It is probably just my own FUD that is making me doubt it. Rob Schramm
On Thu, Jul 5, 2018, 1:59 PM Mike Hochee <[email protected]> wrote: > I have not used it for that specifically, but I don't see why not. The > policy based rules allow for job/task names and support wildcards, and you > might not even need those if you can filter based on a unique port range. > I've been impressed with AT-TLS, as it offers a lot of customization > options, as well as quite a few OOB use cases. An underrated feature of > comm server IMO. > > HTH, > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Rob Schramm > Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2018 12:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: AT-TLS for HTTP > > This might be a weird one. I have used Policy Agent AT-TLS in the past to > secure JDBC communication with a UDB data base. Can I use Policy agent to > secure an existing HTTP GET process (assembler program), by doing a similar > process? Has anyone else done this? > > Thanks, > Rob Schramm > > -- > > Rob Schramm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > -- Rob Schramm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
