We have all used implicit enhancements to add code to the beginning or end of a standard function, form or method. But you may not know that it can also be used to add fields to data structures, whether they’re declared as TYPES or directly as DATA.
Some days ago I was using an ST (Simple Transformation) and thought that, even though its job is to convert an input into an output, it is can be used to store XML data.
Let’s asy we have the following XML:
<cocktails>
<cocktail id="gt" nome="Gin Tonic"/>
<cocktail id="ws" nome="Whiskey Sour"/>
<cocktail id="cl" nome="Campari Laranja"/>
</cocktails>
The view below shows how simple it is to create the conditions to inject ABAP commands into programs in a productive system.
I considered whether to publish this. But, as it already happened in the past, I believe it is better for this to be known because it is very important for system administrators to be aware of this so they can protect their systems against this threat.
Thank you Ricardo Monteiro for the tip.
Some time ago you created a table and its maintenance screens as local objects.
When, later, you regret it and decide to transport the table, how will you be able to also transport the maintenance screens?
Transporting the maintenance screens function group together with the table is not enough.
I was sure I had already posted about this before but I can’t find it so here it goes (again?).
Some function modules save global data which must then be used by another function module belonging to the same function group. So, if you need to test them, they must run in sequence inside the same transaction.
Everybody knows you can use SE37 to test a function module. What few people know is that you can also use SE37 to test a sequence of function modules inside the same transaction. Those who don’t know this end up creating a small program to call those functions in sequence and that’s also ok. But here’s how you can avoid that.
The PARAMETERS and SELECT-OPTIONS already have some configuration options. But sometimes you need more control, more customising. Interestingly, although it’s not simple nor obvious, it can be done through a standard function module.
In a well protected system, normal users don’t have debug permissions. Very often, this makes it harder for ABAP programmers to help solve the users’ problems, not being able to debug directly in their session.
But there is a legit, albeit obscure, work-around for this problem.
Here we are again facing a dilemma: hide something because it is dangerous and someone can do bad things using this information or teach it because it would be condescending to presume the readers are not responsible enough to know it. Dictatorships usually go for the first: burning books, censorship, etc. Abapinho like to believe that its readers are responsible people and deserve the right to know.
Thus, here it is. No, it’s not a user manual on how to enrich uranium nor a formula for homemade nitroglycerin. But it’s something similar: a trick that allows you to change standard objects without the need for a key.
As we all know, system adminstrators are very bad, cold blooded and cruel people. To prove it you just need to read the Bastard Operator from Hell.
We, ABAP programmers, are hopeless victims in the hands of these evil creatures.
But not always do we have to be smashed under their hairy fingers.
Sometimes a SALV has inconsistencies which can go unnoticed. For example, if its structure has an amount field which doesn’t have an associated currency field: