oDL = oDLservice.GetDistributionRule(oDLParams)
            ' Update distribution rule
            oDL.FactorCode = "DR001"
            oDL.FactorDescription = "Desc 1"
            oDL.InWhichDimension = 1
            oDL.TotalFactor = 60
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(0).CenterCode = "036" -> exist line
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(0).TotalInCenter = "20"
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(1).CenterCode = "049" -> exist line
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(1).TotalInCenter = "30"
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Add()
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(2).CenterCode = "090" -> new line
            oDL.DistributionRuleLines.Item(2).TotalInCenter = "10"
            Try
                oDLservice.UpdateDistributionRule(oDL)
            Catch ex As Exception
                MsgBox(ex.Message)
            End Try
        Catch ex As Exception
            MsgBox(ex.Message)
        End Try
Regards,
On

Transform Update/transfer rules into DTP in Standard Business Content

Hi all,
I have a new installation of BI 7.0, and we are massively going to use Standard BC delivered by SAP.
I received an input from to transform all Update/Transform rule contained in the Standard BC, into DTP.
First of all I noticed that in the area of interest for our scope the DTP delivered with the standard content are a very small percentage of the all Standard BC (area HCM, FIN, SC). Is it possible?
Second I have to perform ana analysis on impact/benefits/consequence of performing this transformation. We tried already, but we had some errors, and we had to stop.
Can you please help me?
Many Many Thanks
Valentina

TR/UR will be migrated to Transformations not DTP - DTP is jst like an Infopackage which loads data from PSA to Datatargets.
Migrate TR/UR before you Migrate datasources.
Migrate datasources with WITH EXPORT in RSDS.
Change the Routines accordingly to OO ABAP.
There is no standard BC for Transformations and DTP's.

Creating a new CI for each rule in a current CI using PowerShell

I have a client investigating DCM and for reporting reasons they'd like EACH RULE in a CI to be it's own CI (so it's stored server side and they can report on it). They've imported the Windows 7 baseline recommended by MS and now would like to
extract each rule and make a new CI based on it.
So I'm digging around in the rules through PowerShell and I can get them out but they don't seem complete. Here's how I'm getting them:
$CI = Get-CMConfigurationItem -Id 65210
[XML]$RulesXML = $CI.SDMPackageXML
$Rules = $RulesXML.DesiredConfigurationDigest.OperatingSystem.Rules
This particular rule is a sample one I set up that requires the existence of C:\IT\test.txt. But I don't see the actual text of that rule anywhere in the XML:
<Rules>
<Rule xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/SystemsCenterConfigurationManager/2009/06/14/Rules" id="Rule_e0beb149-7459-417f-9ae6-70cbc7f588b1" Severity="None" NonCompliantWhenSettingIsNotFound="false">
<Annotation>
<DisplayName Text="TEST - Test File" ResourceId="ID-b11826e5-b3e0-4444-ac2b-b6156ac8f5cc" />
<Description Text="C:\IT\Test.txt must be present" ResourceId="ID-3dc17d90-e06f-46e1-9504-ec24c843dffb" />
</Annotation>
<Expression>
<Operator>NotEquals</Operator>
<Operands>
<SettingReference AuthoringScopeId="ScopeId_811CF9C7-F08C-4528-8C02-E20811B33FD5" LogicalName="OperatingSystem_5c61496b-b4dc-4ca9-a3f7-30c3aec8e2a4" Version="1" DataType="Int64" SettingLogicalName="File_cccd7dc7-e590-494c-b166-6d4aea7abc57" SettingSourceType="File" Method="Count" Changeable="false" />
<ConstantValue Value="0" DataType="Int64" />
</Operands>
</Expression>
</Rule>
</Rules>
I see some GUID references so is the actual rule kept elsewhere in the DB? Or am I just barking up the wrong tree?
Thanks.
Keith

Hi Keith,
<<This particular rule is a sample one I set up that requires the existence of C:\IT\test.txt. But I don't see the actual text of that rule anywhere in the XML:>>
In your XML, if you see these lines:
<Expression>
<Operator>NotEquals</Operator>
<Operands>
<SettingReference AuthoringScopeId="ScopeId_811CF9C7-F08C-4528-8C02-E20811B33FD5" LogicalName="OperatingSystem_5c61496b-b4dc-4ca9-a3f7-30c3aec8e2a4" Version="1" DataType="Int64" SettingLogicalName="File_cccd7dc7-e590-494c-b166-6d4aea7abc57" SettingSourceType="File" Method="Count" Changeable="false" />
<ConstantValue Value="0" DataType="Int64" />
</Operands>
</Expression>
It has setting reference with GUID with Method="Count" means this is existential rule referenced to setting blah blah... (If method="Value" means that it has value rule defined) and for existential rule,
XML has "NotEquals" operator and value is "0" which means that if file not equals to zero means file exist (compliant).
Hope this helps.
This posting is provided "AS IS", provides no warranties, and confers no rights. -Praveen S.

