CVE-2026-0505
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 BSP applications allow an unauthenticated user to manipulate user-controlled URL parameters that are not sufficiently validated. This could result in unvalidated redirection to attacker-controlled websites, leading to a low impact on confidentiality and integrity, and no impact on the 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 confidenceThis is an Open Redirect (CWE-601) vulnerability in BSP applications where user-controlled URL parameters are not validated before being used in redirect operations. An unauthenticated attacker can craft malicious URLs that redirect users to attacker-controlled websites, exploiting insufficient input validation on redirect logic.
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= 600= 602= 603= 604= 605= 606= 617= 618= 102= 103= 104= 105= 106= 107= 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 product and versionUse transaction code SM37 or check system information via SAP GUI: execute 'System > Status' and note the SAP system version and release number. Alternatively, use ABAP report RSUSR200 to retrieve version details.Affected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: DMS = 600, 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 617; ERP = 618; S4CORE = 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, or 108.
-
Verify if BSP (Business Server Pages) applications are enabledAccess SAP transaction code SE80 (Object Navigator) or use transaction SICF to check if BSP services are active. Look for BSP-related services under the '/sap/bc' path.Affected if BSP applications are active and accessible in the SAP system.
-
Locate BSP applications with redirect functionalitySearch the BSP application codebase (using transaction SE80 or transaction code SE24 for class grep) for keywords: 'redirect', 'IF_HTTP_REQUEST~GET_HEADER', 'SET_LOCATION', or similar redirect methods. Review custom BSP applications that handle URL parameters.Affected if BSP applications exist that accept URL parameters and perform redirect operations using those parameters.
-
Inspect redirect parameter handling for validationReview the code of identified BSP applications. Check if URL parameters used in redirect operations (such as 'url', 'redirect', 'target', or similar) are validated against a whitelist or if user-supplied values are used directly in redirect logic.Affected if Redirect parameters accept user input without proper validation against a whitelist of allowed domains, or if the application permits arbitrary external URLs in redirect parameters.
A user is affected if their SAP system runs an affected version, has BSP applications enabled, and contains BSP pages that use unvalidated URL parameters for redirect operations.
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 strict input validation with a whitelist approach for all redirect URLs, ensuring only trusted domains are allowed. Alternatively, use indirect redirects (e.g., internal mapping tokens) instead of allowing direct URL parameter injection for redirects.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0505 — 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-2026-0505 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