|
John Earl wrote:
If you don't want someone to do something on the AS/400, you secure against that event. Then it's done, end of hassle.
This is precisely what I'd like to do, but other subscribers of this list have cautioned me against it - Dean warned me: "Of course, this will cause you other problems --No new batch processes to manage or monitor. No confused, angry or hurt users, and no arguement. If the rules for your system are that no user objects belong in QGPL, then use OS/400's security to enforce those rules.
Better to take preventative action and prohibit users placing objects in the library in the first place by removing their *ADD authority to the library. The users get immediate feedback, the queries get put somewhere else, and you don't have another IS overhead process to babysit.
I'm rusty on the whole security thing because when I joined my company almost two years ago, the users and security were all setup and we've had minimal turnover in office staff. The security was so lax on the CISC box that it would have been a major challenge to bring it up to speed. On my new AS400e RISC machine, I want to correct these security things and do it right.
Any advice on this is welcome!
Thanks,
Paul
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.