There is still a (microscopically small) risk if there are users with the ability to display real storage and a lot of free time to hunt for TCP buffers in real storage. If you are in LPAR mode and using real hipersockets or a shared OSA, it is possible to intercept traffic -- the same is true under VM, but it's harder to do as you'd have to crack both a userid with appropriate privileges and known enough about how CP does it's work to track down where the buffers are.
In most cases, only the absolutely ultra-super-mega-paranoid care about this, but since you work for a health-care provider, you may be provided with such people as security officers. For all *normal* intents and purposes, it's probably not worth worrying about it. Tapping such a connection is something that requires far too much knowledge for the average luser. I think a good case can be made that it's a waste of cycles to encrypt something that never leaves the box. If someone does manage to tap that, then you have way bigger problems than data transfer security. -- db David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates > -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > McKown, John > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 1:22 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Really dumb question. > > > Given that my OS/390 system and my Linux system are on the > same box and > using an OSA for all TCP/IP connectivity, is there any reason > to do any sort > of encryption between them for things like ftp or even things that may > transport userids and passwords? > > > -- > John McKown > Senior Systems Programmer > UICI Insurance Center > Applications & Solutions Team > +1.817.255.3225 > > This message (including any attachments) contains > confidential information > intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its' content is > protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you > should delete > this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or > distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based > on it, is > strictly prohibited. >
