Re: Profiles for Security and Operator

[boothm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

The idea, as I understand it, is to copy them then point them to nothing. 
Hackers all know those two profiles have superpowers and so attack those 
profiles first.  By keeping them in use you cut their brute-force work to 
only needing to find passwords.

_______________________
Booth Martin
boothm@earth.goddard.edu
http://www.spy.net/~booth
_______________________




"Gallagher, Debbie" <dgallagher@deloitte.ca>
Sent by: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
12/06/1999 10:34 PM
Please respond to MIDRANGE-L

 
        To:     Midrange-L@midrange.com
        cc: 
        Subject:        Profiles for Security and Operator

I notice that IBM recommends that the QSECOFR and QSYSOPR profiles not
actually
be used. Their set up procedures show creation of alternate profiles for
these.

I can do it, but don't really know the reasoning behind using a different
profile instead. Anyone know why?

Debbie Gallagher
dgallagher@deloitte.ca
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to 
MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: 
david@midrange.com
+---




+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---