CVE-2017-16689
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA Trusted RFC connection in SAP KERNEL 32NUC, SAP KERNEL 32Unicode, SAP KERNEL 64NUC, SAP KERNEL 64Unicode 7.21, 7.21EXT, 7.22, 7.22EXT; SAP KERNEL from 7.21 to 7.22, 7.45, 7.49, can be established to a different client or a different user on the same system, although no explicit Trusted/Trusting Relation to the same system has been defined.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceSAP Kernel trusted RFC connections can be established to a different client or different user on the same system without an explicit Trusted/Trusting Relation defined. This bypasses the intended access control mechanism in the SAP Kernel, allowing unauthorized RFC calls that should be blocked.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 7.21= 7.21ext= 7.22= 7.22ext= 7.45= 7.49CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check the installed SAP Kernel versionExecute transaction SM51 or use the SAP kernel version display command (e.g., 'SAPCAR -tvf <kernel_archive>' or check the 'exe' directory for the kernel version file) to determine the exact kernel release and patch levelAffected if The kernel version matches 7.21, 7.21ext, 7.22, 7.22ext, 7.45, or 7.49 (exact match)
-
Identify configured RFC destinationsExecute transaction SM59 to display all defined RFC destinations. Review the list for any RFC connections that use the 'Trusted' or 'Trusting' connection typeAffected if Any RFC destinations of type 'Trusted RFC' exist in the system
-
Review existing trusted relationshipsUse transaction RFCTEST or check the trusted system configuration (typically via transaction SMT1 or system profile parameters rfc/trust_rfc_with_logon_check) to list all established trusted relationships between clientsAffected if Trusted RFC relationships are defined between different clients or users in the system
-
Audit recent RFC activity logsCheck system logs (transaction SM37 or STAT trace) and security audit log (transaction SM20) for RFC calls that may have been executed across clients without proper trusted relationship configurationAffected if RFC activity is observed between clients where no explicit trusted relationship was intended or documented
A system is affected if it runs a matching vulnerable kernel version AND has any trusted RFC destinations or relationships configured that could be exploited to bypass access controls.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply relevant SAP security notes/patches for this kernel vulnerability and audit existing trusted RFC relationships to ensure only intended connections are permitted.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16689 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-16689 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data