How to use new patch updates in track

Hi All,
I am a developer working in NWDI. We have everything in place and working fine upto now.
SAP has release a patch for the software component i am using in a track. Basis guys have updated the track and they confirmed the patch is updated successfully.
Now when ever i rebuild my DC, the changes are not effected as per the new patch. Please let me how I will be able to use new patch updates in my DC(In NWDS I can see the old source code only, I did all SYNC's and refresh but didnt worked, even NWDI is restarted)
How I can confirm that the patch is updated to track successfully, from a developer point of view.
I have access to CMS and CBS.
Regards,
Sateesh Chandra

Did you update your configuration in the studio?
--MLS

Auto Run Program not updating Settlement Rules for few WBS elements

Hi,
Addition of settlement rules for OPEX WBS.
In producion system, two jobs are running daily for generating settlement rules of WBS elements but, all WBS elements are not updating with Settlement rules.
It is becoming a problem in the Period end while doing the settlement. Currently we are updating the settlement rule manually.
We have investigated and found the following WBS element with Profile name are not updating Settlement rule.
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-J0 - HHDC01
H-N0U00ULD01-P1-D1-W2 - 000090
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-U0-T1-OB - HHDC01
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-U1-W1-ON - HHDC01
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-U2-W1-ON - HHDC01
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-I0-E1 - HHDC01
H-U0DU0204DE-EX-I0-B1 -HHDC01
H-U1DU0204DE-EX-U0-W1-ON - HHDC01
Job Names :
ZFPD_UK_SETTLEMENT_RULE_GEN
ZFPD_NO_SETTLEMENT_RULE_GEN
Please suggest on this issue
Regards

Hi,
I suppose these are background jobs. Usually there is an issue with background jobs that are run for a custom developed program. Not sure why that happens. Even i faced this issue with a couple of jobs in my system. I have still not found out the reason as to why this happens. There might be a possibility that these projects were being processed in the foreground by some user and hence they were omitted from the run.
I would suggest you to consult your technical guys on this.
Regards,
Gokul

Udev update: udev.rules file contains errors [was: dbus+hal update]

I am aware of the fact that there are already a few topics and a bug report (http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/6351) concerning the recent dbus & hal upgrades. However, my case seems different and more complex. I am not even sure if this is directly related to the others' issues.
Since the update to dbus-1.0.2-2 my system does not follow some dbus rules any more. The recent follow-up update to dbus-1.0.2-3 did not remedy my problems, either.
I think that this is due to the /etc/udev/rules.d/udev.rules file having become corrupted with the recent updates. Under the sections
#pty and tty legacy devices
and
#vc devices
several KERNEL=[...] lines have errors, at least the final double quotation marks are missing!
So far my problems are as follows:
- Intel i810 video driver fails to load: "No matching device [...] found".
- Thinkpad's nvram is not get created in /dev
- no pty devices / no ttyp devices are created in /dev. Therefore, none of my X-based consoles will start. Konsole, for example, exits with "Konsole is unable to open a PTY [...]".
I will investigate further and report. Anyone eslse experiencing similar problems?
Btw., contrary to the experience of others, removable devices are recognized and mounted.
Last edited by mutlu_inek (2007-02-07 02:52:34)

Those errors I found were actually introduced a few days ago by udev-105-1! The /etc/udev/rules.d/udev.rules provided by that package has errors!
Correcting those errors brought back my beloved pseudo teletypes in /dev/pts/X. But the nvram device is still not created.
Update:
Here is the diff output of udev-105-1's udev.rules compared with what it should be:
--- udev.rules 2007-02-06 21:20:06.000000000 -0500
+++ udev.rules_corrected 2007-02-06 21:16:36.000000000 -0500
@@ -143,8 +143,8 @@
SUBSYSTEMS=="scsi", KERNEL=="sg[0-9]*", ATTRS{type}=="6", GROUP="scanner"
# pty and tty legacy devices
-KERNEL=="pty[a-z][a-z,0-9]*", NAME="legacy/%k", OPTIONS="last_rule
-KERNEL=="tty[a-z][a-z,0-9]*", NAME="legacy/%k", OPTIONS="last_rule
+KERNEL=="pty[a-z][a-z,0-9]*", NAME="legacy/%k", OPTIONS="last_rule"
+KERNEL=="tty[a-z][a-z,0-9]*", NAME="legacy/%k", OPTIONS="last_rule"
# md block devices
KERNEL=="md[0-9]*", NAME="md%n", SYMLINK+="md/%n"
@@ -166,8 +166,8 @@
KERNEL=="vcs[0-9]*", NAME="vcc/%n", OPTIONS="last_rule"
KERNEL=="vcsa", NAME="vcc/a0", OPTIONS="last_rule"
KERNEL=="vcsa[0-9]*", NAME="vcc/a%n", OPTIONS="last_rule"
-KERNEL=="ptmx", MODE="0666", OPTIONS="last_rule
-KERNEL=="tty", MODE="0666", OPTIONS="last_rule
+KERNEL=="ptmx", MODE="0666", OPTIONS="last_rule"
+KERNEL=="tty", MODE="0666", OPTIONS="last_rule"
# video devices
SUBSYSTEM=="video4linux", GROUP="video"
Last edited by mutlu_inek (2007-02-07 02:44:24)

