Hi Mike,

We occasionally come across undefined-users, and they are usually the result of 
errors in setting up STARTED profiles. On rare occasions, we encounter 
installations that have not activated SETROPTS JES(BATCHALLRACF), which, as you 
point out, if not activated, can allow undefined-user batch jobs to execute. 
Most installations do not generate daily/weekly reports on undefined users, so 
they go unnoticed unless the lack of an ID causes a security violation.

Regards, Bob

Robert S. Hansel                       2024 IBM Champion
Lead RACF Specialist
RSH Consulting, Inc.
617-969-8211
www.linkedin.com/in/roberthansel
www.rshconsulting.com

-----Original Message-----
Date:    Tue, 25 Jun 2024 11:22:17 -0500
From:    Mike Cairns <m...@mikecairns.com>
Subject: Re: Data Set Commander Monitor (DSCMON) Access Authority

Hi Peter,

Radoslaw and I probably spend more time over on the RACF_L list than here on 
IBM-MAIN, but I still like to keep an eye open here.

The use of ID(*) ACCESS(READ) is well known among the RACF community as the 
'preferred' option to UACC nowadays, and the reason you cite is indeed 
mentioned in the literature.  Though I'm not sure about the NJE port of entry 
still being able to actually get a batch job running under the JES 
UNDEFINEDUSER, I have a recollection that the RACF SETROPTS setting 
BATCHALLRACF(YES) should prevent a batch job from initiating with the 
UNDEFINEDUSER value, though I have a vague recollection that BATCHALLRACF 
itself has been redundant also for many years now as well.

I'm intrigued generally to ask of this community, just how often does anyone 
observe work executing on their system *without* a valid RACF (or ACF2 or 
TopSecret) identity associated with it?  

I think there might still be one or two started tasks, probably running as 
TRUSTED or PRIVILEGED, that are initiated in nucleus initialisation that may 
still run with traditionally either the 8 plusses or the 8 question marks as 
their ID, we can see them in SDSF, but realistically I don't believe that we 
see work running under the UNDEFINEDUSER in modern systems for a long time 
nowadays.  I'd be keen to hear otherwise if there is though.

Cheers - Mike

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to