Erik Janssen wrote: >The article itself may contain some errors and misunderstandings, but the conclusion is absolutely spot on. Some people still maintain the idea that z/OS is better that linux and even windows in terms of security. Sadly, this believe and lack of urgency means that all z/OS shops that are not recent on their maintenance today are running with zero day exploits in APF authorized routines that leave them extremely vulnerable.
Well said. I was unhappy with the quality of the article, but the overarching point is 100% true. It didn't used to be-but the other platforms have largely caught up. IBM Z Larger/faster/more secure? Not any more. Most (perhaps all) of the continuing value of the mainframe lies in the captured intelligence stored in the software: the core applications that have been developed over the last 20/30/40+ years. Folks know that in theory, they can port those to some other language on some other platform, but the smart ones realize that (a) doing so will cost more than anyone is willing to guess and (b) they WILL NOT get it 100% right. So there will be real costs, real losses, due to that rewrite: the risk of doing so is very high. Those of us who have made our careers on IBM Z in its various incarnations don't like this reality, but denying it is no more productive than denying aging. Better to understand and acknowledge it and deal with it appropriately. ...phsiii ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
