Re: DOS attack details in

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:27:43 -0500, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Back on July 15, we experienced our first known Denial of Service "attac k" >(more likely a problem server). >I reported it to our Internet Security group including: > >From the nearly anonymous/invisible "TCPIPME

Netstat command from VM:Operator

Mike, As of z/VM 5.3 there has been a change in way to get NETSTAT working. See Knowledge base article TEC437559 at CA Support Online. At our site the NETSTAT command is trapped by VMOPER and a msg sent to a DSM running WAKEUP. The DSM sets SECUSER to the requester (OPERATOR) issues the comma

Re: SHARE with us Velocity Software's 20th Anniversary

Does that offer to provide transportation apply to someone in Foster City? ;-) I may not be in attendance on Thursday. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barton Robinson > Sent: Thursday, July 31

SHARE with us Velocity Software's 20th Anniversary

The SHARE meeting was graciously located in San Jose, California for Velocity Software's 20th Anniversary. Velocity Software was incorporated 8/8/88 close by in Mountain View, CA. We have been a very active part of VM/XA, VM/ESA and now z/VM in the UPs, DOWNs and now back UPs of the last 20 y

Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture - NOT.

Apologies for not responding to this thread in a more timely fashion. I had a flood of emails after the initial post. Speed OR Portability Adam is closer than he knows about the approach we have taken on z/VOS. First, he is right when he guessed "almost-certainly assembly". We have tried both Q

Dirmaint unknown user id

Has anyone seen something like this from Dirmaint. I'm interested where the user LILNKHOLDERS is coming from. Thanks DVHDMC6831E active links held by the following users: LINKHOLDERS _ LEGAL NOTICE Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may

Re: Linux guest not seeing mini disk

chccwdev -e 691-694 To have them come on at boot- Add range to modprobe.conf and do a mkinitrd. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 31, 2008, at 4:18 PM, "Juarez, David T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We are running z/VM 5.3 with Red Hat Linux 5. We have created a new guest and defined in the user

Re: ADD VIRTUAL MEMORY DYNAMICALLY

Don't groan. You gave him the incentive :-) Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:37 PM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: ADD VIRTUAL MEMORY

Re: ADD VIRTUAL MEMORY DYNAMICALLY

On Thursday, 07/31/2008 at 04:42 EDT, Brian Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm virtually certain that you really believe in the absolute truth of > that, and as you might have guessed, so do I. If memory serves me, I > havn't had a Hostess cupcake in a long time - I was last at the store a

SMAPI Java library?

Has IBM or anyone wrappered z/VM SMAPI in Java classes akin to how the host servers on i/OS got wrappered by JTOpen? I have not found anything, in particular, no open source project. -- Jack J. Woehr

Re: Linux guest not seeing mini disk

Whoops, sorry my answer was based on you trying to add the MDISK while the Linux guest was already up. I assume you have completely logged this guest off after updating the Directory. Thank You, Terry Martin Lockheed Martin - Information Technology z/OS & z/VM Systems - Performance

Re: Linux guest not seeing mini disk

Hi Once you change the Directory and bring it online you can then logon to the Linux Host under z/VM and issue the following: #cp LINK * Vdev Vdev MW - where Vdev is the Virtual Address of the MDISK you want to add. This will present the MDISK to the Linux host. You will then be able

Re: ADD VIRTUAL MEMORY DYNAMICALLY

On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:52:52 -0400, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >On Monday, 07/28/2008 at 03:55 EDT, "McKown, John" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hum, perhaps we need a code phrase to distinguish VM "virtual memory" , >which >> is guest "real memory" from guest "virtual memory"? >

Linux guest not seeing mini disk

We are running z/VM 5.3 with Red Hat Linux 5. We have created a new guest and defined in the user directory some mini disks as follows: USER LIN0003 KK 2G 2G G INCLUDE LNXDFLT OPTION APPLMON MDISK 100 3390 0001 3338 VM7DBF MR MDISK 691 3390 0001 200 VM7DC0 MR MDISK 692 3390 0251

Re: ADD VIRTUAL MEMORY DYNAMICALLY

On Monday, 07/28/2008 at 03:55 EDT, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hum, perhaps we need a code phrase to distinguish VM "virtual memory", which > is guest "real memory" from guest "virtual memory"? These terms already exist. Guest virtual Guest real Guest absolute

Re: DOS attack details in

On Thursday, 07/31/2008 at 01:18 EDT, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And Alan, by NOTIFY could you actually have meant INFORM? Perhaps you > were just attempting to NOTIFY me to *look up* INFORM? ;-) Yes, I meant INFORM. NOTIFY is the internal function used to send information to

Instant VM:Operator windows for all your Linux guests

Cross-posted to Linux-390 and IBMVM lists If you're using CA's VM:Operator SECUSER/REVIEW windows to manage your Linux guests, due to window overhead CA recommends you limit yourself to windows for "choice", "critical" or "priority" Linux guests instead of having windows for all your guests. Yo

Re: DOS attack details in

> You did notice the word "intranet", not "internet", in my post, > did you not? VM is definitely behind a firewall that makes us > invisible to the outside world. Furthermore, the network that > we are on is isolated from our production network. It may well > be that there is some zeal in interpre

