FWIW, I was notified that my personal information was part of the OPM
data breach.  Only problem is I've never worked for, nor applied for a
federal job.  However, back in 2007 I did work for an outsourcer who
had a federal account.  Perhaps that is how my personal information
got there.  

I contacted OPM and requested to know how my personal information was
on their system.  The response was they could not find my personal
information.  I contacted my U.S. Representative, and asked him to
contact OPM.  Basically got the same reply.  At that point I gave
up.  
   

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of John Crossno
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 9:12 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: ComputerWorld Says: Cobol plays major role in U.S. government 
breaches

If one reads the article, then digs into the underlying research, and finally 
the Congressional report on the OPM incidents (all 250 pages of it), it's quite 
easy to see that the authors of the research and subsequent article are 
implying that legacy=mainframe/COBOL, while the real problem(s) really had 
nothing to do with either, at the end of the day. It had everything to do with 
"legacy" network security, not following best security practices, etc. Where 
the research talks about investments in modernization, they imply that the 
problem is "archaic" 30-year old COBOL systems, when that really isn't 
supported by the research at all (contradictions?). They really mean that when 
the distributed network security is modernized with security best practices, 
advanced intrusion and malware detection, use of MFA/PIV/etc, there's a 
reduction in the number of incidents.

I wrote up a longer response to it, as comments to the FB and LinkedIn 
postings, that starts with the OPM report and works it's way back up to the 
article. Seemingly, Computerworld didn't like some of the original comments 
from their posting last week on LinkedIn, and felt the need to repost it 
yesterday. That's where my longer comments can be found, vs their original 
posting. Can't link directly to it or the FB posting.. You'll have to search 
for Computerworld's page, then scroll.

At the end of the day, it really has nothing to do with COBOL "security" at 
all, but everything to do with network security. The article is just an example 
of taking at face value poor research, taking liberties with and cherry picking 
bits of a report and quotes from people who probably don't understand the 
technology to begin with, and just plain old fashioned bad journalism... Fake 
News!



"Common sense is not so common."
         * Voltaire, Dictionnaire Philosophique (1764)



On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht < 
[email protected]> wrote:

> Todd Arnold wrote:
>
> >Gee, I've been developing crypto technology for 30+ years that runs 
> >in
> those environments - so it's certainly news to me that it can't be 
> done :-)
>
> Amazing! ;-)
>
> No one said those cards are that *fast* !
>
>
> >Looking at the ICSF Application Programmer's Guide, which defines the
> ways most z/OS applications get cryptographic services, I see this:
>
> >  ICSF callable services can be called from application programs 
> > written
> in a number of high-level languages as well as assembler. The 
> high-level languages are:
> >    - C
> >    - COBOL
> >    - FORTRAN
> >    - PL/I
>
> And REXX + Assembler too. Look in Redbook - 'System z Crypto and TKE 
> Update' (SG24-7848-00) for samples.
>
> Note from that bookie: The code supplied has not been subjected to any 
> formal IBM test ....
>
> Groete / Greetings
> Elardus Engelbrecht
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
[email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
FIRST TENNESSEE

Confidentiality notice: 
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to