Re: ICSF with CPACF

2006-09-07 Thread Alan Altmark
On Thursday, 09/07/2006 at 08:12 CST, "Jeffrey D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think there is a language barrier here. My point is that there is > no point in preventing/restricting acccess to the ICSF ciphering > functions. The vast majority of encryption needs involve ciphering > data.

Re: ICSF with CPACF

2006-09-07 Thread Jeffrey D. Smith
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Alan Altmark > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 10:07 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ICSF with CPACF > > On Thursday, 09/07/2006 at 08:12 CST, &quo

ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-06 Thread Jeffrey D. Smith
label for the clear key (which adds overhead for locating the clear key in the ICSF application storage). There's no advantage for using ICSF with CPACF over using a home-grown solution. So, why bother using ICSF to store clear keys in its VSAM data set? When CPACF is in use, ICSF has no substant

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-06 Thread R.S.
F application storage). There's no advantage for using ICSF with CPACF over using a home-grown solution. I dare to disagree. ICSF's CKDS is ready to use key container. The keys are encrypted using master key. This is the advantage - you don't have to worry about it. You can control a

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-06 Thread Jeffrey D. Smith
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 9:04 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone > conside

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-07 Thread R.S.
Jeffrey D. Smith wrote: [...] I dare to disagree. ICSF's CKDS is ready to use key container. The keys are encrypted using master key. Wrong. The CPACF services offered by ICSF require CLEAR KEYS. They are not encrypted by the master key. There are new key form keywords for clear keys, "CLRDES

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-07 Thread Jeffrey D. Smith
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 1:22 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone > conside

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-10 Thread R.S.
Jeffrey D. Smith wrote: [...] How about key IMPORT ? Could I keep the key in encrypted form and import it from CKDS ? Of course, but you can't use CPACF in that case. I can use both: ICSF for key extract and CPACF. BTW: I understand "using CPACF" as using CPACF directly OR via ICSF API. [...]

Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone considering field encryption?)

2006-09-10 Thread Jeffrey D. Smith
> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of R.S. > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 11:35 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ICSF with CPACF (was RE: Encrypting tape drives... anyone > conside