CVE-2020-6362
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 Banking Services version 500, use an incorrect authorization object in some of its reports. Although the affected reports are protected with otherauthorization objects, exploitation of the vulnerability could lead to privilege escalation and violation in segregation of duties, which in turn could lead to Service interruptions and system unavailability for the victim and users of the component.
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 · moderate confidenceSAP Banking Services version 500 uses incorrect authorization objects in certain reports. Although these reports are protected by other authorization objects, the incorrect authorization object implementation allows privilege escalation and violates segregation of duties principles, potentially causing service interruptions.
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= 500CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Confirm SAP Banking Services version 500 is installedIn SAP GUI, run transaction SAINT (SAP Add-On Installation Tool) or use transaction SM37 to check installed software components. Navigate to System > Status > Component Information to verify the SAP Banking Services version.Affected if The installed version of SAP Banking Services is exactly version 500
-
Identify reports in the Banking Services componentUse transaction SE38 or SE80 to browse the SAP Banking Services repository. Look for reports in the namespace related to Banking Services 500 that handle authorization or segregation of duties functions.Affected if Reports within the SAP Banking Services 500 component are present in the system
-
Review authorization object assignments for affected reportsUse transaction SUIM (User Information System) or directly access the report properties in SE38/SE80 to examine which authorization objects are assigned to each report. Compare the assigned authorization objects against the expected proper authorization objects for that report type.Affected if The authorization objects assigned to the reports do not match the correct authorization objects required for proper segregation of duties, or incorrect authorization objects are being used
-
Check for privilege escalation indicatorsUse transaction SU53 to check authorization failures, and review user role assignments using transaction PFCG. Look for users assigned to reports who have permissions beyond their intended segregation of duties scope.Affected if Users have authorization combinations that allow access beyond their intended role boundaries due to the misconfigured authorization objects in the reports
A system is affected if SAP Banking Services version 500 is installed and the reports within it use incorrect authorization objects that allow privilege escalation or violate segregation of duties principles.
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 dataReview and correct the authorization objects assigned to the affected reports in SAP Banking Services 500, ensuring proper segregation of duties is enforced and the correct authorization objects are applied.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-6362 — 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-2020-6362 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