
In 2007, Onapsis CEO & Co-founder Mariano Nuñez presented several vulnerabilities and attacks affecting the RFC Protocol at Black Hat Europe. That presentation became a call-to-action for the research community to dedicate time into improving the security of SAP applications and SAP Protocols.
On June 29, 2023–sixteen years later–Fabian Hagg, a security researcher with vast experience in SAP applications, presented at the TROOPERS Conference in Heidelberg, providing details of four vulnerabilities affecting the RFC protocol. He is credited with reporting these vulnerabilities which can be chained and combined by attackers to take over SAP applications running the RFC Protocol.
SAP RFC Vulnerabilities
The presentation by Fabian Hagg incorporated the release of a whitepaper including details of the RFC protocol and some proof of concept code and details for the following vulnerabilities:
- CVE-2023-0014 (SAP Security Note 3089413) – CVSS 9.8
- CVE-2021-27610 (SAP Security Note 3007182) – CVSS 9.8
- CVE-2021-33677 (SAP Security Note 3044754) – CVSS 7.5
- CVE-2021-33684 (SAP Security Note 3032624) – CVSS 5.3
Due to the potential criticality of the disclosed vulnerabilities, unprotected SAP applications could be compromised by remote unauthenticated attackers, with potential to affect the integrity, confidentiality, and availability of these applications. Furthermore, due to the critical nature of SAP applications and its business processes, attackers could engage in performing espionage (accessing business information), sabotage (disrupting business processes) or fraud attacks (modifying business data.)
Resolving These Vulnerabilities
The solution to the different vulnerabilities are diverse and involve patching the SAP Kernel as well as upgrading the SAP_BASIS software component. In some cases, both are required so patching these vulnerabilities requires time and preparation. Some of these patches have been released two years ago and some as recently as several months ago, so it is possible that many organizations have already implemented at least some of the solutions. However, it is important to check your systems against these vulnerabilities to ensure you have both patched and upgraded your software.
I highly encourage your team to evaluate your systems against these vulnerabilities. All existing Onapsis Assess customers have the ability to check if the associated SAP Security Notes are relevant for their systems and whether they have been applied since the notes were published. Additionally, customers with the Threat Intel Center will receive an update with details of this research along with a listing of any system that is still vulnerable.
Fachartikel

Gefährliche Chrome-Erweiterung entwendet Zugangsdaten von Meta Business-Konten

Agentenbasierte KI im Unternehmen: Wie Rollback-Mechanismen Automatisierung absichern

Google dokumentiert zunehmenden Missbrauch von KI-Systemen durch Cyberkriminelle

Sicherheitslücke in Claude Desktop Extensions gefährdet Tausende Nutzer

KI-Agenten: Dateisystem vs. Datenbank – Welche Speicherlösung passt zu Ihrem Projekt?
Studien

Deutsche Wirtschaft unzureichend auf hybride Bedrohungen vorbereitet

Cyberkriminalität im Dark Web: Wie KI-Systeme Betrüger ausbremsen

Sicherheitsstudie 2026: Menschliche Faktoren übertreffen KI-Risiken

Studie: Unternehmen müssen ihre DNS- und IP-Management-Strukturen für das KI-Zeitalter neu denken

Deutsche Unicorn-Gründer bevorzugen zunehmend den Standort Deutschland
Whitepaper

MITRE ATLAS analysiert OpenClaw: Neue Exploit-Pfade in KI-Agentensystemen

BSI setzt Auslaufdatum für klassische Verschlüsselungsverfahren

Token Exchange: Sichere Authentifizierung über Identity-Provider-Grenzen

KI-Agenten in Unternehmen: Governance-Lücken als Sicherheitsrisiko

KuppingerCole legt Forschungsagenda für IAM und Cybersecurity 2026 vor
Hamsterrad-Rebell

KI‑basierte E‑Mail‑Angriffe: Einfach gestartet, kaum zu stoppen

NIS2: „Zum Glück gezwungen“ – mit OKR-basiertem Vorgehen zum nachhaltigen Erfolg

Cyberversicherung ohne Datenbasis? Warum CIOs und CISOs jetzt auf quantifizierbare Risikomodelle setzen müssen

Identity Security Posture Management (ISPM): Rettung oder Hype?







