As Dave mentions, we used a dedicated ssh server.
I wrote a unix rexx (U1) which is called by Cyberark through SSH.
Via the unix rexx U1 another REXX is called via the EXEC command (let's say
T1).
In T1 we interprete the parameters given by cyberark, being userid and password.
Via zSecure's
How large is the exit routine? (number of csects and sizes in bytes)
Michael
At 01:42 PM 6/23/2024, José I. RÃos wrote:
Hi,
Yes, but it was compiled apperantly without no changes long time ago. We
are searching the source code. There was no new maintenance only that we
moved the LPAR to a
Although CyberArk supports multi-factor authentication (to/with CyberArk), if
you configure RACF (or your other z/OS ESM) to trust CyberArk fully then
there’s no multi-factor authentication to/with z/OS or any applications running
on z/OS. And that means that if CyberArk is ever compromised
What machine type was ii running on before?
Lizette
Sent from EarthLink Mobile mail
On 6/23/24, 11:42, José I. Ríos wrote:
Hi,
Yes, but it was compiled apperantly without no changes long time ago. We are
searching the source code. There was no new maintenance only that we moved the
LPAR to
Although I gather z/OS now allows them to be in REXX. I'm a REXX enthusiast
and HLASM is still in my future, but I have to wonder whether that's a good
idea. I gotta believe exits get hit a lot; surely it would be a drag on the
system?
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336
Most exits are assembler, right?
Run a disassembler and save the generated source.
Compare with sample and instructions of old version (last before
required recomplie) and create comments, variable names.
Review required changes and new facilities and update as needed.
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at
Hi,
Yes, but it was compiled apperantly without no changes long time ago. We
are searching the source code. There was no new maintenance only that we
moved the LPAR to a new z16.
Best Regards,
Josian
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024, 11:18 wrote:
> Is that a user exit for ends? Do you have the source to
We did UACC(WARN) and monitored to make sure somebody put RACF on it.
We eventually went to NONE.
On Sun, Jun 23, 2024 at 7:16 AM Radoslaw Skorupka
<0471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> W dniu 23.06.2024 o 10:51, Mike Cairns pisze:
> > No Bob - I meant UACC(READ) or its
Hi,
We are having problems with RMDS (Report Management Distribution System),
and we wonder if someone has stumbled in this situation. After an IPL, the
users report in RMDS login screen the error:
DBNV016SECURITY CHECK FAILED: DBNIXSEC
Our Security Team verified any errors with the
W dniu 23.06.2024 o 10:51, Mike Cairns pisze:
No Bob - I meant UACC(READ) or its equivalent. I just don't see what gate is
being closed by insisting that LinkList or LPA libraries must have UACC(NONE),
when, as you confirm, they cannot be fetch protected and therefore the content
is
No Bob - I meant UACC(READ) or its equivalent. I just don't see what gate is
being closed by insisting that LinkList or LPA libraries must have UACC(NONE),
when, as you confirm, they cannot be fetch protected and therefore the content
is available to anyone on the system anyway.
Cheers - Mike
11 matches
Mail list logo
