|
PLEASE NOTE : No sarcasm is intended, however, I know that sarcasm WILL be projected from my response to this. Lets take this from the sublime to the WAY ridiculous. Somebody requires access to High level Top secret documents, but to obtain this data "they then have to jump through all sorts of hoops." So lets make it easier to obtain this data. Oh, did'nt they do that at some military installation in California just recently. Sarcasm switch now turned off. Implementing a security procedure is NOT easy, and it is (or should be) ALWAYS revised. If it is hard for a person to be able to obtain data, then surely the security is working. Letting an application handle the security (even if users only see the options they need to see) is NOT (this is strictly my opinion) the procedure to use. If fred Bloggs should never have access to the payroll master file, then the security should be in place that he is NOT allowed access, even through the application, thet he may or may not have. If he should have access to the payroll master file, give him direct access. If not, he falls into the category of PUBLIC *EXCLUDE. >>> <rob@dekko.com> 07/27/01 11:10AM >>> But, Alan, most of the geezers are very comfortable with 5250 menu security. They've created fancy menus that are customized to the user. Certain users only have certain options. People who should not withdraw funds cannot. This technique used to be valid until the arrival of the S/36 and the S/38. When these machines came along alternative methods of access came into being, one of the early ones being Client Access. Now that we have Client Access, ftp, odbc, etc., then the recommended way of securing things so that your menu system has any validity at all is to allow no access to data except via adopted programs. The other alternative is to either purchase a package to handle all exit point programs, or write your own. Of course, with IBM adding new exit points with every release, we went with the package option. Of course, when one DOES want to access a file with Client Access, or whatnot, and has a valid business reason for doing so, they then have to jump through all sorts of hoops. Rob Berendt ================== A smart person learns from their mistakes, but a wise person learns from OTHER peoples mistakes. "alan shore" <SHOREA@dime.com> To: <RPG400-L@midrange.com> Sent by: cc: owner-rpg400-l@mi Subject: RE: Programing Question/Authority... drange.com 07/27/2001 08:38 AM Please respond to RPG400-L I have been VERY cautious in taking this approach, as this means that ANYBODY that can sign onto the system can really play havoc with the system JUST by using the application. Fred Blogs has a valid profile/password to sign onto the system, and even with NO command line can apply payments, withdraw funds, place orders etc. just by following the menu options, because there is NO security to stop him due to the application giving him the authority because he is signed on. Whereas, if authorization per Group profile or user profile was applied to the files within the production libraries, the security would stop him because he is NOT authorized to update a particular master file. He is only allowed to read the master file. Using adopted owner authority should be used ONLY where needed, NOT across the gamut of the application. But then thats just my opinion, for what its worth. >>> "Njal Fisketjon" <n.f@figu.no> 07/26/01 08:43PM >>> I am a bit surprised to see all the postings regarding USRPRF(*OWNER) I always thought this was the recommended way of handling db security: - use public *Exclude on all libraries - let each application (all programs and files) be owned by an owner profile with pwd *none - use USRPRF(*OWNER) on all application programs Something important must have slipped by me if this is no longer a recommended approach. +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +--- +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +--- +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +--- +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.