Re: DOS attack details in

You did notice the word "intranet", not "internet", in my post, did you not? VM is definitely behind a firewall that makes us invisible to the outside world. Furthermore, the network that we are on is isolated from our production network. It may well be that there is some zeal in interpreting the r

Re: DOS attack details in

Nick Laflamme wrote: The key line there may be, "Internet Facing"; how many companies put their key systems behind NAT'ting firewalls? Easiest really pretty secure solution: put an OpenBSD firewall between your Big Iron and the Net. -- Jack J. Woehr# "Self-delusion is http://www.we

Re: DOS attack details in

At 01:18 PM 7/31/2008 -0400, Edward M. Martin wrote: You may see more because to comply with PCI (Payment Card Industry) Security Standards you are required to have all Internet Facing IP addresses scanned for vulnerabilities. The key line there may be, "Internet Facing"; how many compa

Re: DOS attack details in

Hello Everyone, You may see more because to comply with PCI (Payment Card Industry) Security Standards you are required to have all Internet Facing IP addresses scanned for vulnerabilities. Ed Martin 330-588-4723 ext 40441 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [m

Re: Mainframes vs Woonix

Hi, Jack. OK, I'll take a loom at this asap. You did a very good job, imho, with the OO-Rexx article from June:-) Just about have your user id ready here. What password would you like to use? Jack Woehr wrote: I'd appreciate thoughts on /Mainframe Programming vs. Woonix Programming /

Re: DOS attack details in

Thanks, guys! Helpful information. I'll have to print it and put it in the TCPIP Msgs and Codes manual right by the message: DTCIPU086I A denial-of-service attack has been detected Your words of wisdom go well beyond that found in the Messages and Codes in the manual (but at least it's not a

Mainframes vs Woonix

I'd appreciate thoughts on /Mainframe Programming vs. Woonix Programming / http://dobbscodetalk.com/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Mainframe-Programming-Fun.html&Itemid=29 I'm probably going to blog more of this kinda stuff and hope that I am making some kind of sense. I don't always :-)

Re: DOS attack details in

We had a DOS attack a couple of years ago and duly reported it to our Info Sec group. We got no response. When it happened again one month later, we tracked it down to a server owned by Info. Sec. We blocked its IP address and have had no problem since. It seems that those folks have an automated m

Re: Curiosity question: 370 Accommodation Facility Definition

On Thursday, 07/31/2008 at 09:13 EDT, Gary Eheman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:21:03 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >The SET MACHINE 370 is gone indeed, I think with z series or even > >already since the > >later 9672's. > > Depends upon the machine

Re: DOS attack details in

Mike, Smurf attacks are malformed ICMP echo packets. They aren't directed to a particular port. You've got all the information there is :-) Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 07/31/2008 07:40:23 AM: > [image removed] > > Re: DOS attack det

Re: DOS attack details in

Mike Walter wrote: Dunno, I'm not an IP (or networking) Wizard, either. Not sure what else might be able to be gathered, but at least TCPIP knows what port was being attacked. Great minds will think of more. Perhaps information for that IP address obtained from NETSTAT CONN? Wizards will thin

Re: DOS attack details in

On Thursday, 07/31/2008 at 09:30 EDT, Mike Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So I asked our Internet Security team who might be the offending > "10.64.103.250". In turn they asked me for the port number being used for > this attack, and the mac address of the attacking machine. Unfortunately

Re: DOS attack details in

The port and IP address sending the request should be in the monitor records. There would some inforamation useful there. Mike Walter wrote: Back on July 15, we experienced our first known Denial of Service "attack" (more likely a problem server). I reported it to our Internet Security grou

Re: DOS attack details in

Dunno, I'm not an IP (or networking) Wizard, either. Not sure what else might be able to be gathered, but at least TCPIP knows what port was being attacked. Great minds will think of more. Perhaps information for that IP address obtained from NETSTAT CONN? Wizards will think of more. Anything

Re: DOS attack details in

I used the IP address to track down the offending MAC system. What other information would be available? Just curious. Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 "Its kind of fun to do the impossible." (Walt Disney) =>-Original Message- =>From: The IBM z/VM Operating System

Re: DOS attack details in

Thanks, Jim, The source of this one-time attack is less important than getting clear documentation about _who/what_ is doing the attack _when_ it happens. I have no problem writing automation to gather the details no matter how many hoops I have to jump through - until I have to jump through wh

Re: DOS attack details in

We had this DOS attack and tracked it back to a MAC computer on the network. It was doing some sort of broadcast network thing. I can supply the details if it's important to anyone. Not being a network wizard, I tend to forget the details. Jim Hughes 603-271-5586 "Its

DOS attack details in

Back on July 15, we experienced our first known Denial of Service "attack" (more likely a problem server). I reported it to our Internet Security group including: >From the nearly anonymous/invisible "TCPIPMESSAGE" file in TCPMAINT's reader: --- DTCUTI001E Serious problem encountere

Re: Curiosity question: 370 Accommodation Facility Definition

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:21:03 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The SET MACHINE 370 is gone indeed, I think with z series or even >already since the >later 9672's. Depends upon the machine manufacturer. FLEX-ES still supports 370 mode with a configuration file specification of "fe