Topic starter
24/07/2026 4:08 pm
TL;DR: Manufacturing SAP environments face 10 high-risk segregation of duties conflicts, led by combinations such as vendor master plus payment run and create user plus assign roles, because one user can initiate and complete sensitive transactions without independent oversight, according to OpenIAM. The governance problem is not just detection but preventing toxic combinations across SAP and adjacent identity systems before access goes live.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by OpenIAM: “The 10 Most Dangerous SAP Access Conflicts in Manufacturing”.
Key questions
Q: What breaks when SAP users can create and approve their own transactions?
A: Independent control breaks down.
Q: Why do SAP SoD conflicts create a broader governance risk than a single access finding?
A: Because the same access often depends on surrounding identity systems as well as SAP itself.
Q: What are the signs that SAP SoD reviews are missing the real conflict?
A: Common signs include role reviews that focus on module names, conflicts that only appear after an audit, and toxic combinations that span finance, procurement, HR, or Basis.
Practitioner guidance
- Map toxic SAP combinations across business processes Review access by transaction path, not by individual module, so vendor creation, payment execution, purchasing, HR, quality, and Basis conflicts are evaluated together.
- Block access at request time Validate proposed roles before assignment and stop any request that would create a toxic combination unless a documented risk acceptance is approved.
- Split roles where dual authority exists Remove combinations that let one user both initiate and complete the same sensitive transaction, especially in vendor, payroll, production, and maintenance flows.
Bottom line: Manufacturing SAP SoD conflicts are dangerous because they let one user hold both sides of a sensitive transaction across business processes.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
24/07/2026 4:13 pm
Cross-functional SoD is the real manufacturing control problem: the dangerous failure mode is not excessive access inside a single module but a user holding both sides of a business process. That collapses the separation the control model depends on, especially where finance, procurement, HR, quality, and plant maintenance intersect. Practitioners should govern transaction paths, not just application silos.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How should manufacturers handle SAP SoD conflicts that depend on other identity systems?
A: They should treat the external identities and workflow systems as part of the control surface, not as separate exceptions. The decision trail must show who approved the access, what evidence supported the approval, and how any remediation was documented across the full identity chain. Otherwise, the compensating control is incomplete.
👉 Read our full editorial: SAP access conflicts in manufacturing expose weak SoD governance