CVE-2020-6270
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 NetWeaver AS ABAP (Banking Services), versions - 710, 711, 740, 750, 751, 752, 75A, 75B, 75C, 75D, 75E, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user due to Missing Authorization Check, allowing wrong and unexpected change of individual conditions by a malicious user leading to wrong prices.
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 NetWeaver AS ABAP Banking Services versions 710-75E contains a Missing Authorization Check vulnerability that allows authenticated users to modify individual conditions (pricing conditions) without proper authorization, potentially resulting in incorrect pricing data.
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= 75a= 75b= 75c= 75d= 75e= 710= 711= 740= 750= 751= 752CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
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.
-
Confirm SAP NetWeaver AS ABAP Banking Services is installedCheck your SAP system for the presence of the Banking Services component (component SAP_FINS) using transaction SPAM or by querying table CWBT_COMPONENT for component 'BANKING'Affected if The Banking Services component is present in the SAP system
-
Identify the SAP NetWeaver AS ABAP versionExecute transaction SM51 or check the kernel version using command 'sapkernel -v' to determine the installed SAP NetWeaver AS ABAP versionAffected if The version matches 710, 711, 740, 750, 751, 752, or versions 75a through 75e (or falls within these release families)
-
Verify the Banking Services module is activeCheck transaction SICF for active service nodes related to Banking Services (path typically contains /sap/banking/) or query transaction SM37 for active Banking Services background jobsAffected if The Banking Services HTTP service nodes are active in SICF
-
Review user access to pricing condition modificationUse transaction SUIM to search for users assigned roles containing authorization object FBN1 (pricing condition authorization) with activity 02 (change) or 01 (create) for Banking ServicesAffected if Users without proper approval authority have been assigned roles granting modification rights to pricing conditions in Banking Services
The environment is affected if SAP NetWeaver AS ABAP with Banking Services is installed and the version falls within 710-75E range AND the Banking Services component is active, allowing unauthorized users to modify pricing conditions.
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 the relevant SAP Security Note to address the missing authorization check. Additionally, review and restrict user role assignments to ensure only authorized personnel can modify pricing conditions in Banking Services.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,776.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-6270 — 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-2020-6270 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