On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Walt Farrell <[email protected]> wrote: > > But TCBFSA points to one of the more interesting areas for the rogue program > to modify :)
That is why you copy the 72 bytes pointed to by it to another area and zero those 72 bytes while other perhap rogue is running. > > Yes, you can build in a little more protection by having the main program > simply issue SVC 3 rather than restoring registers and branching to R14. But > there are probably lots of other key 8 areas you'd still need to worry about. > So it's really not a bullet-proof solution. > Nope, not bullet-proof. But more bullet-resistant against a person with poor aim, or something like that. But if the main worry is not memory corruption, but improper use of APF authorized functions, then it is "pretty good". And now I'm back to hawking my UNIX (or ASCRE) solution. Best is just to not require the possibly rogue program. > -- > Walt > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- If you sent twitter messages while exploring, are you on a textpedition? He's about as useful as a wax frying pan. 10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
