I guess that might be covered under "hurting" the user. I don't write APF code, so I don't think that I can create a security hole. I don't do RACF or other ESM type calls. I assume that RACF has been set up properly and all I do is normal non-APF type work. I used to write some z/OS or product exits. But my current manager despises exits because they need to be maintained. We sometimes have a hard enough time maintaining the configuration options, when they are installed as a module update via SMP/E. I prefer configuration data sets. Preferably with simple lines which are like "option=value" or maybe "option=(value1,value2)". I really appreciate IBM setting the SORT and LE options via PARMLIB.
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht <[email protected]> wrote: > John McKown wrote: > >>I say "yes" to most. > > Agreed. ;-) > > What about creating a security hole in your program? For me this is my > greatest fear. > > Groete / Greetings > Elardus Engelbrecht > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
