SARA Archive Administration
PFCG Role maintenance
Either temporary programme calls are blocked that are actually desired or enormously large gateway logs must be analysed. If, due to the heavy workload, one were to decide to forgo the use of the access control lists permanently, this would be a major security vulnerability. The unprotected system does not have any limitations on the external services that may register, and there are no rules for running programmes. One possible consequence would be, for example, the registration of an external system on which malicious programmes exist. At the moment when foreign programmes are running on your system without any control, you can expect that great damage will be done. For example, it ranges from an unnoticed reading of purchase and sales figures, a diversion of funds, to a paralysis or manipulation of the entire system. In addition, this scenario is also possible for poorly maintained access control lists. Our solution: secinfo and reginfo Generator for SAP RFC Gateway To solve the problem, we have developed a generator that can automatically create secinfo and reginfo files based on gateway logs. The basic idea is based on the logging-based approach. It performs the task of time-consuming analysis of log files and also ensures maximum reliability through automation. Nevertheless, the entries of the generated files should be checked by one person. Since the log files used as input are sensitive data, of course none of the inserted data leave your system. More information about the generator can be found here.
In the default scenario, the support packages in the queue are fully loaded. In the event of an error, you will not be able to resume and complete the playback successfully unless the error(s) are resolved. Prerequisites The queue is already defined. Procedure To set the scenario you want, select Additions Settings. Select the desired scenario. Select Insert Support Package Queue. You can also use this function to restore an aborted commit procedure. The status bar provides information on the progress of the commit and the latest steps of the SAP Patch Manager. During the recording, you may get into the modification comparison (SPDD, SPAU). If you are playing with the default scenario, you must immediately perform the comparison of Dictionary objects (transaction SPDD), whereas when you compare Repository objects (transaction SPAU), you have the choice to skip it first and perform it later (modification comparison [page 22]). The mode is blocked while a Support Package is being introduced. To avoid repeated login, open a second mode before inserting the queue.
Integration / Interfaces
Project successes should also be documented and circulated as success stories of the SAP basis or made available to the SAP basis stakeholders to highlight the importance of the SAP basis. These success stories can be shared from the grassroots or from the outside, for example. Examples include CIO communications or project reports. BENEFITS & CONSEQUENCES The added value of the implementation of the recommendations described above lies in the guaranteed operational stability and operational safety. In addition, a company and in particular an IT organisation with a strong SAP basis receives a competent and sustainable partner for SAP topics and technologies, who is always looking at the SAP picture in general. Furthermore, all business and IT departments are aware of the role and the scope of the SAP basis. This means that you can contact them as the right person in good time. There is a lower risk that certain areas may develop shadow IT related to SAP topics and technologies due to lack of transparency.
In this article on SAP Security Automation I would like to take a look at the future of automated processes in the SAP Security area. For many companies, the topic of security automation still offers a lot of potential in terms of time savings and process optimisation. Our daily work environment offers numerous tasks that could be handled excellently automatically. For this reason, in this article I present two of the possibilities that already exist in the broad area of security automation. Security Automation via SAP Security Check The first option of Security Automation, which I want to introduce here, is the automatic verification of the existing permissions. Have you ever wondered who has critical permissions in your SAP system? And have you ever tried to do this by hand? Depending on the level of expertise and experience of the privilege administrator, this is a time-consuming work. If an audit is also announced and the SAP system is to be checked for critical permissions and segregation of duties, then it is very difficult to meet all requirements and secure the eligibility landscape in this respect. For this reason, various vendors provide solutions to automate the verification of the permission system with regard to critical permissions and segregation of duties using tool support. This allows permission administrators to use their valuable time to correct the errors rather than just looking for them. For example, we use a tool that runs through the verification of over 250 rules. We then get an evaluation of which rules are violated and which points are correct. A simple example of such rules is the use of the SAP_ALL profile. Another would be to grant the jump permission in debugging (S_DEVELOP permission object with the ACTVT = 02 field). These are two relatively simple examples of Security Check tools' rulebook. In addition, queries are also made, which are located in the field of Segregation of Duties. Using this tool allowed us to move from manual validation of critical permissions to an automatic process.
For administrators, a useful product - "Shortcut for SAP Systems" - is available in the SAP basis area.
This can be called under Services.
An orientation towards the idea of cloud computing can help.