dbcve.org
Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2026-40133

MEDIUM · 6.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-12
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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
Due to missing authorization check in SAP S/4HANA Condition Maintenance, an authenticated attacker could gain unauthorized access to view and modify condition table records, resulting in low impact on the confidentiality and integrity of the data. Additionally, this vulnerability may prevent the legitimate user from accessing the records, causing low impact on application availability.

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

SAP S/4HANA Condition Maintenance lacks proper authorization checks, allowing authenticated attackers to view and modify condition table records without appropriate permissions. This broken access control vulnerability enables unauthorized data access and manipulation with low confidentiality and integrity impact, plus potential denial of service for legitimate users.

MitigationImplement proper authorization checks in SAP S/4HANA Condition Maintenance using SAP's authorization concept (authorization objects, role-based access controls) to enforce permission validation before allowing access to condition table records.

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
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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 S/4HANA installation
    Execute transaction SM51 or use SAPMMC to identify the SAP system and verify it is S/4HANA. Check system version in system information.
    Affected if The system is running SAP S/4HANA with Condition Maintenance component enabled
  2. Identify Condition Maintenance component version
    Use transaction SPAM or SAINT to check installed packages. Query table CVERS for component SAP_S4HANA_COND_MAINT or similar condition maintenance-related components.
    Affected if The Condition Maintenance component is installed and its version cannot be verified against a patched release
  3. Verify authorization object configuration for condition tables
    Use transaction SU53 after attempting to access condition tables via V/03, V/04, or V/16 to check missing authorizations. Examine authorization objects like V_VAVB_AK, V_VAVB_VK for condition table access rights.
    Affected if Users without proper VAVB authorization objects can still access or modify condition table records
  4. Review user role assignments for condition maintenance
    Use transaction PFCG to examine roles assigned to users who access condition tables. Check for roles containing authorization objects that grant unrestricted condition table access.
    Affected if Users have roles that allow access to condition maintenance without proper business partner or sales area restrictions
  5. Check for unauthorized condition table modifications in logs
    Use transaction SCU3 or system logs (SM37) to review change documents for tables like A003, A004, A005 (condition tables). Look for modifications by users without documented authorization.
    Affected if Condition table records show modifications by users lacking documented permission or by users outside authorized organizational levels

A user is affected if they run SAP S/4HANA with Condition Maintenance enabled and have not properly restricted authorization objects V_VAVB to prevent unauthorized access to condition table records.

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

Implement proper authorization checks in SAP S/4HANA Condition Maintenance using SAP's authorization concept (authorization objects, role-based access controls) to enforce permission validation before allowing access to condition table records.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,280
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40133 — 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-2026-40133 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