WBS release authorisation check

[Former Member]

Hi All

My requirement is that for all users , having authorisation for cj20 transcation, should not have authorisation for wbs release expect for few.

Please suggest.

Regards,

Vishal

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Vishal,

Your requirement is possible to restrict releasing wbse by specific uses only as per standard SAP.

Provide CJ20N access to all uses but release WBSE authorization you can give to specific uses only.

Let me check the Authorization Object for release and reply back to u !! I fogot the T-Code to check the TCode wise authorization objects.

Meanwhile you can check authorization object in PFCG for any role which is having authorization for CJ20N.

Regards

Hari.

Edited by: Hari Krishna Kudaravalli on Jun 11, 2009 12:32 AM

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Hari,

Thanks for the answer.

I was able to see authorisation objects through su24.

But , could not locate which one is for WBS release check.

I think i can not find authorisation object for WBS release from either su24 or PFCG.

Please suggest something different from this.

Regards,

Vishal

[Former Member]

Hi

The WBS release status can be changed with the help of a coding in the user status.

This is possible and i have done the same in an implementation project. Don't remember the object to be updated but a technical guy can help you in this regard

Regards,

Uddhab

[nitin_patoliya]

If you are using user status than you can earsily achieve the same. Create user status profile a/c to your requirement in OK02. Create Authorization key in BS52. Assign the same ot relevent user status.

Use authorization object B_USERSTAT to give authorizations for those authorization keys

Regards

Nitin P.

[Former Member]

Dear Sir,

Thanks for the answer.

But I suppose user status authorisation check can not control release of WBS at user specific level.

Let us take one example :

Suppose the last user status before release of WBS is "X" .

and suppose only one user has access to change this user status to "X",

Even then after WBS user status has been changed to X by that only one specific user, every user will have access to do WBS Release .

I think there will not be any check at WBS release.

Please suggest .

Regards,

Vishal

[nitin_patoliya]

You have correctly understood.. we have to believe like that once you set X, Ideally you have release the same.... Till the itme you don't wanted to Release the WBS don't set X ... Once you set X user status, the person is immediately going ot release the same.. Than it don't make diff. all other user are also able to release the same.....

Indirectly bu setting user status you are directing the sys. to set perticular user status and in that user status only Release is allowed... in all other user status prior to it Release is forbidden.... you are assigning authorization to set this X to some core persone only.....

This way it can be controlled..

Regards

Nitin P.

[Former Member]

Dear Sir,

Thanks for the reply.

I agree with your answer.

I have just one doubt

How to provide user specific authorisation check at "X" user status level.

As per your earlier explation for this, User status profile has to be maintained.

That is fine.

What do we maintain in authorisation key.

How is this authorision key linked to user status "X".

Further how is authorisation key maintained in authorization object B_USERSTAT .

Please expalin this in detail for my convenience as I have never done user specific authorisation check at wbs user status level.

Thanks in advance .

Regards,

Vishal

[nitin_patoliya]

I believe that up to user status profile creation yo are comfortable, Create Authorization Keys in BS52. assign that key in OK02 ( just besides your user status X, scroll right hand side ).

Ask your BASIS to use authorization object B_USERSTAT, remaining they will does...

I hope this will help you. Finally we all are consultants, Noone is sir, each and every body are on the learning curve...

Regards

Nitin P.

[Former Member]

Hi Nitin,

Thanks for the answer.

I think i will be able to do it now.

Regards,

Vishal