Application Development 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: 

Restriction of Tcode FBZG in company code level.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

There is requirment of Transaction code FBZG for the user. Users are from Spain and Italy. We need restirction for this Tcode at company code level. When ever we are giving any company code value it is taking. I have looked into the checked authorization object for tcode FBZG by using su24. But there is no company code related object has been maintained. Can any anybody please help me how to restrict this Tcode at comapny code level.

Regards

Auroshikha

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

sdipanjan
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi

Please add the following Object in SE93 for FBZG for a forceful check of Company Code.

F_BKPF_BUK FI Accounting Document: Authorization for Company Codes

regards,

Dipanjan

21 REPLIES 21

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

You need to customize i.e. change the program SAPMFBZG which is behind this transaction to include the necessary authorization checks.

Regards,

Gowrinadh

arpan_paik
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

This is a transaction where many transactions get called. Field BUKRS is also there but in program there is no authorization check !!! But I think there may be another way like maintain some value in some table. You can take on this to ABAP who might give some idea on this. May be in the end user exit will be answer.

0 Kudos

If you just want a static authorization check make changes to transaction in SE93. use some existing or custom created object with field BUKRS.

However, this is not a recommended approach.

Regards,

Gowrinadh

0 Kudos

Auroshika,

Check with your ABAP folks whether there are any user exits (include programs) available for this particular transaction FBZG (program SAPMFBZG). If there is one, the ABAP folks can tell you the feasibility of including and object check based on field BUKRS.

One importnt point to note. If a standard object is being used in an include, please check the impact of using the standard object because a lot of other transaction use the SAP standard auth objects. You might inadvertently end up giving access to an object and authorization value which the user should not have for other transactions. Instead you can create a custom auth object (SU21).

Another point to note: Modifying the SAP standard program is a very bad idea. Only use it as a last resort. Try includes first, then your own custom programs and as a last resort, modifying the standard programs.

Regards,

Prashant

0 Kudos

It is not working.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Auroshikha,

i dont think i agree with the others that FBZG works without restrictions. I am sure it does work with restricition on the company code..........i have it in the set-up i have here

I can check tomorrow if there are specific changes we made to the programs but for a start i would think you should check if the users you have in spain and italy have access on S_TABU_DIS as (*) , i think if they have this value they would get defalut authorization on the table view V_TINSO that is needed for FBZG maintainence.

I will try my best to check tomorrow and give you an update on how this works at my end

sdipanjan
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi

Please add the following Object in SE93 for FBZG for a forceful check of Company Code.

F_BKPF_BUK FI Accounting Document: Authorization for Company Codes

regards,

Dipanjan

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

i dont tend to agree to what is suggested adding object F_BKPF_BUK is not correct

FBZG has 4 dofferent functionalities (if you want to call it so). there are 4 radio buttons you can pick from to execute.

1. to copy data from UNIX or DOS (this would require some sort of authorization on the UNIX path, which can be controlled for sure)

2.Enter Data and maintain copied data (this needs change access on table groups "FRTR"): table TINSO

3.Carry out update of data entered (this also needs change access on table groups "FRTR"): Table TINSO

4. Maintain Alterante Bank accounts (this needs change access on table groups "FC17")

all the above 4 steps need a input of the company code

for step 2 mentioned above, when you click the radio button and press enter it takes you to the table maintenance screen, when you want to add/odify new entries, it takes you to transaction OBVU - this has a default check on the object F_T042_BUK (which is for the authorization on the payment processing) and object S_TABU_DIS

control the authorization on FBZG by adding OBVU and by managing the above mentioned objects.

I am sure this would work

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Dipanjan,

Send me the solution in detail.

Regards

Auroshikha

Former Member
0 Kudos

That solution is not working.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Briefly explain the steps. So that I will try again

sdipanjan
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

It's about calling - called relationship of TCodes. If you check this relationship for FBZG, then the list is like below:

FBWE, F_76, FB01, F_72, FD11, FBWD, OBVU

Now the importance and check for Company Code for these Tcodes which are called internally by FBZG and being called a check for the mandatory field the checks are done for the below Objects as provided below:

F_76 F_SKA1_BUK, F_BKPF_BUK

F_72 F_SKA1_BUK

FBWD F_BKPF_BUK

FB01 F_BKPF_BUK

I suggested to add F_BKPF_BUK to add in SE93 to FBZG because the check need to performed when you are in the first screen of this TCode (though this is a forceful blunt check and not invoked through a AUTHORITY-CHECK). I wanted to use the Objects checked for it's called TCode here itself. To make the object available in PFCG for managing designated values of company code you need to add the object to FBZG in SU24 also as C/M check proposal. Then go for a testing with a test id to trace the checks once more.

A good practice will be to add the TCodes FB01, FBWD and OBVU also in role where FBZG is going to be added.

Please let me know if you have any further query.

Regards,

Dipanjan

Former Member
0 Kudos

> A good practice will be to add the TCodes .... OBVU ... also in role where FBZG is going to be added.

Thanks. I always wondered where that was called from...

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

I have already done this and tested. But it is not working. I think the tcode OBVU is not called by FBZG.

Regards

Auroshikha

Former Member
0 Kudos

When you click on MAINTAIN DATA tab in FBZG, you are in transaction OBVU, isnt it?

sdipanjan
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Then you need a Code enhancement for this. Put a post to SAP for this.

regards,

Dipanjan

Former Member
0 Kudos

Another option would be to create a mainteance view to a table of your choice adn assign it as a parameter to OBVU.

You can then add your company code check on an object of your choice in the view maintenance call.

Strange concept... but I thought that was what SAP intended here...

Cheers,

Julius

sdipanjan
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Unfortunately this is not the only call from FBZG! We can't deprive others also. SAP should look into this matter i hope as they intended to put Comp. code as mandatory field in the first screen. But didn't think about the segregation through a check.

Regards,

Dipanjan

Former Member
0 Kudos

I dont seem to understand the discussion any more

I think the issue is being made a bit more complex, than it is. Anyway, as i dont seem to get the drift - i will stay away

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Shekar,

Perhaps we are just on different releases and SP levels?

For me, OBVU is a parameter transaction for a view maintenance call with edit mode flagged, but no view is defined - so it stops in the initial screen of SM30 and asks for a table.

My understanding is that you configure this by creating a view for OBVU which points, for example, at T100. There you can add the company code check.

Please start transaction OBVU directly and check. Perhaps this has changed?

Cheers,

Julius

Former Member
0 Kudos

thanks for that, Julius.........there is some sanity restored in my thought process.

I get your point now, you are quite right in what you said.

I am of the opinion that if the right effort is expended, the issue can Definitely be solved.........it is all about intent (this is a not for the thread initiator)

By the way, I am on ECC6.0 Final Rlease Version 710, Patch Level 13.

Windows Version: Microsoft WIndows XP 5.1 (2600)

Service Pack: 3