CVE-2023-33992
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 · uneditedThe SAP BW BICS communication layer in SAP Business Warehouse and SAP BW/4HANA - version SAP_BW 730, SAP_BW 731, SAP_BW 740, SAP_BW 730, SAP_BW 750, DW4CORE 100, DW4CORE 200, DW4CORE 300, may expose unauthorized cell values to the data response. To be able to exploit this, the user still needs authorizations on the query as well as on the keyfigure/measure level. The missing check only affects the data level.
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 confidenceIn SAP Business Warehouse and SAP BW/4HANA, the BICS communication layer has a missing authorization check at the data cell level. Users with valid query-level and keyfigure/measure-level authorizations can receive unauthorized cell values in data responses due to this incomplete authorization validation.
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= 730= 731= 740= 750= 100= 200= 300CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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 the installed SAP Business Warehouse versionUse transaction code 'SM51' or check system information via 'SYST' system table fields, or query table SAPVERS for the SAP_BASIS release version, then derive BW version from the SAP_BW componentAffected if The installed version matches 730, 731, 740, or 750 for SAP Business Warehouse, or 100, 200, or 300 for SAP BW/4HANA
-
Confirm BICS communication layer is in useCheck if the system exposes OData or BICS-based data services to consumers (typically via transaction code 'RSRT' for Query Designer or check web service configuration via 'SOAMANAGER' for BICS-related service definitions)Affected if The system uses BICS-based data access methods to serve query results to frontend clients or external consumers
-
Verify query-level authorization is configuredUse transaction code 'RSECADMIN' or check authorization object 'S_RS_COMP' (component authorization) and 'S_RS_IOBJ' (InfoObject authorization) to review which users have query accessAffected if Users have query-level authorization but the system may not be enforcing cell-level restrictions for the data returned
-
Check keyfigure/measure authorization scopeReview authorization objects 'S_RS_KF' (key figure) and 'S_RS_MEA' (measure) assignments via transaction code 'PFCG' or table 'RSPCAUTH' to determine if measure-level filtering is appliedAffected if The authorization configuration includes keyfigure/measure permissions but cell-level validation may be incomplete
-
Test data cell authorization enforcementExecute a query via 'RSRT' or BICS client using a user account with query and measure permissions, then compare returned cell values against expected restricted results - specifically check if unauthorized measure values appear in the outputAffected if The system returns cell values that should be restricted based on measure-level authorization but are exposed due to incomplete validation
The environment is affected if it runs SAP BW version 730/731/740/750 or SAP BW/4HANA 100/200/300, uses the BICS communication layer, and does not have cell-level authorization validation explicitly enforced for query measures and keyfigures.
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/patch for CVE-2023-33992 and verify that data-level authorization controls properly restrict cell-level data exposure.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $11,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-33992 — 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-2023-33992 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