Planning Stucture authorization issue in SCM

[Former Member]

Hello Experts,

Need your help.

In our SCM7.0 system, we have implemented FM: /SAPAPO/MCP_PERMISSION_CHECK2 for authorization check to Planning Structure Infocube. That is working fine.

Now Users are facing authorization issue in Prodcution when they executed transaction /n/SAPAPO/SDP94 with below message.

Error message: You do not have authorization for all the characteristic values selected Message no. AUTHORITY041

Analysis authorization trace message: " Message EYE001: You do not have sufficient authorization for InfoProvider ZDM_PLN1 with activity 03.

We have assigned customized analysis authorization and that is maintained with InfoProvider "0TCAIPROV" as " * ".

Earlier this was working fine in production but now users are getting authorization issue. When we tested in other systems, it is working fine.

I appreciate your help in this issue.

Regards

Ravi

Edited by: Ravi K on Jul 5, 2011 6:04 PM

[Former Member]

Ravi

Verify the selections in the Production system v/s the test system. Are they exactly the same ? I can think of two possibilities -

1. User is attempting to access a selection where he/ she does not have access to at least one of the CVC's filtered by the CVC.

2. The selection definition should (but does not in your case) contain the characteristic on which the authorization is setup.

Rishi Menon

[Former Member]

Hi Rishi,

I verified with same selection and CVCs in Production and test system. This is fine in test system.

It is failing at InfoProvider authorization check using FM RSEC_AUTHORITY_CHECK_IPROV.

regards,

Ravi

[Former Member]

Ravi

All CVC level authorization in DP (/SAPAPO/SDP94) is through the Planning Object Structure Infocube. So it's not surprising that its failing the InfoProvider check. Sorry, cant think of any other reason.

RIshi Menon

[Former Member]

Found the root cause of the issue.

Thanks

Ravi.

[Former Member]

Ravi

Would be helpful to all if you mention what your solution is.

Rishi Menon