In a recent note, Martin Kline said: > Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 07:41:03 -0500 > > I find this interesting. Just recently, list members were objecting that > limiting a user's access to resources (in that case it was memory) was > probably keeping them from doing their job. Where are they now? > Weary from the last time around? But since you ask ...
> The argument was that if a user was requesting a resource, they MUST NEED > IT for their job. This seems like a very similar situation. Why not allow > the users access to all of ISPF, and depend on their honorable nature to > only use those functions that they need to do their job? > "depend on their honorable nature" is appropriate for functions, but inadequate for resources. But the approach should be to protect resources with RACF, not to restrict a targeted class of users. Don't stigmatize a group and confine them to reservations, or to ghettos, or with house arrest; rather secure the bank vaults to prevent theft. -- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
