Program Security

[Measuremanmike]

Here’s one for the Wilcox moderator.
Why is it that we users have the onus of devising a method with which to protect our programs from unintentional edits? From all the information I can gather, I cannot allow anyone access to the functionality of the machine without exposing approved programs to the risk of edit. The ‘operator’ and ‘protected’ modes do not allow my inspectors to do anything but run programs. I have auditors in tow that insist that I secure my programs. It appears, from previous posts, that there are hundreds of companies and programmers that would benefit from having the ability to configure the properties of individual programs or the directories that they reside in. After 18 years of riding the PCDMIS work-around wagon, I think it’s about time for Wilcox to step up to the plate and provide us a means to protect our work without sacrificing the machine.

[NinjaBadger]

I've added functionality to my operator interface to download programs from the network to the local PC, execute the program then delete it when it's completed.

Users only need read permissions to copy the prog, if execution is cancelled part way through, the local copy is deleted.

[TheyCallMeWoody]

Here’s one for the Wilcox moderator.
Why is it that we users have the onus of devising a method with which to protect our programs from unintentional edits? From all the information I can gather, I cannot allow anyone access to the functionality of the machine without exposing approved programs to the risk of edit. The ‘operator’ and ‘protected’ modes do not allow my inspectors to do anything but run programs. I have auditors in tow that insist that I secure my programs. It appears, from previous posts, that there are hundreds of companies and programmers that would benefit from having the ability to configure the properties of individual programs or the directories that they reside in. After 18 years of riding the PCDMIS work-around wagon, I think it’s about time for Wilcox to step up to the plate and provide us a means to protect our work without sacrificing the machine.

Personally, I would push back on these "auditors" to

1/ explain where this "requirement" to "secure" programs comes from,
2/ just what defines "secure"
3/ and explain how your chosen methods fail to meet said "requirement"

because there is NOTHING 100% "secure." Or else the NSA would be out of business.

In my personal experience, auditors are in the habit of creative interpretations (or flat out misrepresentations).

I, for one, am tired of them creating work where it's not needed.

[Rookie]

...or you could just use BladeRunner. The BR system "write protects" the programs folder to prevent any changes to the programs. In addition, BR copies the original program and runs the copy, not the original

[Matthew D. Hoedeman]

Personally, I would push back on these "auditors" to

1/ explain where this "requirement" to "secure" programs comes from,
2/ just what defines "secure"
3/ and explain how your chosen methods fail to meet said "requirement"

because there is NOTHING 100% "secure." Or else the NSA would be out of business.

In my personal experience, auditors are in the habit of creative interpretations (or flat out misrepresentations).
I, for one, am tired of them creating work where it's not needed.

So many of them are like politicians. They decide what to define as their job, that you are paying them to do, no matter if it really is part of their job (or YOURS!). Job security in todays marketplace.