Walt Farrell wrote: > In a more normal shop, I personally don't see much of an exposure.
True, but not much consolation to the guy who got fired when I showed management one of his, er, impolite (ok, unprintable) dsnames. :-) I think I ran into it while investigating a full vtoc, which turned out to be caused by many zero-space datasets created by that clown. Edward E. Jaffe wrote: > That's why "God" invented VM. Huh? I thought it was the devil... ;-) Thomas Berg wrote: > I have always seen source hiding in circumstances like this as silly > and sneaky. > I never do this. Thanks for that posting. It reminds me to me ask (rhetorically!) how many of us would be where we are if we didn't have access to a large inventory of source written by good, experienced programmers? I'm sure that I learned a lot more from reading other people's source than from reading manuals. It would be interesting to see how many of the "hide the source" people here have also previously bemoaned the lack of new mainframe programmers. Craddock, Chris wrote: > It would be folly to depend on information hiding as the only security > strategy, I believe the technical term for that is "security through obscurity". Long ago, I worked in a classified environment where the client considered it a security problem to see JOBNAMES that didn't belong to you. It's amazing what they made us disable on that system. /Leonard ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
