RE: CHGSYSLIBL and Security

Rick,

What you're describing sounds like a reasonable compromise.  If your
client were to compile a small CLP with appropriate authority which did:

CHGSYSLIBL LIB(LIBRARY1) OPTION(*REMOVE)
CHGSYSLIBL LIB(LIBRARY2) OPTION(*REMOVE)

Then you could go ahead and add the appropriate libraries to the user
portion of the library list and proceed with testing.  This would still
allow you to access production data with your own programs, but if
they're okay with that, it should work.

Alternatively, you could gather a consensus of opinion as to what a poor
architecture this is, and try to shame them into overcoming their
reluctance.  If they're doing development on the system, they really
should consider changing.

Regards,
Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

> admin@midrange.com] On Behalf Of Richard B Baird
> Subject: CHGSYSLIBL and Security
>
> I'm kinda in the same boat.  A client i'm working for has a couple of
> production (file and program) libraries in the system library list
(not
> recommended, but they are reluctant to change)
>
> This makes for a real hassle when trying to test changes to these.  I
> end
> up having to hard code library names for calls and file overrides.  It
> would be nice to slip a test library above these for testing.
>
> I don't have all of the authorities I need to use the command, and
> rather
> than ask for this specific authority - I was wondering - can't someone
> WITH
> all these authorities compile a program that does a CHGSYSLIBL, using
> adopt
> authority, and then give me authority to this program?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rick