CVE-2025-42917
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 HCM Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 application does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user, resulting in escalation of privileges. This issue has a significant impact on the application's integrity, while confidentiality and availability remain unaffected.
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 confidenceThe SAP HCM Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 application fails to enforce proper authorization checks for authenticated users, allowing users to perform actions outside their assigned role permissions. This broken access control enables privilege escalation, compromising system integrity while leaving confidentiality and availability unaffected.
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
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 SAP HCM Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 deploymentCheck your SAP system for the presence of the HCM Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 application component. Use SAP transaction SE11 or check the Fiori app catalog for apps with IDs related to timesheet approval.Affected if The Fiori application is deployed in your SAP environment
-
Verify user role assignmentsUse SAP transaction PFCG or SU01 to review the role definitions assigned to users who have access to the Approve Timesheets application. Document the configured authorizations for each role.Affected if Users have roles that grant access to the timesheet approval functionality
-
Test for authorization bypassCreate a test user with limited role permissions for timesheet submission only. Attempt to access the Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 application and approve timesheets for other employees. Compare attempted actions against the assigned role permissions.Affected if A user without approve authorization can successfully approve timesheets for other employees
-
Review application logs for unauthorized actionsUse SAP transaction SLG1 or the Fiori audit logs to search for timesheet approval events. Cross-reference these events with the actor's assigned role permissions to identify approvals performed outside role boundaries.Affected if Approval actions exist for users whose roles do not include timesheet approval permissions
Your environment is affected if the SAP HCM Approve Timesheets Fiori 2.0 application is deployed and users can perform approval actions without corresponding role-based authorization.
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 and enforce role-based authorization validation in the Fiori application to verify user permissions before executing sensitive operations, and conduct a comprehensive review of all API endpoints for similar authorization bypasses.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $16,896.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-42917 — 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-2025-42917 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