CVE-2026-0511
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 Fiori App Intercompany Balance Reconciliation does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user, resulting in escalation of privileges. This has high impact on confidentiality and integrity of the application ,availability is not impacted.
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 authorization vulnerability in SAP Fiori App Intercompany Balance Reconciliation where the application fails to perform proper authorization checks for authenticated users, allowing privilege escalation. An authenticated attacker can access functionality or data beyond what their assigned role should permit, impacting confidentiality and integrity.
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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 if Intercompany Balance Reconciliation app is deployedIn SAP Fiori Admin UI (FLC_FND_SUS or Fiori Configuration), search for app 'Intercompany Balance Reconciliation' or check the app catalog for IC_BALANCE_RECONCILIATION. Alternatively, query SAP Fiori launchpad catalog entries for this application name.Affected if The app appears in the deployed Fiori apps catalog
-
Determine the application versionIn SAP Fiori Admin, select the app and view its version details. Also check SAP Note 2564101 or relevant SAP Fiori apps reference for the deployed version of IC Balance Reconciliation.Affected if Version cannot be determined or is unknown - the vulnerability may still apply
-
Review user role assignments for the appUse transaction PFCG to review roles assigned to users. Check if roles grant access to transaction /n/UI2/IC_BALANCE_RECONCILIATION or related OData service. Compare assigned roles against the principle of least privilege.Affected if Users have roles that grant broader access than their job function requires
-
Check for authorization bypass indicatorsAudit logs via transaction SLG1 (Object: /IWFND/ERROR_LOG or /UI2/CHIP). Look for requests to Intercompany Balance Reconciliation where users access data outside their organizational scope (check tables like FAGLFLEXT, GLPCA for unauthorized access patterns).Affected if Logs show users accessing data or functions outside their assigned role scope
User is affected if the Intercompany Balance Reconciliation Fiori app is deployed and authenticated users can access data or functionality beyond what their assigned SAP role should permit.
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 proper role-based authorization checks in the Intercompany Balance Reconciliation application and enforce least-privilege access controls to ensure users can only access data and functions appropriate to their assigned roles.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0511 — 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-2026-0511 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