>>> This runs afoul of IBM's practice of "security through obscurity" >> >> That's not a practice or policy of which I am aware. Quite the opposite. >> >You have a short memory, or perhaps you weren't a >participant.
Possibly both. If you were referring to "we're not going to explain what the integrity exposure is that we're fixing", then I agree that that is IBM's practice. If you were referring to "we rely on the obscurity of how to exploit an exposure for our fixes" I do not. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design
