| Author |
Message
|
| new_321 |
 Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:11 pm Post subject: How to setup security parameters in "define channel&quo |
 |
|
Novice
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 10
|
We have no security implementation on existing MQ environment.
"DEFINE CHANNEL(SYSTEM.ADMIN.SVRCONN) CHLTYPE(SVRCONN)" will be added for Administering remote queue managers, how to set up security in "DEFINE CHANNEL(SYSTEM.ADMIN.SVRCONN) CHLTYPE(SVRCONN)" commnad to prevent unauthorized person from access remotely.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| wschutz |
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 3316
Location: IBM (retired)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
A small security exit may also be helpful - e. g. BlockIP.
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| HubertKleinmanns wrote: |
| A small security exit may also be helpful - e. g. BlockIP. |
But a firewall is a better place to start...
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| HubertKleinmanns wrote: |
| A small security exit may also be helpful - e. g. BlockIP. |
But a firewall is a better place to start... |
may be, but inside a specific network (e. g. company net, intranet, DMZ) you mostly do not have a firewall. For these cases an exit is more specific.
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I'm not a network designer, nor a SOX-compliance auditor... but I'd generally like to see every production machine in an isolated network from the rest of the company network.
It's not sufficient, but it's a good place to start.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| ... but I'd generally like to see every production machine in an isolated network from the rest of the company network... |
An interesting approach, but I never saw such solutions at my customer's side 
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| HubertKleinmanns wrote: |
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| ... but I'd generally like to see every production machine in an isolated network from the rest of the company network... |
An interesting approach, but I never saw such solutions at my customer's side |
I guess I've worked for some governmental and financial companies that were paranoid...
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kevinf2349 |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 28 Feb 2003
Posts: 1311
Location: USA
|
Jeff.....or SOX doesn't effect Germany.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
| kevinf2349 wrote: |
| Jeff.....or SOX doesn't effect Germany. |
I'm sure it doesn't. 
I'd just expect that the Germans would try to do things right... 
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| HubertKleinmanns |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Shaman
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 732
Location: Germany
|
| jefflowrey wrote: |
| kevinf2349 wrote: |
| Jeff.....or SOX doesn't effect Germany. |
I'm sure it doesn't.
I'd just expect that the Germans would try to do things right... |
The more security - the less efficiency of administrators 
Or is anybody not handicapped by security issues ?
_________________
Regards
Hubert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
I think every company would rather suffer from inefficient security processes instead of ineffective security proccesses.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| This is more management approach rather than a technical issues. If management enphasise being more right rather than doing right things, the problem of inefficency crops up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
