IBM z was more secure even when there were 1000 times more of them and a million times less MSFT platforms. Target was down again over the weekend. How many fools will blame the mainframe again? When it was their point of sale system again.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Monday, June 17, 2019, 4:48 PM, R.S. <[email protected]> wrote: W dniu 2019-05-13 o 02:42, Phil Smith III pisze: > Bill Johnson posted a couple more links to mainframe blog posts from a > mainframe vendor-more asking the barber if you need a shave; but even > ignoring that, you don't appear to have actually read the articles, Bill. > > > > The first one > <https://blog.syncsort.com/2018/09/mainframe/mainframes-secure-even-more-secure/> > says IBM Z is more secure because it's less common. That's not inherent > security; that's like saying your car is less vulnerable because you park it > far from the madding crowd. It may be *attacked* less, but that doesn't make > it inherently more *secure*. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
