Phil Smith III wrote:
>(Note that Im using the Pervasive Encryption term
>in the sense that IBM did when it was first introduced:
>the whole-data set encryption on z/OS. More recently
>theyve expanded it to mean the entire IBM encryption
>strategy, which is still developing and not particularly
Sorry for the late reply. I just saw this question.
If you have questions about chrome browser, ask them in the google group
chromium-discuss. In fact, questions about any chromium based browser (e.g.
chrome, MS Edge and several others) can be asked here. Don't confuse
chromium-os with chromium
Phil,
One area where PE encryption, as implemented on z is where it is used
together with compression.
The horse must go in front of the cart, meaning compression must happen
before encryption, because it will be ineffective if you do it after.
It is a simple but important part of the implemen
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw wrote, re platform-specificity:
>Why do you think this is platform specific? The AES encryption keys
>involved can be managed by an external key manager, (such as EKMF) and
>so those keys can be securely deployed to other (secured) platforms. The
>encrypted data can be re
Phil Smith said,
" It's also platform-specific, so when data has to be moved across platforms,
it must be decrypted and (hopefully!) re-encrypted, which is both expensive and
risky: those egress points provide huge attack surface."
Why do you think this is platform specific? The AES encryption k
Has all IBM code that issues an ABEND documented to give a reason code been
updated to use the REASON keyword rather than just loading R15 before the ABEND?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on
ITschak Mugzach wrote:
>PE is much cheaper, CPU wise, than a field level encryption as it use bulk
>encryption. encrypting field by field is much more expensive and affect
>elapse as well.
Of course. That's part of the attraction. Yes, field-level is more expensive.
It's also more secure. A
Phil,
PE is much cheaper, CPU wise, than a field level encryption as it use bulk
encryption. encrypting field by field is much more expensive and affect
elapse as well.
I believe that what IBM is doing is to make the mainframe a file server.
and this is the correct way to use the data. Don't move
Cameron Conacher asked about the value of PE, and various folks provided good
answers. (Note that Im using the Pervasive Encryption term in the sense that
IBM did when it was first introduced: the whole-data set encryption on z/OS.
More recently theyve expanded it to mean the entire IBM encr
Thanks everyone!
On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 6:55 AM Peter Relson wrote:
>
> what about the normal completion reason code (R0)?
>
> "Normal completion reason code" is not a concept supported by z/OS. Of
> course there is "value in R0 upon normal completion" but that is not
> surfaced.
>
> The TCB/
10 matches
Mail list logo
