I agree with John's suggestion .... but I actually have two objections to
RACFDRV:
1. John's objection and suggestion
2. Often the setup/configuration/sample is quite far from a good RACF
implementation. It is merely a "functional" one.
Hayim
_____________________________________
Hayim Sokolsky, CISSP
Mainframe Security Architect
DTCC Corporate Information Security
18301 Bermuda Green Dr, MS 1-CIS
Tampa FL 33647-1760
Tel. (813) 470-2177
Hal Merritt <[email protected]>
Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
2010.02.25 13:09
Please respond to
IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
cc
Subject
Re: ServerPac a modest proposal... RACFDRV LIST
Having spent hours slogging through those 'updates' and making them fit
our system, I think that this is certainly an area needing work.
I'd love to see some sort of process that somehow looks at the driving
system and suggests only the needed changes.
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of John Mattson
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:58 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: ServerPac a modest proposal... RACFDRV LIST
ServerPac is a wonderful thing, no doubting that. Thanks, IBM.
However, like most things improvement is always possible. My current
annoyance RACFDRV
ServerPac provides RACF updates to the driving system to support the
install. Great, especially if you are using an "empty" driving system
with no RACF. However, if you are using your current system to drive you
must carefully evaluate each and every statement in RACFDRV to make sure
that you are not hosing up your current system.
My modest proposal... a job called RACFLIST. Which will do a LIST or
RLIST or whatever against every item which RACFDRV contains. SURE, I
could do it myself with some creative editing, but it would take an hour
or so, and heck, IBM has all the info right there. Just generate a new
job in the same way they generate RACFDRV. Then we could just compare the
output from RACFLIST against what is in RACFDRV and resolve any
differences.
Anybody else think this is a good idea?
NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are
intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The
message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged
information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or
distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
<BR>_____________________________________________________________
<FONT size=2><BR>
DTCC DISCLAIMER: This email and any files transmitted with it are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email
in error, please notify us immediately and delete the email and any
attachments from your system. The recipient should check this email
and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company
accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted
by this email.</FONT>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
