On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Paul Gilmartin < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 06:40:30 -0600, John McKown wrote: > > >On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Peter Relson wrote: > > > >> >Even a non-authorized program which is linked RENT > >> >can write into its STATIC CSECT. > >> > >> But only if the program is not fetched from an APF-authorized > >> concatenation ... > >> > >As an aside, I really wish that _all_ programs marked RENT,REFR would be > >loaded into key 0, write protected, storage independent of APF > >considerations. I'm sure that there is _some_ reason why it is done as it > >is currently done, perhaps for "hysterical" <grin/> reasons. If I am > really > >worried about such, I try to use the PGSER PROTECT function to do this. > But > >that is really only easy in HLASM. > > > But doing it uniformly would make sense, so it wouldn't be hysterical. > Sorry. My whimsy: Substitute "hysterical" for "historical" when I disagree with the historical (hysterical) implementation. > > Isn't there a REFRPROT option to enforce what we wish? > Yes. Now how in the blue blazes did I miss that? And we are actually on z/OS 1.12, where _apparently_ that where it came in. > > -- gil > > -- While a transcendent vocabulary is laudable, one must be eternally careful so that the calculated objective of communication does not become ensconced in obscurity. In other words, eschew obfuscation. 111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321 Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
