RE: "Not authorized to command XXXXXXXX"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I used EDTOBJAUT per your advice.  This seems to match what the security
reference says.

Why isn't QSECOFR in this list?  Is it because it has *ALLOBJ special
authority?

Maybe I should just create a new PDM option: GRTOBJAUT &N *CMD
USER(LTEIT) AUT(*USE) and use it on all command objects in QSYS?  (LTEIT
is the group profile for admins.)

Dan Bale
IT - AS/400
Handleman Company
248-362-4400  Ext. 4952
D.Bale@Handleman.com
  Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
  (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

-------------------------- Original Message --------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Langston [SMTP:jlangston@celsinc.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:00 PM
> To:   security400@midrange.com
> Subject:      RE: [Security400] "Not authorized to command XXXXXXXX"
>
> Generally what I do when I come across this type of situation is I
> EDTOBJAUT
> on the given command and see how they are currently set up.  I see on
> our
> system it is also set up:
>
>                           Object
>  User        Group       Authority
>  QSYS                    *ALL
>  QSRV                    *USE
>  QSRVBAS                 *USE
>  QSYSOPR                 *USE
>  QPGMR                   *USE
>  *PUBLIC                 *EXCLUDE
>
> which basically means the system, programmers and the security officer
> can
> run the command.  If I wanted someone else to use this command I would
> add
> them as *USE.
>
> EDTOBJAUT is generally the first place I look when securing or
> unsecuring
> commands.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jim Langston
> Programmer/Analyst
> Cels Enterprises, Inc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: security400-admin@midrange.com
> [mailto:security400-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Bale, Dan
> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:40 PM
> To: security400@midrange.com
> Subject: [Security400] "Not authorized to command XXXXXXXX"
>
>
> <SNIP>
> Am I correct that I can give the group profile for admins *USE
> authority
> to the STRHOSTSVR command to solve our dilemna?  Or is there something
> else that needs to be done?
>
> Dan Bale
> <SNIP>