CVE-2024-21735
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 LT Replication Server - version S4CORE 103, S4CORE 104, S4CORE 105, S4CORE 106, S4CORE 107, S4CORE 108, does not perform necessary authorization checks. This could allow an attacker with high privileges to perform unintended actions, resulting in escalation of privileges, which has High impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability of the system.
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 LT Replication Server versions S4CORE 103-108 lacks proper authorization checks, allowing an authenticated attacker with elevated privileges to perform unauthorized actions. This enables privilege escalation to execute functions beyond their intended permission level, impacting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
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= s4core_103= s4core_104= s4core_105= s4core_106= s4core_107= s4core_108CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/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 LT Replication Server installationLocate the SAP LT Replication Server component in your SAP system landscape and confirm it is deployed. Check system inventory or SAP transaction code SPAM/SAINT for installed components.Affected if SAP LT Replication Server is present in the environment
-
Determine the S4CORE versionUse SAP transaction code SM37 or execute version query for the S4CORE component. Retrieve the exact version number installed.Affected if The installed S4CORE version is 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, or 108
-
Review user role assignments with elevated privilegesUse SAP transaction code PFCG or SUIM to list all users assigned roles with administrative or elevated function execution permissions. Examine role menu configurations for function modules that could be exploited.Affected if Users exist with roles that grant access to functions beyond standard business operations
-
Verify authorization configuration for function module executionUse SAP transaction code SU24 or SU53 to inspect authorization objects related to function module execution and LT Replication Server specific transactions. Check if authorization checks are properly enforced.Affected if Authorization objects allow execution of functions without proper validation or permit escalated actions
-
Audit recent function module executionsUse SAP transaction code ST03N or review system logs for execution patterns of LT Replication Server functions. Look for unauthorized or unexpected function calls.Affected if Function executions occur outside expected business workflows or by users without documented authorization
The environment is affected if SAP LT Replication Server with S4CORE versions 103-108 is installed and users with elevated privileges exist who could exploit the authorization bypass.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the relevant SAP security patch for this authorization bypass vulnerability. Review user role assignments and implement the principle of least privilege pending patch deployment.
- 1. Identify the applicable SAP Security Note for CVE-2024-21735 by checking the SAP Security Optimization Wizard or SAP Support Portal
- 2. Download the relevant SAP Security Note from the SAP Support Portal (notes are typically published at https://launchpad.support.sap.com/#/notes/)
- 3. Implement the correction as described in the SAP Security Note - this typically involves applying ABAP corrections via SAP Transport of Copies (ToC) or implementing the provided code changes
- 4. Verify the correction was applied successfully by checking the SAP system logs and the note implementation status
- 5. Test the authorization behavior to confirm the vulnerability is remediated
- 6. Document the change in the system's change management process
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-21735 — 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-2024-21735 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