John von Neumann, call your office.
On Sat, Jan 13, 2024 at 5:41 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Programs are data.
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
> נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
>
>
> From: IBM
We looked at dataset encryption to please our auditors.Just trying to see
the benefit, honestly.If you are a permitted user of the dataset by any
means, then you have to be permitted to the encryption key profile as well.
So who are you protecting the data from? Storage managers?
I've been reading this thread and the question I have is what
problem are we (or you) trying to solve, or prevent?
Making auditors happy who may not understand how a system functions?
Trying to prevent a bad actor(s) from making the system unusable
(ransomware attack?)?
If we start with the
Thank you.
You are correct in my error however I do remember that I what I used as a
starting point was STCBLSDP and from memory it pointed to a X'8C' which is
branch state entry.
Regardless bumping down by X'128' I got to a X'89' is a header the doc say
that decrementing that would bring
On Sun, 14 Jan 2024 15:57:47 + Peter Relson
<056a472f7cb4-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
:>Binyamin wrote does that means that the CSFDLL functions do not create a
:>linkage stack entry before calling the true routines/
:>Could you share why it matters to you if there is a linkage
Is this to reduce the elapsed time, or that you are doing this a million
times a second and want to save CPU?
I expect any elapsed time impact is going to be at the sub microsecond
level. I would have thought that there are other areas which you might
address which might give you a bigger
On 1/13/2024 9:50 PM, Attila Fogarasi wrote:
It is indeed a technical reason: PDS and PDSE datasets cannot be
Extended-Format. Pervasive Encryption requires Extended-Format. The
restrictions on Extended-Format have been problematic for the past decade,
so presumably not easy to fix. A few
Get your mind out of my gutter!
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי
נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Jay
Maynard
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2024 8:28 AM
To:
Binyamin wrote does that means that the CSFDLL functions do not create a
linkage stack entry before calling the true routines/
Could you share why it matters to you if there is a linkage stack entry
(whether before or after getting to the "true routine", even if my guess is
right about what you
On 1/14/2024 7:05 AM, Jousma, David wrote:
The technology that I see as beneficial is one that I think is in the works
with ibm in that data will never be decrypted including during execution. I
forget the term used for that.
Homomorphic encryption, but that has limited use.
--
Phoenix
The technical reason "why" is because it would be very difficult to do, would
have adverse performance effects for the system, and there is not at this point
a business case for providing it. So you're not going to get it just because
you think it sounds nice (and even because it sounds
There has to be a way to set it via software. What happens when you
replace the machine including the hardware where the master key is stored?
How is the key set into the disaster recovery machine?
/Leonard
Jousma, David wrote on 1/14/2024 4:50 PM:
Pretty hard to mess up the master key,
(I read the whole thread before starting this reply.)
Steve Estle wrote on 1/13/2024 8:28 AM:
[...]
My true reason for composing this is that we've discovered the inability to
encrypt load libraries - even in PDSE format.
[...]
I know this seems innocuous, but we'd like to encrypt as much as
Found it
Part of the problem was in TEST I was doing a list the SDWAEC2 had 0704
while the Linkage stack 070C
But the reason for that was bit 12 is on for 8 byte PSW and off as in the
linkage stack for 16 byte PSW
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
Pretty hard to mess up the master key, since it only lives in the crypto
hardware.
That's the other thing though. Sounds like the OP wants to encrypt everything
with the same HLQ, with the same key that's a big exposure if the key gets
accidentally deleted. Not sure what the rule of
Hi
Figure out my PSW problems but I would think that if SDWAEC1 equals RBPOSW
then SDWAGRSV should then match TBOPSW
Here is the SDWA as you can see the PSW matches how come the registers
don't?
thanks
L 3R? L(240) XC
7F6676D8. 7F667B0C 840F8000 FF84002A *".#.dd..*
Steve Estle wrote, in part:
>but we'd like to encrypt as much as possible in our environment
Why? What problem are you trying to solve? Remember that DSE provides
protection against exactly two attacks:
1) Someone getting at the wire between the array and the CEC
2) Rogue storage admin
On 1/14/2024 5:52 PM, Leonard D Woren wrote:
There has to be a way to set it via software. What happens when you
replace the machine including the hardware where the master key is
stored?
How is the key set into the disaster recovery machine?
In our case, we brought z/OS up on the DR
18 matches
Mail list logo
