Authorization object in update task

[Former Member]

Hello experts,

I am getting an issue with authorization object in update task. In the message processing program for Purchase Order, we have added an authorization check on M_BEST_WRK. It works fine when dealt online however when the messages are processed in Update Task the authorization object does not give any failures. I also tried adding the transaction ME9F in SU24 for auth object M_BEST_WRK.

Please let me if there is any wok around for this issue.

Thanks,

Ganesh Khumse

[Former Member]

Hi,

Please do not check the authorization object in update task. you may need to check the authoration object in the BEFORE_SAVE event.

This statement checks whether authorization is entered in the user master record of the current user or the user specified in user for the authorization object entered in the field auth_obj, and whether this authorization is sufficient for the request specified in the statement. A flat character-type field that contains the name of an authorization object is expected for auth_obj. Without the addition FOR USER, the authorization of the current user is checked.

Cheers,

[Former Member]

Thanks for the reply. We did a workaround to solve the issue.

To summerize the issue and solution; its true that SAP bypasses all the authorization checks in update task. This is at a very basic level of SAP so we can not help it. To avoid this failure of authority check we implemnted an OSS notes 1386395 and 529174 so the authorization checks are done in ME9F itself. Now ME9F does not display the un-authorized PO's.

Authority checks updates at all levels are available in service packege 604 and we are at 603 so we had to do an implicit enhancement in the program RM06ENDR_ALV to add the authority check at plant level on the PO as the OSS notes applied provides the solution for header level data. I know this is not the good way to do it but it solved the production issue till we apply the next service packege.

Hope this helps if anyone stuck in the same situation.

Thanks,

Ganesh Khumse