CVE-2021-44232
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 · uneditedSAF-T Framework Transaction SAFTN_G allows an attacker to exploit insufficient validation of path information provided by normal user, leading to full server directory access. The attacker can see the whole filesystem structure but cannot overwrite, delete, or corrupt arbitrary files on the server.
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 confidencePath traversal vulnerability in SAF-T Framework's SAFTN_G transaction that allows authenticated normal users to access the entire server filesystem directory structure through insufficient validation of path parameters, enabling directory listing and sensitive information disclosure but without write/delete capabilities.
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= 103= 104= 105= 602= 603= 604= 605= 606= 618= 720= 730= s4core_102CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Identify installed SAP Saf T Framework versionExecute transaction code SMNA in SAP system and navigate to the SAF-T Framework component details, or query table SAPCOMPONENTS for component 'SAF-T Framework' to retrieve the installed version numberAffected if The installed version matches any of: 103, 104, 105, 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 618, 720, 730, or s4core_102
-
Verify SAFTN_G transaction is activeExecute transaction code SA txncode or search for SAFTN_G in transaction menu, check if the transaction is listed as available in the SAP menu treeAffected if SAFTN_G transaction exists and is accessible in the system
-
Check user role assignments for normal usersUse transactioncode SUIM to query user assignments, filter for roles containing normal (non-privileged) user profiles, and verify which roles have access to SAFTN_G transaction by checking transaction SU24 or table TSTCAffected if Normal (non-admin) users are assigned roles that include SAFTN_G transaction access
-
Inspect transaction parameter configurationExecute transaction SE93 to view SAFTN_G transaction parameters and examine if path validation or restrictions are configured in the transaction variant settingsAffected if No path validation or allowed-directory restrictions are defined in the SAFTN_G transaction configuration
The environment is affected if the installed SAP Saf T Framework version matches any of the affected versions AND the SAFTN_G transaction is accessible to normal (non-privileged) users without proper path validation controls in place.
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 strict input validation and path canonicalization in the SAFTN_G transaction handler to ensure user-supplied paths are validated against allowed directories and prevent traversal sequences (../). Apply least-privilege file system permissions to limit exposure.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-44232 — 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-2021-44232 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