RE: V5R1 Memo to Users: "Control blocks more secure"

The SEPT itself or the pointer to the SEPT in the job? Either way that
sucks.

-Walden

------------
Walden H Leverich III
President
Tech Software
(516) 627-3800 x11
(208) 692-3308 eFax
WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com
http://www.TechSoftInc.com

Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
(Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)



-----Original Message-----
From: Leif Svalgaard [mailto:leif@leif.org]
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 13:50
To: mi400@midrange.com
Subject: Re: [MI400] V5R1 Memo to Users: "Control blocks more secure"


From: <jamesl@hb.quik.com>
> Fellow MI geeks:
> The V5R1 Memo to Users includes this warning:
>
> In V5R1,
> integrity protection for some system control blocks was improved.

The only one I know of is that the SEPT can now longer be changed even by a
system state program.


_______________________________________________
This is the MI Programming on the AS400 / iSeries (MI400) mailing list To
post a message email: MI400@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe, or
change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/mi400
or email: MI400-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/mi400.