WF_ADMIN is dying?

[Gregory Utley]

I agree with Sue.  We have a workflow administrator security role (with
requisite authority) that is assigned to the userids of the primary and
backup workflow admins.  That works well.  WF_BATCH, as usual, has
SAP_ALL.

Greg Utley
Citrix Systems, Inc.
SAP Development Team


From: sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu [mailto:sap-wug-bounces at mit.edu] On Behalf
Of Sue Keohan
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:27 PM
To: SAP Workflow Users' Group
Subject: Re: WF_ADMIN is dying?

Hi Sherman,

We don't even use a WF_ADMIN ID. We have WF_BATCH, sure, and it needs 
all the authorizations, and is a non-dialog account, but as for the 
actual administrator(s), we specify a user (non-generic) in customizing,

and I have the necessary authorizations to trouble-shoot. If I don't, my

friends in Basis are very accomodating to help keep the business
flowing.

Hope this helps,
Sue

Wright, Sherman wrote:

> Hi All -
>
> Our auditors have informed me that, due to Sarbanes Oxley, the 
> WF_ADMIN ID in our production system will be changed. The choices are 
> that it be 1) De-activated; 2) Converted to a NON-Dialog account; or 
> 3) that it will have the BARE MINIMUM Display-ONLY access. The idea is

> that, since we have shared firefighter IDs, one of those can be used 
> for anything necessary. In trying to document the use and need for the

> WF_ADMIN, I went to the SAP Library - SAP Business Workflow 
>
(http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp2004/helpdata/en/a5/172437130e0d09e10000
009b38f839/frameset.htm) 
> as well as a couple of other sites (SDN, and the WUG Archives). 
> Surprisingly, I was unable to find ANYTHING about the need and uses of

> the WF_ADMIN User ID. Is it a thing of the past? Has Sarbanes Oxley 
> already killed it (they REALLY don't like "generic" IDs, you know...)?
>
> I have surprisingly mixed feelings about this. I understand what they 
> are saying, and why they feel the way they do. But at the same time, 
> I'm used to doing things a certain way (8-1/2 years now) and I really 
> resent the "intrusion".
>
> Anyway, how would YOU feel? IS there a necessity for the WF_ADMIN ID? 
> Are there things for which ONLY the WF_ADMIN ID should be used? Can it

> all be done by properly authorized individuals? Am I clinging to a 
> relic of the past? I'd really like to hear your opinions...
>
> And thank you for letting me vent to the only group of people that 
> would have any idea of what I'm talking about! :^)
>
> Regards,
> Sherman
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>_______________________________________________
>SAP-WUG mailing list
>SAP-WUG at mit.edu
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>  
>
_______________________________________________
SAP-WUG mailing list
SAP-WUG at mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug