|
Tom: If we use the InfoCenter as the arbiter, then adopted authority relates only to the use of the use adopted authority (USEADPAUT) parameter and can be validated through the DSPPGMADP command. We shouldn't try to confuse swap profile functionality with adopt authority functionality. Currently, the operating system tools for managing authority adoption can't be used to manage profile swapping. Phil Ashe NetIQ (A division of Attachmate) 1233 West Loop South, Suite 1800 | Houston, TX 77027 USA 713.418.5279 phone phil.ashe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx www.netiq.com -----Original Message----- From: security400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:security400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qsrvbas@xxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:06 PM To: Security Administration on the AS400 / iSeries Subject: Re: [Security400] Commands for Limited Users David.Morris wrote:
In your original message you said: "I would use adopted authority for access through the expected application interfaces and use proxy commands to limit the use of EDTF
or DFU to well-defined views of the data, then take away the data rights to the file. The object authority is still checked on the remote server interfaces. If you need access to the file from one or more remote servers, you can use exit programs to give you this
authority."
I took that to mean that you used adopted authority in your exit program but it sounds like you are actually swapping or setting the effective user, which is the approach I use in all cases where I used to use adoption. There are some other steps you need to take like register exits to back out the authority to mimic adoption.
Now there's an interesting point to discuss... One item that is needed is a clear agreement on terms. "Adopted authority" is used in ways that seem to mean different things to different people at different times. I have had a personal understanding that limits its meaning, and maybe others could comment so that a consensus is reached and available. To me, "adopted authority" refers specifically to the authority gained by a program that has the USRPRF(*OWNER) attribute set. It does _not_ refer to any authority resulting from the use of any profile-switching APIs. "Adopted authority" becomes active when, within the program, an object access is attempted and the job current user does not have sufficient authority but (1) the program USRPRF(*OWNER) attribute is set and (2) the program owner does have sufficient authority. One result is that the USEADPAUT(*YES/*NO) program attribute _only_ affects the authority gained within a higher program in the call stack by the above mechanism. It has no effect on authority gained by a profile switch from any API because that isn't "adopted authority". Anybody have modifications (or direct corrections) to add? Tom Liotta -- Tom Liotta The PowerTech Group, Inc. 19426 68th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 Phone 253-872-7788 x313 Fax 253-872-7904 http://www.powertech.com _______________________________________________ This is the Security Administration on the AS400 / iSeries (Security400) mailing list To post a message email: Security400@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/security400 or email: Security400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/security400.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.