Customer Master No authorization

[Former Member]

Hi,

I need to check the Authorization in customer No. in XD01 transaction code.

The Authorization field of customer No is KUNNR.

In PFCG KUNNR field doesn't appear with the Authorization object.

I added the filed KUNNR with XD01 with SU24( assgine authorization object to transaction ).

Now i am getting the field KUNNR in PFCG. But the authorization check doesn't check the field KUNNAR.

Now in PFCG, I gave the Customer No ( eg : A23410 ) in KUNNR field. It suppose to allow only A23410. But it allow all the all the customer no .. whatever it start Axxxxx.

Form this it show it doesn't check the KUNNR field.

Is there anything beyond this to check , authorization check on KUNNR field. ????

[Former Member]

Yes, to make this check happen let an abapper add it to the code of the program.

Only adding a check via SU24 is useless unless the check is also hardcoded in the ABAP!

[Former Member]

Hi Lee,

Adding objects/fields in SU24 will not enable authorization check in the related ABAP program.

For Customer master following two options are available:

1. User object F_KNA1_BED for restricting authorization for specific master records. Maintain a 4 digit authorization group in the specific master record to be protected. You can enter an authorization group in either the general or in the company code-specific area of the master records. Maintain this authorization group in the object mentioned earlier and assign to the users who should be having access to this particular master record. Pls go through the object documentation before proceeding.

2. User object F_KNA1_AEN for restricting authorization of specific fields at global level. You will have to define field groups to protect fields that you want and assign to users.

The first option is more applicable in your case. The object document will provide a detailed description of how to go about it.

Regards

Sachin

[Former Member]

Hi ,

now i add that field KUNNR in F_KNA1_BED . Now the F_KNA1_BED gives inconsistence . I am not able to remove the KUNNAR field from F_KNA1_BED.

Pls give solution

[Former Member]

You added a custom field to a standard object and now it is inconsistent. Did the system not throw lots of warnings at you about name spaces and original languages etc?

I have never done this myself before, but to undo it you could try to go into version management and reactivate the version of the object before you changed it, to remove the field from the auth object.

PS: F_KNA1_BED is a group concept. You group the customers, and then assign authorization to the group (not the individual customer)... unless you have a group : customer number relationship which is 1 : 1.

Good luck,

Julius

[Former Member]

thxs for ur reply. Concept understand.

My requirement is Educational purpose. The student can create ( for ex. A23410 ) only not the A23411 or other no.

bcos A23411 is for another student.

2 Questions.......

1 .Activate the KUNNR field. how ?

2. Due to inconsistency .. in F_kna1_bed object.... how to porceed with version management.... any T.code is there ?

[Former Member]

Hello Lee,

> My requirement is Educational purpose.

Thank you for adding that info..

> 1 .Activate the KUNNR field. how ?

I cannot see any field for KUNNR available as standard, sorry. Also, the group concept is only 4 characters if I remember correctly, so that won't help either. An option you might want to explore is the concept of user-exits... (create your own object, and add a field KUNNR and check it in an exit, if available). But be carefull with that option, as it might impact other transactions as well...

> 2. Due to inconsistency .. in F_kna1_bed object.... how to porceed with version management.... any T.code is there ?

If there is no version management available (usually via menu "utilities => versions") then you may need to transport the original object from another system to this one to remove the field. Again, I have never done that, so... I can only wish you good luck.

Regards,

Julius

[Former Member]

a

[Former Member]

>

> a

Ahh yes, I should have seen that coming.

The genesis of another village idiot.