In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on
06/02/2005
at 12:49 PM, "Low, David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>My boss asked me about this the other day. We have Top Secret yet we
>have been maintaining UADS for all our userids. Is this unnecessary?
There is no technical reason to have anything but emergency user ids
in UADS. Are you using Top Secret to control TSO access and
maintaining UADS in parallel, or are you actually using UADS? Do you
have inhouse procedures that depend on reading UADS?
IMHO you should come up with a plan for getting of of non-emergency
dependence on UADS and present it to your boss. After that it will be
a managerial issue as to whether to proceed.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
