Yes, I agree with you in the part of keep security issues "at home". I
have business reasons to try this anyway, not a question of frivolity or
nonsense. It seems to be technically imposible as system integrity
protection works fine.
Regards:
Roberto.
IBM Global Services España, S.A.
Mar Adriático, 2, 28830 San Fernando de Henares (Madrid)
Registro Mercantil de Madrid, Folio 49; Tomo 6430; Hoja M-104.742
CIF A80-599459
CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: mi400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
14/05/2010 16:31
Please respond to
MI Programming on the AS400 / iSeries <mi400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To
mi400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
Re: [MI400] OBJECT PATCHING
Why would a new program need to be in the EPT unless it is part
of the OS? Code that is created outside of the OS development, the
programs in such an application should be created and delivered as
an LPP using user-state programs. Not understanding why the LIC
exception 4401 occurs, is a clear indication that success with
effecting the patch is probable folly. Similarly, for understanding
about why attempts to patch system state would not be functional.
Had you at least asked internally on the ibmforums.ibm.com
newgroup [or equivalent brower-based forums]; e.g. on software.os400
or hardware.iseries? While it may be interesting to those outside
IBM to try to /play/ with such things, IMO it is at least somewhat
inappropriate for someone within IBM to be attempting such nonsense;
even somewhat odd, to be discussing the topic on a public forum,
since that makes IBM look incapable of doing their own business.
You should contact IBM Rochester development team to discuss what
you are attempting to do, and probably best to discuss what you want
to do. I believe the security component provides a tool to
IBM-support to update the EPT, but it will not assist in making a
valid signed system state program object.
Regards, Chuck
Roberto Garcia Perez1 wrote:
I have a couple of problems when trying to patch some objects in
the system. What I pretend is to replace the virtual address in
one of the QINSEPT pointers and point to a new pgm that I've
developed, and also patch this new program to change it to
*SYSTEM state. The problems are:
1) My attempt to patch QINSEPT ends with a MCH6801.
2) My attempt to patch the program at location X'105C' to move
it to a *SYSTEM state shows no error but the operation is not
performed. All these steps are issued from a pgm in *SYSTEM
state.
Regards:
Roberto.
IBM Global Services España, S.A.
Mar Adriático, 2, 28830 San Fernando de Henares (Madrid)
Registro Mercantil de Madrid, Folio 49; Tomo 6430; Hoja M-104.742
CIF A80-599459
Salvo indicado de otro modo más arriba / Unless stated otherwise above:
International Business Machines, S.A.
Santa Hortensia, 26-28, 28002 Madrid
Registro Mercantil de Madrid; Folio 1; Tomo 1525; Hoja M-28146
CIF A28-010791
_______________________________________________
This is the MI Programming on the AS400 / iSeries (MI400) mailing list
To post a message email: MI400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/mi400
or email: MI400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at
http://archive.midrange.com/mi400.
Salvo indicado de otro modo más arriba / Unless stated otherwise above:
International Business Machines, S.A.
Santa Hortensia, 26-28, 28002 Madrid
Registro Mercantil de Madrid; Folio 1; Tomo 1525; Hoja M-28146
CIF A28-010791
midrange.com
