In
<cf4c9114ed956d49a019f58166d918570a346...@tjaxp80093dag.csxt.ad.csx.com>,
on 03/05/2012
at 02:19 PM, "Pate, Gene" <gene_p...@csx.com> said:
>How you allow code to get into supervisor state is of no consequence
>once it is in supervisor state so, unless you have a pristine system
>where every load module library on the system is totally locked down
>and only the OS libraries supplied by IBM appear in the APF list, you
>have by definition accepted exposures to system integrity.
It's not just how but who. Letting trusted code get into supervisor
code is one thing; letting everybody that knows how do it is quite
another.
>Back in the late 70's I wrote a PCFLIH backdoor
What do you mean by backdoor? I don't believe that it is what others
were referring to.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
