Re: New 6.1 security group ptf.

Agreed, but again, depending on your shop applying individual PTFs might
require a change management record for each PTF while the group requires
just one.  In my shop, I'll do the cume as one change record and all groups
as another.  Two change records and my box is current.  But individual PTFs
require individual change records.

Besides, from a time standpoint, going to Fix Central, selecting the
Security group, and letting it run is easier and faster than having to do
any kind of search and the following up with manual entry of the PTFs to
pull.


And again, I agree that I'd prefer to get the HIPER group to get bug fixes
that may not have security implictions in addition to those that do.  But
some folks may not have that luxury and for them the security group may be
useful.


On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:25 PM, CRPence <CRPbottle-/[email protected]> wrote:

> John Jones wrote:
> > There may also be shops that have internal controls, procedures,
> > and/or audit requirements that allow security updates but not
> > necessarily any other updates without rigorous review & testing.
> > Having a separate security group lets them get those updates
> > without scouring all PTF cover letters looking for just
> > security-related events.
>
>   FWiW.  The security\integrity PTFs [for LIC, OS, and LPPs] had
> already been included with the HIPer designation and each identified
> with variant(s) of the "security" and "integrity" terms capable of
> being found with a simple token search; i.e. no poring over cover
> letters required to locate them.  Issues which either effect data
> errors per designation of "incorrect output" or defects which may
> result in system failure, in many cases would be much more important
> to include in the list of updates being installed [in consideration
> of the cover letter text, for how the described situation might be
> applicable], than those of a security nature [for which no
> description of what either the defect or its correction is published
> for which just as rigorous testing would be justified but without
> full ability to review].
>
> Regards, Chuck
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Security Administration on the AS400 / iSeries (Security400)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: Security400-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/security400
> or email: Security400-request-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/security400.
>
>


-- 
JJ
"I'm in no condition to drive...Wait! I shouldn't listen to myself, I'm
drunk!"
 - Homer J. Simpson
_______________________________________________
This is the Security Administration on the AS400 / iSeries (Security400) mailing list
To post a message email: Security400-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/security400
or email: Security400-request-Zwy7GipZuJhWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/security400.