dbcve.org
Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2024-42371

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2024-09-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
60/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The RFC enabled function module allows a low privileged user to delete the workplace favourites of any user. This vulnerability could be utilized to identify usernames and access information about targeted user's workplaces and nodes. There is low impact on integrity and availability of the application.

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 confidence

This is an authorization bypass vulnerability in an RFC-enabled SAP function module. The module lacks proper access controls, allowing any low-privileged user to delete workplace favorites belonging to any other user in the system. This can expose usernames and information about other users' workplace configurations and nodes.

MitigationImplement and enforce proper authorization checks within the RFC function module to ensure users can only access and modify their own workplace favorites. The fix requires adding ABAP authorization checks that validate the current user's identity before allowing delete operations.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify exposed RFC function modules for workplace favorites
    Use transaction SE37 or SE80 to search for RFC-enabled function modules related to workplace favorites (look for modules containing 'WORKPLACE', 'FAVORITES', or 'DELETE' in their names). Check if these function modules have 'Remote-Enabled' flag set in their attributes.
    Affected if An RFC function module handling workplace favorites exists and is remote-enabled (RFC-accessible)
  2. Verify authorization check implementation in the function module
    Use transaction SE37 to display the function module source code. Search for AUTHORITY-CHECK statements within the module or the methods it calls. Specifically look for checks that validate the current user against the owner of the favorite being deleted.
    Affected if The function module lacks proper AUTHORITY-CHECK statements that verify the current user owns the favorite before allowing deletion
  3. Test if low-privileged users can delete other users' favorites
    Using a low-privileged test account, attempt to call the RFC function module to delete a workplace favorite belonging to a different user. Document whether the operation succeeds without authorization errors.
    Affected if The operation completes successfully without authorization errors, allowing deletion of another user's favorites
  4. Inspect user workplace favorites configuration tables
    Query SAP tables that store workplace favorites (such as T77OO, T77AW, or similar) using transaction SE16N. Check if favorites from multiple users are stored in tables accessible via the RFC function module.
    Affected if Favorites from multiple users exist in the system and are accessible through the vulnerable module

A user is affected if an RFC-enabled function module for deleting workplace favorites exists in the system and lacks proper authorization checks that verify the current user owns the favorite being deleted.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement and enforce proper authorization checks within the RFC function module to ensure users can only access and modify their own workplace favorites. The fix requires adding ABAP authorization checks that validate the current user's identity before allowing delete operations.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-42371 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-42371 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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