SAP isn’t just another application within the broader IT landscape; it is an application landscape within the IT landscape—not understanding this is a serious security oversight. SAP is a complex ecosystem that integrates financial systems, supply chains, HR, and other core business functions. Its proprietary communication protocols, unique user identity management, and custom Advanced Business Application Programming (ABAP) code create an extensive attack surface that is vulnerable to cyber threats. However, traditional enterprise security fails to recognize these complexities, which renders SAP environments vulnerable to sophisticated attacks.
In addition to the security gaps, the European Union’s NIS2 Directive has placed a new level of accountability on CISOs overseeing SAP environments. This directive mandates proactive risk assessments, incident detection, and comprehensive security controls. In the U.S., the May 2024 NIST update pointed out several SAP vulnerabilities, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) published several guidelines on securing SAP environments. SAP security has to be more than just a reactive process. Many CISOs face challenges securing SAP effectively before compliance penalties come down.
Also Read: Why Vulnerability Management Should be a Priority for Every CISO
Compliance
As of October 2024, organizations have been mandated to comply with NIS2. NIS2 is a European Union (EU) directive that seeks to strengthen cybersecurity. It applies to the energy, retail, transport, banking, health, and public administration sectors and covers the security of supply chains and service vendors. The main goals of NIS2 are to encourage cooperation and information sharing, increase cyber-resilience across the EU, streamline cybersecurity practices, and improve the EU’s preparedness to deal with cyberattacks.
The directive places full responsibility on CISOs to identify potential cybersecurity risks, implement mitigation strategies, and establish robust incident response frameworks. It makes clear that executive leadership is accountable for cybersecurity failures. Thus, SAP security is a top business priority.
As previously mentioned, the U.S. has also updated its guidelines: NIST has published “the final versions of Special Publication (SP) 800-171r3 (Revision 3), Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Systems and Organizations, and SP 800-171Ar3, Assessing Security Requirements for Controlled Unclassified Information.” According to the NIST website, the updates include refinements such as:
- Restructured security requirements to show direct alignment with SP 800-53r5 controls
- Introduction of organization-defined parameters (ODP)
- New tailoring criteria to reduce potential redundancy and improve clarity
- Recategorization of controls based on the new tailoring criteria.
Compliance is challenging due to the complexity of SAP landscapes. Secure configuration goes beyond implementing security monitoring. Integrating vulnerability management, patch deployment, and custom code security must be part of the broader cybersecurity framework. Relying on SIEM solutions will not cut it because these platforms were not created to analyze SAP-specific threats efficiently. This means that organizations need purpose-built SAP security solutions that can intelligently filter events, automate patch management, and ensure that security configurations remain compliant with regulations.
The Problems
Many SAP security projects are seen as a one-time implementation rather than an ongoing endeavor. You wouldn’t just do one perimeter patrol around the castle and assume the place is secured for the week. Organizations tend to deploy monitoring tools or patch management solutions without embedding them into a structured security governance model. This can lead to a scenario where security dashboards flash with hundreds of unheeded alerts. Strong SAP security requires that businesses establish a sustainable security process that aligns with SAP operational workflows and integrates seamlessly with broader cybersecurity initiatives.
The absence of dedicated security models explains why traditional security falls short when protecting SAP. Standard IT security approaches focus on network firewalls, endpoint protection, and infrastructure-level monitoring; however, they don’t have the specificity needed to secure the architecture. Attempts have been made to integrate SAP Security Audit Logs into existing SIEM platforms, often resulting in ineffective threat detection. Because the volume of SAP logs is massive, that approach increases operational costs and leaves SOC teams (who tend to lack SAP expertise) dealing with alerts they do not understand.
On top of the lack of expertise, businesses often believe that monitoring SAP logs is enough to protect their systems. This is foolhardy! Security monitoring without proactive hardening renders SAP environments open to attack like a hole in a castle wall keeps it open to invasion. SAP security requires continuous patching, vulnerability management, and strict access controls to be genuinely effective. Without these approaches, even low-level attack vectors can cause significant breaches.
The Road Ahead
There is now a sense of urgency surrounding SAP security. As cyber threats grow more sophisticated and regulations like NIS2 demand higher accountability, organizations can no longer afford to overlook SAP security gaps. Ensuring that SAP environments are protected requires a holistic approach beyond log monitoring, including system hardening, patch management, and proactive threat detection.
CISOs must recognize that SAP security is not just an IT issue but a business necessity. A breach of an SAP system could easily compromise financial records, disrupt supply chains, and expose sensitive customer data, leading to severe economic and reputational damage. This makes having specialized SAP security expertise a must and integrating SAP protection into enterprise-wide security strategies crucial. This way, continuous security improvements can be ensured rather than implemented once.
Also Read: 5 API Trends Shaping Financial Services in 2025: What CIOs Need to Know
Conclusion
It must be understood that SAP is not just another application but an application landscape within the IT landscape. Protecting SAP appropriately requires an approach tailored to its complexity. Traditional security models fail, and the same protection methods used with general IT infrastructure are inadequate. These faulty approaches will leave organizations exposed to cybersecurity risks.
To fix this, organizations must have a dedicated SAP security framework that integrates seamlessly with broader IT security strategies while addressing SAP-specific threats. Simple monitoring and SIEM integrations are not enough. A holistic security model that includes continuous threat detection, system hardening, real-time vulnerability management, and secure patching processes is necessary for efficient and compliant security measures.
This urgency calls for SAP expertise. Traditional SOC teams usually lack the knowledge to interpret SAP security events correctly. Most critical business applications must be protected with the same seriousness as the broader IT environment.
Don’t leave your castle unguarded! Evolving threats and NIS2 and NIST compliance requirements call for immediate security action. Businesses that don’t prioritize SAP will suffer security risk penalties, operational disruptions, and irreparable reputational damage. Now is the time to bridge your security gaps and consider SAP security an essential component of cybersecurity.
