Sec dynamic program

Switching to static calls provides a full solution to the security problem presented here. If this is not possible, the input data must be checked accordingly before being used as function module names.

The message in questions is only produced for RFC calls, i. In the case in question, external data is used within a dynamic program call meaning a dynamic call of a report or transaction. This enables potential attackers to call unexpected program units by making unexpected input, and thereby illegally modify the running of the program. First check whether it is necessary to use dynamic program calls. If this is not possible, the input data must be checked accordingly before being used as report names or transaction names.

In the transaction code editor transaction SE93 , developers can specify an authorization object with authorization values. If an entry of this type is found, the authorization specified there is checked. The developer of the program in question must decide whether the transaction start authorization is checked.

In special cases, it may be appropriate to have an additional allow list check see the following explanation. Here, the name of a called function module can be controlled using either the user interface or a parameter of an RFC-enabled function module. An attacker might be able to call forbidden function modules by entering unexpected data in this location.

First check whether it is necessary to use dynamic function module calls. Dynamic function module calls are frequent, which means that only those calls are registered here for which some or all of the function module name can be controlled meaningfully using the user interface or RFC.

To do this, a local data flow analysis is performed. The additional check was specified in the transaction editor, but no check on this authorization was found in the code. This could present a security risk.

It works in the same way as the function module call. In systems with older releases, the message must be suppressed using an exemption. In called procedures, a search is also performed for these authorization checks up to a nesting depth of five. Here, a check on the authorization object from the transaction editor SE93 was found.

Here, none of the authorization checks above were found in the code. In called procedures, a search is also performed for these authorization checks up to a restricted nesting depth. The message is displayed if none of the authorization checks above are found. An allow list check restricts the set of potential transactions called, which means that the security risk is already reduced. Depending on the context, this restriction may be enough. In the case in question, external data is used within a dynamic transaction call.

This enables potential attackers to call unexpected transactions by making unexpected input, and thereby illegally modify the running of the program. Both the authorization check aspect and the aspect of dynamics in the name of the called transaction must be considered. In most situations, an authorization check is the best choice for removing the security problem.

First check whether it is necessary to use dynamic transaction calls. Switching to static calls provides a solution to the security problem presented here at least. If this is not possible, the input data must be checked accordingly before being used as transaction names. If an authorization check is not predefined, an error message stating that the authorization check is missing might be raised the next time the program is checked.

The authorization check might be incomplete, since the system analysis cannot decide whether a check was made on the authorization from the transaction editor transaction SE Switching to static calls provides a solution to the security problem presented here.

Calls of the obsolete escape methods must be replaced by calls of the predefined function ESCAPE , appropriate for the context in question. More information is available in the ABAP keyword documentation. This is the only way to ensure that the encoding matches the context in which an attribute value is used in the finished HTML document. If the position in question does not have any security problems and there is no point in modifying the BSP page, an exemption should be requested in ATC.

Obsolete designs can no longer be used. If sy-subrc is not equal to 0, the authorization check was not successful. Statements such as ENDIF, simple assignments that do not modify sy-subrc , or comments are permitted before reads. Some declarative statements, such as DATA, are also valid.

Statements such as ENDIF, simple assignments that do not modify the return value , or comments are permitted before reads. If the message is caused by an inconsistent BAdI implementation , contact the person responsible for the BAdI implementation classes specified in the message details. Once the security-relevant subroutine FORM routine has been called, a check must be run to verify that execution was successful.

In general this is an evaluation of the corresponding output parameter or a check of system field SY-SUBRC, if the subroutine uses this as an implicit output parameter. A check is run to verify if an evaluation is performed after an external security-relevant subroutine is called.

After a procedure is called, the corresponding output parameter must be queried. This delegates the job of responding appropriately to a failed authorization check to the the caller B. In this case, we know that a globally visible procedure delegates the evaluation of the result of an authorization check to its calling programs.

Therefore the procedure should be registered as security-relevant in CVA, so that all its calling programs can be checked, to verify that they evaluate the returned result. The successful execution check is delegated to the calling program. First check whether it is necessary to use the global procedure.

Switching to a local procedure for example, from a public to a private method means that messages are no longer displayed. Once the procedure has been registered as security-relevant, messages are no longer displayed. Instead, new security messages can now be displayed in all programs that use the registered procedure. In the case in question, this return is either reused as the return code of the current procedure or a classic exception is raised dependent on the return code which creates a new return code.

This means that the handling of the value is delegated to the caller of the current procedure. After the procedure call, run the evaluation of the return value with an appropriate response for example, error message or cancel. However, calling operating system commands can be a potential security problem. This is a particular risk in cases where end users can modify or manipulate the parameters of an operating system command.

Usually all system function calls CALL cfunc are only allowed to be used in system programs and are not allowed to be used in application programs. However, calling C functions can be a potential security problem. Potential attackers can call unwanted kernel functions by making unexpected input, and thereby illegally modify the running of the program.

You can do this by using official APIs such as function modules and methods. If this is not possible, check whether it is really necessary to use dynamic calls of C functions. One solution is to switch to using static calls. If this is not possible either, the input data must be checked accordingly before being used as C function names.

If user input is incorporated in the names cfunc, the CALL statement is reported. A local data flow analysis is performed to do this. This is often a very sensible requirement. Example: Data needs to be processed using a specific user in a background job. In the background job itself, however, the current user should check the authorization again. If an authorization check needs to be run for a user other than the logged on user, it is important to ensure that the user name specified for the addition FOR USER cannot be manipulated externally by making entries on the user interface, for example.

Checks against an allow list can be a good way of verifying user names entered from outside. In the example above authorization check before scheduling a background job for the user name to be used to run the job , it is important that you perform an authorization check yourself in the background job.

Request an exemption in this case. Here, the source of the user name is not checked. Any allow list checks are ignored. In RFC calls of these functions, it is often a requirement to check the authorization for the same user ID as the logged on user in the local system. However, you should note that this user name might be assigned to a different person in the called system.

These conditions can also contain functional ABAP method calls. If this is not possible, the input data must be checked appropriately before being used in the dynamic clause. Authorization checks should be used to secure reports against being called by unauthorized users.

Check whether an authorization check exists for this report and, if necessary, add a check at the start of the report. The report code is scanned for specific authorization checks see below , including its form routines, dynpro modules, function calls, and method calls. The system also searches for potentially dangerous statements. These include database access and file access in particular.

If a statement like this is found before an authorization check, a message is displayed. It is also possible to assign an authorization group to the report, in which case an authorization check does not need to be integrated and no message is displayed if the group is valid.

The authorization group can be entered in the properties of the report. Authorization checks should be used to secure RFC function modules against being called by unauthorized users. Check whether an authorization check exists for this RFC function module and, if necessary, add a check at the start of the RFC function module. The RFC function module code is scanned for specific authorization checks see below , including its form routines, dynpro modules, function calls, and method calls.

In the case in question, external data is injected into an SQL statement that is passed for execution by the database. It is important that user input is not injected directly into the SQL statement. If it is necessary to create the SQL statement based on user input regardless of this, this input must be thoroughly checked beforehand.

A method or function was called with a hard coded password. This is a possible indication, for example, that a user or an RFC destination exists in the system with logon data from the source code. Verify that the hard coded password is necessary and, if possible, stop using the hard coded value.

A parameter is password-relevant if it follows a particular naming convention. A variable or constant with a hard coded password exists.

All password-relevant fields that have a hard-coded value are reported. A field is a password-relevant field if it follows a specific naming convention or has a specific type.

About the author. View All Posts. Click here to post a comment. Cancel reply Comment Name Email Website. Cpp Programming — Partition Problem. Comment Share This! Wherever we see a recursive solution that has repeated calls for same inputs, we can optimize it using Dynamic Programming.

The idea is to simply store the results of subproblems, so that we do not have to re-compute them when needed later. This simple optimization reduces time complexities from exponential to polynomial. For example, if we write simple recursive solution for Fibonacci Numbers , we get exponential time complexity and if we optimize it by storing solutions of subproblems, time complexity reduces to linear.

Complete Interview Preparation Get fulfilled all your interview preparation needs at a single place with the Complete Interview Preparation Course that provides you all the required stuff to prepare for any product-based, service-based, or start-up company at the most affordable prices.

If you like GeeksforGeeks and would like to contribute, you can also write an article and mail your article to review-team geeksforgeeks. See your article appearing on the GeeksforGeeks main page and help other Geeks.

Please write comments if you find anything incorrect, or you want to share more information about the topic discussed above.