Operator was an exception just incase RACF were down and we needed to use
it to recover. If this is not required then I'm very open to making it
conform.
Thanks
Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist
Enterprise Platform Services, Mainframe Engineering
KP-IT Enterprise Engineering, Client and Platform Engineering Services
(CAPES)
925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck
Kaiser Service Credo: "Our cause is health. Our passion is service. We?re
here to make lives better.?
?Never attribute to malice what can be caused by miscommunication.?
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail,
you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing
its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and
any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them. Thank you.
From:
"Ponte, Doug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Date:
09/26/2007 08:10 AM
Subject:
Re: z/vm security advise requested
Agreed. Although, why is OPERATOR proposed as an exception?
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It
contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named
addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or
disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us
immediately and then destroy it.
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System on behalf of Huegel, Thomas
Sent: Wed 26-Sep-07 10:35
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: z/vm security advise requested
I think once you have RACF installed all of the other sevurity problems
you describe are solved.
-----Original Message-----
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Lionel B. Dyck
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:30 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: z/vm security advise requested
To keep our auditors happy (assuming that is possible) to
secure our z/vm (5.3) environment I am planning on doing the following.
Note that our environment is purely in support of linux virtualized
servers and the only cms users are the handful of sysprogs supporting
z/vm.
1. installing both racf/vm and dirmaint
2. all linux virtual server guests will be
defined with LBYONLY and a LOGONBY for the sysprogs
3. all system machines with the exception of
Operator will also be defined with LBYONLY and LOGONBY for the sysprogs
Does anyone see any issues/exposures with this approach.
Thanks
________________________________
Lionel B. Dyck, Consultant/Specialist
Enterprise Platform Services, Mainframe Engineering
KP-IT Enterprise Engineering, Client and Platform
Engineering Services (CAPES)
925-926-5332 (8-473-5332) | E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AIM: lbdyck | Yahoo IM: lbdyck
Kaiser Service Credo: "Our cause is health. Our passion
is service. We're here to make lives better."
"Never attribute to malice what can be caused by
miscommunication."
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended
recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or
otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading,
forwarding or saving them. Thank you.
________________________________
<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 13021 VSE-List messages and set
aside 12385 VM-List for me
You can use it too - and it's FREE! www.ellaforspam.com <
http://www.ellaforspam.com/>
