Hi Gil,
I saw this reference before I asked, but, it seems like other references
say that BPX.SUPERUSER is enough.
Thanks ad regards,
David
On 2025-05-22 19:14, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2025 17:59:07 -0400, David Spiegel wrote:
Hi,
Is it absolutely necessary for SysProgs running SMP/e Jobs with USS
Maintenance to have UID(0)?
One reason I can think of is that the new files need to be owned by
UID(0)/GID(0). Another is that since "System" Directories (e.g. /usr)
are owned by UID(0)/GID(0), the new files cannot be placed there due to
the existing permission bits.)
Please confirm/deny my reasoning.
...
Does BPX.SUPERUSER modify this?
<https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/ims-es/3.2.0?topic=installation-setting-up-uid0-access-smpe>
<https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/3.1.0?topic=security-superusers-in-zos-unix>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