GRC CC rule update q2 2009

Having taken a look at it, I don't agree with the fact that it recommends to remove the check of f_bkpf_koa in many tcode. For tcd FB05 for example, the Tcode is in functions AP01, AR01, GL01. If we remove the permission check f_bkpf_koa, the authroization check of FB05 in these 3 functions will be exactely the same. And because GL01 conflicts against AP01 and also AR01, every users having FB05 will have conflicts. Same case for FBV0, and also much more other tcds!!!
Does any body have an idea why SAP recommend to remove f_bkpf_koa check in the q2 2009 rule update?

I think this is because a vendor accoutant, restricted on account type K (vendor) for object f_bkpf_koa is automatically authorized to post on S (GL) account type. This is mandatory to balance the post. Yet it makes him possible to post frrom GL account to GL account, even if he does not have S (GL) in his authorizations.
Same thing for a customer accountant who is restricted on D (customer) in his authorizations: he can post on GL accounts too.
Only GL accountant is really restrictied on GL account type if he has only S for object f_bkpf_koa in his authorizations.
So according to me, the rules should be:
AP01 => K
AR01 => D
GL01 => K, D, S, A, M
...which effectively create risks for every user who has FB05, FBV0...

After update Udev rule ignored: loading firmware of HP LJ 1020

Hi all
After one of the latest updates I have a problem with the udev rules. It worked some weeks ago perfectly. But after some updates of the past weeks it seems, that the rules in /etcudev/rules.d/11-hp-lj1020.rules are not triggered anymore. I cannot tell you the precise date as I update my mom's computer via ssh from another country and my mom told me weeks after that the printer is not working any more.
Was there any update of the udev package which is causing problems?
I read some threads and had also the problem, that renaming my network adapters does not work any more.
Issue was that "name" is deprecated in udev.
Best regards
Martin

Potomac wrote:
check these bugreports :
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/42505
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/42353
it seems that this bug related to i915 chip ( or intel graphic card ) is fixed in kernel 3.18rc3 mainline ( we can find this kernel package in AUR )
there is also another and complete different bug when we use a kernel 3.17 and even 3.18 ( it's a random bug ) but with a similar effect : boot can hang ( the boot process suddenly stops ) :
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=189622
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=189324
downgrading to kernel 3.16.x is the workaround
I assume my computer is affected by one of these bugs. While I can get to the point where my window manager is loaded, everything almost immediately hangs (but doesn't freeze). Terminal windows become non-responsive and Chromium will refuse input. It's very weird. This happens with both of the 3.17 kernel updates but not in any of the 3.16 releases (including 3.16.7).
This is on an AMD system (cpu/gpu w/ open source driver). Overall 3.17 seems rather buggy.

Rule Updates - Custom Risks, Multiple Systems

We have CC 5.2 on SP8 connected to 3 ECC clients in our landscape. We also have a bunch of Custom Risks - both Conflicting and Critical action.
If we update to SP9 to include ALL Rule updates from Q2 2008 as indicated in Note: 1173980:
will the Custom risks beginning with 'Y' be wiped out?
and also will we have to update the applicability of the Risks to the particular cleints..now we have a subset of risks to Client A, a different subset applicable to client B and ALL applicable to Client C.
Any information on how the Rule Updates via SP9 impact the current setup is appreciated.
Thanks

Thanks Simon,
Will ONLY the Functions (TCodes, Object values) be updated and the expectation is to Generate the Rules again?
Will any other activities have to be performed after applying the SP for Rule Updates.
Thx

Track new rules updated in Rule Architect in CC 5.2 after upgraded frm CC 4

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for