09-28-2009 7:40 PM
I am looking to limit the info that can be pulled from transaction FAGLB03 by profit center.
I have tried adding profit center auth objects to the role. I also used SU24- turning on K_PCA from No to Yes, but the user is still able to pull all data.
Any other ideas how to limit by profit center? The profit center listing I see in FAGLB03 is PRCTR from FAGL_HEADER.
Please advise.
09-29-2009 9:16 AM
Hi Michelle,
The New G/L authorisation concept is a mess at the moment.
I recommend that you have a look through OSS as I am pretty sure I have implemented a note previously which activated Profit Centre restriction at a previous client. Unfortunately I can't remember any more than that.
Good Luck.
09-28-2009 10:35 PM
Hi,
Proposal value Yes/No is not a switch for activating authorization check for that object. It only means if the object is proposed in PFCG when you add new transaction into role.
It looks like it does not check profit centre authorization by default. It depends on your config. You can define selection characteristics for balance display in SPRO -> Financial Accounting -> General Ledger Accounting -> Information System -> Define Balance Display. If you add field PRCTR to your characteristics then SAP should check profit centre authorization. I don't know all consequences of this setting so be careful. If you don't want to touch your config then have a look at BADI FAGL_AUTH_ADD_DATA_C. It's called from transaction FAGLB03 it can be used for implementing additional authorization checks.
Cheers
09-29-2009 9:16 AM
Hi Michelle,
The New G/L authorisation concept is a mess at the moment.
I recommend that you have a look through OSS as I am pretty sure I have implemented a note previously which activated Profit Centre restriction at a previous client. Unfortunately I can't remember any more than that.
Good Luck.
09-29-2009 9:28 AM
Hi,
Probably you mean note 1238115. When I checked that program I was surprised that it checks authorization for profit centre only if it is set as characteristic. It is a bug fixed in that note.
Cheers