|
> From Al Macintyre 405 CD with 4 facilities sharing one production environment on AS/436 V4R3 at http://www.cen-elec.com BPCS V4 security can be very effective provided someone is managing it who knows how it works & has good communication through the company regarding who all ought to be able to update what & who decides ... we have departments that are serious about security access to THEIR stuff ... we have departments that could care less about security - other issues are far more important. We get a lot of new hires in which the request is "give this new person 100% of the same access as that pre-existing user has" ... now did that new person get comparable training? I get a lot of requests in which I am told "this person needs access to that BPCS program to do their job right ... please adjust their security" Ok, I have an arrangement with my boss ... I fulfil these requests, but I also notify both my boss, and the person in charge of that application that there has been an addition to their staff, just in case there is a problem with this. Sometimes there is an explosion & the access approval is reversed. 99% of the time my notification is met with not even a murmer. I am the Chief Security Officer - only my boss & I are supposed to know the Master IBM Security passwords - MANY more people knew this stuff when we had consultants helping us, but I have been closing the doors they left open. We have an arrangement wherebye business partners can dial into our AS/400 on the ECS line, but I also have a hardware switch to disconnect that ability unless they have called in advance of a session to clear it with us. I have a few power users who help with BPCS security & adjusting what is on what menus. For 75% of our users, if they accidentally F3 out of BPCS to OS/400 menu, IBM security kicks in with *SIGNOFF instead. > BPCS V4 security has some holes. To this, we have added some holes of our own unique flavor. The vast majority of our users have command line authority, which means that under how BPCS group security functions, IBM security will let them do ANYTHING to any record of any file of BPCS without leaving an audit trail. Although I have noticed several incidents of a nature that undermines the integrity of the BPCS data base, our corporate interest is more in the productivity of the total work force than the risks from a security nature. Reports are generated by individuals within departments in which other individuals in the same departments need to access those reports. This has led to us giving spool file authority to 100% of our users. Occasionally someone deletes someone else's report by accident, but we see no problem with this, so long as everyone understands THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONFIDENTIAL REPORT & any time you transfer data that is protected by security to a screen print or report form, the odds are that some other user might look at it. As MIS Manager, I am periodically deleting reports from spool that are like 2 weeks old, having consulted with the users involved ... do yuu need ORD500 audit trails kept for how long ... etc. & various people ask me to leave stuff alone for a while, such as the CFO's reports from EOM sitting on one spool queue ... now think about this for a moment - if there are any reports that are seriously confidential, there they are all in one place, for any user to look at. > We are a multi-faciilty company in which > some users are authorized to do a wide range of transactions at the facility > at which they are based, and are authorized to LOOK at data in other > facilities but not update anything there. We have not figured out how to > enforce that, but we can query on the user-id within inventory history ... > running a total only number of transactions by user by facility each month, > to catch any no-nos, after the fact. > From: Lisa.Abney@universalflavors.com > Al ... We have a very similar setup ... 4.0.5 (nonCD), with 9 manufacturing > facilities across the country, all operating out of the same environment. > We use a warehouse name the same as the facility name for our "primary" > warehouse at each facility. > As we can set security at the warehouse level, and because > most "stuff" happens at the warehouse level, we think we are secure against > users at one facility changing data at another facility. We have factories in 3 cities. one of the factories is host to 2 facilities. We use a consistent number system --- the first character of the facility & all warehouses in that facility consistently "say" where it is --- the second character is the type of warehouse --- raw materials, finished, work-in-process, QC problem. We are more concerned with human error than with risk of fraud. We have several different kinds of users who are authorized to do transactions into warehouses. There are the people who work ONLY in their facility & have no involvement with the other facilities ... no problems there, until their job function is promoted & sometimes the training in their new responsibilities is a bit weak, regarding the new risks of the new position. If in fact all your people are like this scenario, and you have not imitated the Central system of digging lots of security holes, then you are probably fairly safe. There are the people who are authorized to work with data in ALL facilities & generally have had the training & experience to know what they are doing ... occasionally I get a call from one of these people ... OOPS ... I was doing transactions for this facility & by accident I was in that other facility & was oblivious to the fact that I was in the wrong one ... in this case the user normally has the experience to recognize that they made a mistake, knows how to check the audit trails, knows how to back out the error entries & only needs my help if it can';t be backed out because of some other activity that interferes. The big problem we have had is with people who are authorized to work with data in THEIR facility & LOOK at data in other facilities, because we have some common sub-components & we are a job-shop make-to-order with short lead times. So some customer wants something pulled up, and the factory involved does not have enough raw materials ... do we authorize high expense rush delivery what we need, or does another factory have some safety stock that can be dipped into? We have tried to address this with remembered keys stickiness. The filters default to that site's home facility --- key in some other facility, get the info, then it reverts to the home facility --- need a lot of lookups & this is a nuisance, so they adjust the remembered keys & forget to reset them, then later forget they are in the wrong facility. > Your comments about the V4 security makes me wonder ... > where do you see the holes? I have to be careful in describing problem areas so that I do not extend an invitation to trouble makers to drive heavy fraud through companies who are not seeing this or protecting against it. Al Macintyre Central Industries of Indiana Inc. +--- | This is the BPCS Users Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to BPCS-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to BPCS-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to BPCS-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner: dasmussen@aol.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.