| Author |
Message
|
| csmith28 |
 Posted: Wed May 11, 2005 7:17 am Post subject: Primeur DataSecureMQ |
 |
|
Grand Master
Joined: 15 Jul 2003
Posts: 1196
Location: Arizona
|
I just attended an introduction to this product. Does anyone here use it or have any experience with it.
If so please express your opinions on it in this thread.
Pros?
Cons?
Alternative products?
Overhead?
From a WMQ Administrative point of view how much work is it?
Note: I already have SSL installed and none of the applications are using it. I often wonder why I even bother renewing the Certs every year.
Also, our application Servers are already running at close to capacity so we will most assuredly have to purchase encryption hardware to allow for the the extra overhead.
Thanks in advance to all who respond.
Chris
_________________
Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Thu May 12, 2005 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
one big pro: it runs on tandem and z/OS !
since tandem is still on 5.1 you can't use SSL yet.
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| csmith28 |
| Posted: Thu May 12, 2005 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 15 Jul 2003
Posts: 1196
Location: Arizona
|
| MichaelDag wrote: |
one big pro: it runs on tandem and z/OS !
since tandem is still on 5.1 you can't use SSL yet. |
Yeah I was rather impressed with that as well.
_________________
Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Michael Dag |
| Posted: Thu May 12, 2005 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 13 Jun 2002
Posts: 2607
Location: The Netherlands (Amsterdam)
|
other then that it works.
configuration is straight forward and it is a lot faster in comparative tests to for example MQSecure from Candle.
we compared MQSecure to DataSecure and SSL, SLL won hands down, but no tandem support. There is a 3rd party product that is supposed to work with Tandem MQ 5.1 and SSL 5.3 on the otherside see:
http://www.insession.com/safetgate/safetgate_white_paper.pdf
page 5
"Figure three below shows a sample configuration of SafeTGate:SSL securing a WebSphere MQ session. Note
that the remote party of the connection implements a standard MQ V5.3 “Secure Channel.” SafeTGate:SSL
on the NonStop Server implements the security involved with the Secure Channel and passed clear data on
to the MQ V5.1 instance on the NonStop Server. The MQ 5.1 instance is not aware that the data was transmitted
over a Secure Channel – it has simply provided it’s standard “non-secure” capability. The MQ 5.3
instance, on the other hand, believes it is dealing with a standard secure channel, unaware that SafeTGate is
actually providing the secure capability."
_________________
Michael
MQSystems Facebook page |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| AndyMQ |
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Scotland
|
Most sites that I visit are Tandem users, so have gone for DSMQ. All seem happy with functionality, configuration, etc....
One of my customer sites chose SafeTGate over DSMQ, but the choice was based purely on cost. They are currently the only site I have visited that uses SafeTGate, and they are not too impressed with it. It seems unable to cope with any significant load (under stress testing), and when channels fail for any reason, it can be difficult to restart....the other end seems to think it still has a valid connection.
Here endeth the thoughts of the Scottish jury. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| interactivechannel |
| Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Voyager
Joined: 20 May 2003
Posts: 94
Location: uk
|
That's disappointing to hear SafeTGate doesn't live up to its promise, as it's a much simpler solution.
One thing to say about DSMQ, check you config files, then check them again and again... Chances are there's a typo, meaning it won't work and you'll be scratching your head for days if not weeks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Tibor |
| Posted: Wed May 18, 2005 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 20 May 2001
Posts: 1033
Location: Hungary
|
Another way using SecurCS by ComForte, another SSL proxy for Tandem. We are running SSL channels with this product.
| Quote: |
| SecurCS will enhance the security of protocols such as Telnet, Remote Server Call (RSC), Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) or MQ Series by transparently adding SSL encryption capabilities to the protocol. It also allows to encrypt traffic on EXPAND lines connecting multiple NonStop Servers. |
Tibor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
