On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 7:07 AM Paul Gilmartin <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 14:33:01 +0300, ITschak Mugzach wrote:
>
> >a user asks to have access to the uss sleep syscall. We would like to
> limit
> >the user only to this function. is this possible?
> >
> Why?  Are there any security risks with other SYSCALLs?
>
> And how are you preventing such access now?
>
> How would you prevent access to Callable Services by means
> other than Rexx?
>
> I suspect the Totalitarian Principle is operating here: "Anything
> not compulsory is forbidden!"


Perhaps. I know that many z/OS types & management likes to "lock down"
everything in sight. I just got issued a new company laptop. It,
supposedly, comes with everything that I need to do my job. And nothing
else. I cannot install or uninstall anything. It automatically logs into
the corporate LAN, which has a corporate "net nanny" installed. I don't
mind much because it does really have the minimal that I need to do my
assigned work. But, on my old Windows machine, I could install PERL and
AWK, which I often used to do "ad hoc" processing. I can do this on our
mainframe, but that costs MSUs, which costs money, which has people asking
"what  are you doing". Curiously, I do the same thing using REXX in batch
or TSO & there is not a murmur. (don't tell them, but I have a Linux
desktop on which I have installed PostgreSQL. I use IRRDBU00 to create a
RACF unload which I ftp down & put into a database to generate reports.)



>
> -- gil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

Reply via email to