Application Development and Automation Discussions
Join the discussions or start your own on all things application development, including tools and APIs, programming models, and keeping your skills sharp.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Read only

Curiosity Question Authorization Checks

Former Member
0 Likes
1,150

I created a Supervisor role that had only CO13, I wanted to use this role with other roles in place that have the plant numbers.  So for the field WERKS I entered ' ' on role A below. Then Role B has the plant numbers on field WERKS, that work as planned. The problem came under the ACTVT field.  Role A has activity 85, Role B has 01.02 and 03 assigned.  The authorization failed, I had to add 85 to the ACTVY for Role B.  Why didn't pick up the 85 on the ACTVY field from Role A if both roles were asigned to the user?

Thanks for your help

TS

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Read only

Former Member
0 Likes
1,127

Julius said correct, combination of authrization fields under an authorization object creates authorization instance which is checked rather than individual fields. In your case, authorization check failed as activity 85 along with plant value doesn't exist in same authorization instance. Once you have included activity 85 in role B the combination is created and results in successful authorization check.

I created a Supervisor role that had only CO13, I wanted to use this role with other roles in place that have the plant numbers.  So for the field WERKS I entered ' ' on role A below. Then Role B has the plant numbers on field WERKS, that work as planned. The problem came under the ACTVT field.  Role A has activity 85, Role B has 01.02 and 03 assigned.  The authorization failed, I had to add 85 to the ACTVY for Role B.  Why didn't pick up the 85 on the ACTVY field from Role A if both roles were asigned to the user?

Thanks for your help

TS

3 REPLIES 3
Read only

Former Member
0 Likes
1,127

SAP does not create a pulp out of the authorizations. Each instance of authorizations (even if in the same role) is it's own combination.

What you have done is the basis for the biggest flawed disasters based on belief instead of proper training about authorization concepts. Sometimes even with training people (value role fanatics) are still stronger believers than what they are useful in the long run.

Go for course ADM940 - it will help you gain a good understanding of the fundamentals. Then carry on.

Cheers,

Julius

Read only

Former Member
0 Likes
1,128

Julius said correct, combination of authrization fields under an authorization object creates authorization instance which is checked rather than individual fields. In your case, authorization check failed as activity 85 along with plant value doesn't exist in same authorization instance. Once you have included activity 85 in role B the combination is created and results in successful authorization check.

Read only

0 Likes
1,127

Thank you Piyusk, that is what I figured...