CVE-2018-2455
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 · uneditedSAP Enterprise Financial Services, versions 6.05, 6.06, 6.16, 6.17, 6.18, 8.0 (in business function EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEPA) does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user, resulting in escalation of privileges.
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 Enterprise Financial Services versions 6.05-8.0 contains a broken access control vulnerability in the EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEPA business function where authorization checks are not performed for authenticated users, allowing privilege escalation.
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= 6.05= 6.06= 6.16= 6.17= 6.18= 8.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify SAP Enterprise Financial Services installationIn SAP transaction SM37, check for EAFS-related processes or use transaction SE16 to inspect table EAFS_INSTALLED_COMPONENTS. Alternatively, check system information via SAP transaction SM51 for installed components.Affected if The system has SAP Enterprise Financial Services component installed.
-
Determine the installed EFS versionExecute transaction SFW5 or use transaction SE16 to query table EAFS_VERSION or CVERS for the EFS component version. Compare against affected versions: 6.05, 6.06, 6.16, 6.17, 6.18, or 8.0.Affected if The installed version matches 6.05, 6.06, 6.16, 6.17, 6.18, or 8.0.
-
Verify if EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEPA business function is activeUse transaction SFW2 to display the business function status. Search for EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEPA in the business function list and check its activation status.Affected if The business function EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEFA is switched ON or active in the system.
-
Inspect SEPA-related transaction authorization gapsUsing transaction SU53 or ST01 trace, attempt to execute SEPA-related operations (such as transaction FPE_SEPA or F110) with a low-privileged user account to verify if authorization bypass occurs.Affected if A user without assigned SEPA business operation roles can execute SEPA functions that should require elevated privileges.
The environment is affected if SAP Enterprise Financial Services version 6.05-8.0 is installed AND the EAFS_BCA_BUSOPR_SEPA business function is active, allowing unauthorized SEPA operations to execute without proper authorization checks.
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 dataImplement proper authorization checks in the affected SEPA business function code path to ensure users can only access resources and operations for which they are explicitly authorized.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-2455 — 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-2018-2455 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