SAP Security Concepts
Define a user group as mandatory field in the user root
The goal is for SAP SuccessFactors users to maintain an overview of roles and authorizations in the system. Analysis and reporting tools help to achieve this. At ABS Team, we use our own combination of an SAP SuccessFactors solution and external documentation for this purpose. As the first graphic shows, our approach is built on a delta concept: all SAP authorizations and processes function independently of each other.
The permission check for the S_PATH object is performed as described only for files corresponding to a path with a permission group in the SPTH table. In our example, you should grant permission for the S_PATH object with the value FILE in the FS_BRGRU field to access files with the path /tmp/myfiles*. Note that the authorization object only distinguishes two types of access. These two values summarise the access types of the S_DATASET authorization object. The value Modify corresponds to the values Delete, Write, and Write with Filter; the value View corresponds to Read and Read with Filter.
Development
Your compliance requirements specify that background jobs that are used should be maintained with permission proposals? We'll show you how to do that. Particularly in the banking environment, there are very strict guidelines for the permissions of background jobs used for monthly and quarterly financial statements, etc. Only selected users or dedicated system users may have these permissions. In order to clearly distinguish these permissions from the end-user permissions, it is useful to explicitly maintain the permissions for specific background jobs with suggestion values, so that these values can be used repeatedly to maintain permissions and are therefore transparent. You may have noticed that in the transaction SU24 you have no way to maintain background job credentials. So what's the best way to do that?
Do you also work in a complex system landscape where roles are decentralised? Then, inconsistencies can occur by transporting profiles from different systems to a target system. We'll show you how to prevent that. In the case of decentralised maintenance of eligibility roles, i.e. maintenance of roles in different systems or clients, there is a risk that the number sequences for the generation of eligibility profiles overlap. You can then generate profiles with the same name for different roles in different clients. As soon as you transport these eponymous permission profiles into a common target system, the profile will be overwritten by the newly imported profile and inconsistencies will arise. As a result, you may, for example, assign an ERP Permissions Role an SCM permission profile. This may result in a user assigned the ERP role not obtaining the required permissions or even too many permissions. You also have a problem if you want to use the permission profile to determine the source system and the client in which this profile was generated. This is not possible if the first and third characters of the SAP System ID (SID) and the number sequence for generating the permission profile match.
During go-live, the assignment of necessary authorizations is particularly time-critical. The "Shortcut for SAP systems" application provides functions for this purpose, so that the go-live does not get bogged down because of missing authorizations.
Not all users should be able to log on to the application server during your maintenance? Use the security policy and a new profile parameter.
If these issues are not taken into account during a conversion, there will be an imbalance between the system and the components to be protected, since the change in the system constellation means that new components, such as those mentioned above, must also be taken into account.