I don't doubt that FCOPY GARBLE isn't all that secure, but I don't happen
to have a z9 or "z" anything. FCOPY runs quite nicely on my G5 and the
output isn't in plain text. I did find, 10-15 years ago, the name of the
encryption technique that Jim Oswald used in FCOPY and, at least, the name
sounded impressive. It also does have the element of portability in that
at a D/R site you wouldn't have to be on matching hdwe.
Jim
At 12:30 PM 6/28/2006, you wrote:
True, the COPYFILE garble option was not very secure and any 'encryption'=
process these days should support at least 3DES and AES128. Having one th=
at
supported the underlying hardware would be nice, but for Disaster Recover=
y
purposes, it should fallback to pure software processing. I might not get=
a
crypto-enabled box for my recovery.
/Tom Kern
/U.S. Dept. of Energy
/301-903-2211
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:12:58 -0500, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
wrote:
>GARBLE actually used to be an undocumented option in the CMS command:
>COPYFILE
>IIRC you could "COPYFILE (GARBLE" a file multiple times, specifying
>different passwords, and to decrypt the file it had to be copied with
>UNGARBLE using the keys in the reverse order.
>
>But it's not very secure. IMHO a pipes solution that provided access th=
e
>latest crypto hardware on the z9 boxes might be interesting.
>
>Mike Walter
>Hewitt Associates
>The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's.
Jim Bohnsack
Cornell Univ.
(607) 255-1760
