If possible, separate libraries for logical files should not be used to secure the data. Doing so complicates save/restore and disaster recovery. Instead of giving *USE to the PF, grant only *READ, and Then give only *USE to the LF. Leave both the PF & LF in the same library. That accomplishes the same thing, without two libraries.

Also the claim that more authority than the PF can not be given to the LF, is misleading. As many rights may be granted as are available, i.e. up to *ALL. The data rights from the LF however, can not override the PF data rights that are available to the user accessing the LF.

Regards, Chuck

Mike wrote:
Jim Franz wrote:

<<SNIP some of quoted text and reply>>

Mike wrote:

Also, if we have *EXCLUDE on a library. Then we have a logical in
another library pointing to a file within the secured library.
Would that work? The file in the locked library would have READ
access only.

yes - (i've not tested this), note: data authorities on LF cannot
be more than on PF. (this one i was not positive till checking
Woodbury/Botz's Experts Guide book p164)

I did just try this one and it works. I give the READ data authority
only on the PF in one library with *EXCLUDE on the library, then give
them *USE access on the logical on a separate library. Now we can
control what live data they can access and what data within the file
they can access.

I'll have to look into that book more.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2020 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].