In <50475f32.9050...@acm.org>, on 09/05/2012 at 09:18 AM, "Joel C. Ewing" <jcew...@acm.org> said:
>and this is the only >locally produced documentation that makes sense on z/OS, While the auditors in question may be stark raving bonkers, there is other relevant documentation; change control procedures for production libraries. >If they were competent auditors they would know this. rara avis >We were fortunate in that our corporation had its own audit >department that interfaced with the annual external auditors and >our auditors were fairly well versed in z/OS security concepts from >interfacing with Technical Services over several decades. If the >external auditors were ever totally clueless, we could reasonably >expect our own auditors to recognize requests that didn't make >sense in the context of the mainframe and side with us on >suggesting sensible alternatives. I'm jealous. I hope that management appreciates them. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> 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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN