First, I am going to be the one to tell you to go over to the IBM-TCPIP list:
"For IBMTCP-L subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
[email protected] with the message: INFO IBMTCP-L"

That said:
SECURE_FTP is as simple as it says, "ALLOWED" basically states that clients can 
log in using a security mechanism, but it is NOT REQUIRED.  If you code 
"REQUIRED" then the client MUST log in using a security mechanism, if the 
client is another z/OS system then " SECURE_MECHANISM TLS" would be the option 
to look at, other software, well start digging.

I personally do not know if access via subnet can be controlled at the z/OS 
TCP/IP level, but that is mostly because we turned that kind of control over to 
our network personnel.

Al Nims
Systems Admin/Programmer 3
UFIT
University of Florida
(352) 273-1298

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Mary Vollmer
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2017 12:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: How to require all secure FTP except to one subnet?

I am implementing TLS 1.2 via AT-TLS and have a requirement to secure all FTPs 
using this protocol except for the exchanges occurring via the hipersocket.

I am manually coding the policy since I don't have zOSMF configured.  In my 
policy I have a rule for my unsecure connections, coding both LocalAddr and 
RemoteAddr with that of our hipersocket subnet.  It has a priority of 100 and 
is first in the policy.  I also have a rule for secure connections with no 
LocalAddr or RemoteAddr with a priority of 10.

In my FTPDATA:
   When I specify SECURE_FTP REQUIRED, all unsecure attempts (inbound and 
outbound) fail - including those via the hipersocket.


   When I specify SECURE_FTP ALLOWED, all unsecure attempts (inbound and 
outbound) are successful - even those NOT using the hipersocket.  

I turned on tracing and see the rules selected are as I would have expected but 
it appears the SECURE_FTP parm in FTP data rules, regardless of what's in the 
policy.  

Does anyone know if it's possible to do what I am trying do to with one TCPIP 
stack?

Thanks,
Mary Vollmer 
 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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