Re: [Security400] Prevent User Profile from using public authority

[Evan Harris <spanner@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Charles

Interesting question.

I think I'd go with option 1, not least because as I understand it, the 
security checking process is most efficient when the lowest level of 
authority is *PUBLIC. I'd hazard a guess that if everything is et to 
*PUBLIC *EXCLUDE this will make little or no difference as the authority 
checking will be forced to look for specific or group profiles every time 
anyway :) The other reason is that then I would feel safer knowing that 
nobody is authorised to anything unless they are explicitly authorised. I 
think I would find this easier to prove from an audit point of view also.

I'm not sure about the IBM libraries. I think I'd have to test this for 
myself but my first though is the same as yours: changing these could be 
dangerous.

Making sure new objects get the right authority should be handled by your 
change control procedure, at least that's where I like to set this stuff 
programmatically by granting the object authority from a model object, but 
you also have the option of the authority parameter (the name escapes me) 
on the library object where if I remember rightly you can specify the 
*PUBLIC authority granted to objects created in the library.

I'm sure this is going to be more of an issue for more of us as time 
marches forward :)

Regards
Evan Harris

At 06:01 a.m. 23/04/2005, you wrote:
> All,
>
> Is there any way to prevent a user profile from using *PUBLIC authority?
>
> Here's the scenario, I've got a user profile set up for JDBC use from a 
> external web server.  All I want this profile do be able to do is call 
> stored procedures it is specifically authorized to.
>
> Basically, I'm concerned about *PUBLIC being expand from just "regular" 
> users, ie. company employees, to the entire world; or at least those non 
> employees who have logons for the web server or more worrisome, hackers 
> that manage to breach the web server (Windows based, not by my choice ;-)
>
> I've thought of two ways to handle this.
> 1) a. Create a group profile for all my "regular" users.
>    b. Grant the group profile the same authority that *PUBLIC currently 
> has for each & every object
>    c. change *PUBLIC to *EXCLUDE for every object
>
> 2) a. Grant *EXCLUDE authority to every object for this user profile (or 
> better yet a new group profile of which this profile will be a member)
>
> Don't forget that when I say "every object" I'm talking about IFS files 
> and directories too.
>
> Couple of problems:
> 1) Making sure new objects on the system get the correct authorities.
> 2) I'd imagine that there are IBM objects I shouldn't set *EXCLUDE
>
> What I'd really like is to be able to do a CHGUSRPRF  USEPUBLIC(*NO).  But 
> that parm doesn't exist <grin>
>
> So how do you handle this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charles Wilt