dbcve.org
Cross-site Scripting (XSS)Weakness · CWE-79

CVE-2026-0512

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-14
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Due to a Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the SAP Supplier Relationship Management (SICF Handler in SRM Catalog), an unauthenticated attacker could craft a malicious URL, that if accessed by a victim, results in execution of malicious content within the victim's browser. This could allow the attacker to access and modify information, impacting the confidentiality and integrity of the application, while availability remains 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 confidence

A Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the SICF Handler within SAP Supplier Relationship Management (SRM) Catalog. An unauthenticated attacker can craft a malicious URL containing JavaScript payload that, when accessed by a victim, executes in the victim's browser context, allowing the attacker to steal session tokens, access/modify data, or perform actions on behalf of the user.

MitigationApply the relevant SAP security patch for this vulnerability; implement output encoding and input validation on the SICF Handler; consider implementing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers as a defense-in-depth measure.

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
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 checks

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

  1. Confirm SAP SRM installation and version
    Execute transaction SM37 or use SAP MII version check: log into SAP GUI, run transaction /n/APP/SP_VERSION or check SAP System Information in the SAP Logon pad. Look for 'SAP Supplier Relationship Management' or 'SRM' in the installed software components.
    Affected if SAP SRM is installed and the version falls within the affected version range (compare your installed SRM version to the advisory).
  2. Verify SICF service for SRM Catalog is active
    In SAP GUI, run transaction SICF. Navigate to the path typically used for SRM Catalog services (default path: /default_host/sap/bc/webdynpro/sap/srm_catalog or similar paths under /sap/bc/webdynpro/sap/). Check if the service is active (green status indicator).
    Affected if The SICF service handler for SRM Catalog is active and exposed via HTTP/HTTPS.
  3. Inspect SICF handler configuration
    In transaction SICF, select the SRM Catalog service path, then choose 'Handler List' from the menu. Review the assigned handler classes for the CL_HTTP_EXT_* or custom handler classes that process URL parameters.
    Affected if The SICF handler processes URL parameters without proper output encoding or input validation.
  4. Review web access logs for malicious URL patterns
    Access transaction SM37 or check SAP Web Dispatcher logs (default path: /usr/sap/<SID>/J00/log/access_log.*). Search for requests to the SRM Catalog SICF service containing patterns like <script>, javascript:, onerror=, or other XSS payloads in URL parameters.
    Affected if Suspicious requests with XSS payloads are found targeting the SRM Catalog endpoint.

You are affected if SAP SRM with an exposed SICF handler for the SRM Catalog is running and web access logs show attempts to inject JavaScript via URL parameters, or if your SRM version matches the affected range.

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 the relevant SAP security patch for this vulnerability; implement output encoding and input validation on the SICF Handler; consider implementing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers as a defense-in-depth measure.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation8.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,680
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-0512 — 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-2026-0512 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