Which tools? Some tools on the PC are user hostile; some tools on z/OS are user hostile.
A security bug in Apache is a security bug in Apache. Keep up to date on security fixes, regardless of platform. I can't speak to TPF, and my DOS and VM experience is too old to be relevant. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Clark Morris <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2019 10:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Just how secure are mainframes? | Trevor Eddolls [SEC=UNOFFICIAL] [Default] On 7 Jun 2019 09:26:29 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main [email protected] (Seymour J Metz) wrote: >How many vulnerabilities have you seen that did not come down to people? Those >sysprogs are just the tip of the iceberg as far as configuration, enforcement, >management, policy, procedure, protocol and training vulnerabilities are >concerned. Yes, I've seen code vulnerabilities, but they're ju8st noise >compared to the other isswues. > >I come at this from the other end; when I had RACF SPECIAL I refused to give >myself UID(0) because it was an unnecessary risk. Are the tools to set up and administer z/OS systems as easy to use as those available for setting up and administering Linux systems? Unix system? Windows systems? Is an Apache server running on a z series mainframe any more secure than one running on Linux? To the extent Mainframes are available from other vendors such as Unisys, how does their security compare? Is z/TPF as secure as z/OS? How about z/VM and z/VSE? Clark Morris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
