In 401e5.41b6aa03.42873...@aol.com, on 05/15/2015
at 08:25 AM, Ed Finnell
000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said:
Over on AFP list one group wanted to change leading spaces to
'*' maybe in a PAGEDEF. It was pointed out that if you allowed this
somebody else could change leading
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
is it practical to protect DFSORT keywords or not.
Sure it's practical, but does it serve any purpose?
As usual, you ask good questions. Perhaps not practical/economically or with
any purposes. (Same goes with protecting languages keywords and routines as
stated
In
0815877962993498.wa.elardus.engelbrechtsita.co...@listserv.ua.edu,
on 05/15/2015
at 06:51 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za
said:
is it practical to protect DFSORT keywords or not.
Sure it's practical, but does it serve any purpose?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz,
/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
:
:
:
:From: Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com
:To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
:Date: 15/05/2015 13:52
:Subject:Re: DFSORT and RACF
:Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
:
:
:
:Just my thoughts.
:
:Would you not protect
Walt Farrell wrote:
The key point is that the DFDSS enforces security, and the ADMINISTRATOR
keyword usage must be controlled, because it's purpose is to bypass certain
other security checks.
I certainly know it. I just took this example to illustrate my point. I could
use other examples if
On May 19, 2015, at 1:33 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
-
SNIP
---
Agreed. As long you can convince the auditors you can reproduce the
reports 100% faithfully
Hey, it was a sordid job but somebody's got to do it...ONIMA!
In a message dated 5/18/2015 9:35:28 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za writes:
your ice cool ideas and suggestions. Thanks for sorting me out!
On Mon, 18 May 2015 09:35:17 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht
elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za wrote:
I don't need help with writing. I am asking whether it is a good thing or not
to protect individual DFSORT and ICETOOL
commands/keywords just like you do it with DFDSS ADMINISTRATOR keyword for
Oh No It's Monday Again...back to the scanner and PDFSAM.
In a message dated 5/18/2015 10:37:43 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
stars...@mindspring.com writes:
I have to ask, what is ONIMA
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
I have to ask, what is ONIMA
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Ed Finnell
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 8:17 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: DFSORT and RACF
Hey, it was a sordid job
On Fri, 15 May 2015 06:51:45 -0500, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
This is what I try to tell our people. Protect the source and custodians
(people), not the tools. So, this is why I'm asking to see what others think -
is it practical to protect DFSORT keywords or not.
Nope.
As David said, let the
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht
elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za wrote:
Jousma, David wrote:
I understand the concept, but sounds impossible.
So, I already see that. Beside, trying to protect the programs of
utilities are simply a no-no.
What about omitting the
It goes further nowadays. After it's processed by a program it's on spool
or report writer and can be modified
again. Over on AFP list one group wanted to change leading spaces to '*'
maybe in a PAGEDEF. It was pointed out that if you allowed this somebody else
could change leading spaces to
columns into something readable.
[1]
Question:
Is there any need to control the modifying of input/output by DFSORT/ICETOOL
with RACF?
Something like that STGADMIN.?? profiles in FACILITY class to control usage of
ADMINISTRATOR keyword in DFDSS?
I don't think those auditors will like to see
: Friday, May 15, 2015 7:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DFSORT and RACF
Hi to all,
I want to ask something on IBM-MAIN before I lodge a formal request for DFSORT
gurus attention:
It is part of my work to produce many audit reports using DFSORT, ICETOOL,
custom REXX, COBOL, Assembler
Jousma, David wrote:
I understand the concept, but sounds impossible.
So, I already see that. Beside, trying to protect the programs of utilities are
simply a no-no.
What about omitting the records you don’t want? Omitting all user=ELARDUS
would be just as bad as changing data if there were
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 4:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DFSORT and RACF
Hi to all,
I want to ask something on IBM-MAIN before I lodge a formal
Mark Nelson from RACF has given a presentation at share As Cool as
Ice: Analyzing Your RACF® Data Using DFSORT™ and ICETOOL which can be
found here
ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/s390/zos/racf/pdf/r12_as_cool_as_ice.pdf
Also RACF has a downloadable utility JCL to create reports using DFSORT.
Check
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 15/05/2015 13:52
Subject:Re: DFSORT and RACF
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Just my thoughts.
Would you not protect the input (SORTIN) and output(SORTOUT) with RACF
from update where appropriate?
DFSORT can only
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 4:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: DFSORT and RACF
Hi to all,
I want to ask something on IBM-MAIN before I lodge a formal request for
DFSORT gurus
attention:
It is part of my work to produce
20 matches
Mail list logo
