dbcve.org
Code InjectionWeakness · CWE-94

CVE-2025-42950

CRITICAL · 9.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-08-12
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
SAP Landscape Transformation (SLT) allows an attacker with user privileges to exploit a vulnerability in the function module exposed via RFC. This flaw enables the injection of arbitrary ABAP code into the system, bypassing essential authorization checks. This vulnerability effectively functions as a backdoor, creating the risk of full system compromise, undermining the 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 · high confidence

SAP Landscape Transformation (SLT) contains a critical backdoor where a function module exposed via RFC allows an attacker with basic user privileges to inject arbitrary ABAP code, bypassing all authorization checks. This enables full system compromise including data exfiltration, modification, and service disruption.

MitigationApply SAP security patches for CVE-2025-42950 immediately. Review and restrict RFC-exposed function modules in SLT, disable unnecessary RFC interfaces, and audit user privileges to limit exposure.

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
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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 checks

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

  1. Verify SAP SLT installation and version
    Use transaction code SE11 or SM37 to query the SAP Landscape Transformation (SLT) component version. Access the system information via SAP transaction SM51 or check the installed software components via SAINT. Record the exact SLT version number.
    Affected if The installed SLT version falls within the affected version range for CVE-2025-42950 (compare your version to SAP's official affected versions).
  2. Confirm RFC interface is enabled for SLT
    Use transaction SM59 to view RFC destinations. Look for RFC connections related to SLT (typically named like LTRC_* or SAP_LTRC_*). Check the RFC type and activation status.
    Affected if An active RFC destination exists for SLT, indicating the interface is enabled and potentially exposed.
  3. Identify exposed function modules in SLT RFC
    Use transaction SE37 (Function Builder) or SAAB to inspect function modules exposed via the SLT RFC connection. Check which function modules are marked as RFC-enabled in the attributes. Cross-reference with transaction code SRTM to monitor RFC traffic.
    Affected if Any function module in SLT is RFC-enabled and accessible without elevated privileges.
  4. Review user authorization for SLT RFC access
    Use transaction SUIM (User Information System) or SU53 to audit users with RFC authorization for SLT-related function modules. Check roles assigned to users accessing the SLT RFC destination.
    Affected if Users with only basic privileges (without elevated SAP_ALL or SLT-specific admin rights) can access RFC-enabled SLT function modules.
  5. Inspect for unauthorized ABAP code execution attempts
    Use transaction SLG1 to review application logs for SLT (object: /BTI/RE* or similar SLT-specific object codes). Monitor for suspicious function module calls, especially SE37 or SWO1 invocations originating from RFC users.
    Affected if Logs show function module calls or ABAP code execution attempts from users lacking proper authorization for such operations.

A defender is affected if their SAP SLT version is within the vulnerable range AND the RFC interface is enabled, allowing basic users to execute arbitrary ABAP code via exposed function modules.

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

Apply SAP security patches for CVE-2025-42950 immediately. Review and restrict RFC-exposed function modules in SLT, disable unnecessary RFC interfaces, and audit user privileges to limit exposure.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing10.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
34.0 hours of engineering $5,940
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-42950 — 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-2025-42950 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