On 11/3/13, John Gilmore <jwgli...@gmail.com> wrote: > I will not comment on Mr. Perryman's suspicions, which are not arguments. > > I will limit myself to noting that 1) an SRB cannot attach a subtask > and 2) a [different] SRB that it scheduled into another address space > would also disabled for I/O. > > Peter Relson's point is the important one here. > > The use of these facilities by the unwashed certainly has great > potential for bringing > down z/OS. The security threat posed by an SRB executed on a cheap > zIIP, zAAP, or the like is not, however, any greater in any way than > the security threat of an SRB executed on an expensive standard CP. > > As Lewis Carroll put it in THOTS: > > Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice: > That alone should encourage the crew. > Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: > What I tell you three times is true. > > --John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA >
-- John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
