On Fri, Apr 2nd, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Bob Shannon wrote: > We protect the SMP data. I'm sort of baffled why > IBM felt SAF support was necessary for SMPE.
Me too. And this whole idea of trying to hide "Integrity" APARs has outlived its usefulness. If it ever had any. I have no gripe with fixing the hole then letting the cat out of the bag, but never doing it ?. Don't vendors ever learn ?. I also wonder about Brians assertion of: <quote>The (fortunately) rare "integrity" flag</quote> How the hell are we supposed to be able to tell how rare it is. And if IBM doesn't have the confidence that they can talk about fixing these exposures, what are we to think of the rest of the codebase ?. Is it (supposedly) secure only until exposed/compromised ?. Excuse my lack of confidence. Bah humbug ... Shane ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
