Comments for Store and Forward

Comment on Security remediation – DIY? by Mary

Mary — Wed, 26 May 2010 13:01:59 +0000

If you are interested in learning more about security network my client Cisco is hosting Cisco Live at The Mandalay Bay Resort in Las Vegas...June 27-July 1st.

Comment on Up for air and off to IMPACT by T.Rob

T.Rob — Wed, 12 May 2010 15:23:27 +0000

Took me a bit to track this down, Greg. Use impact10@us.ibm.com for anything you didn’t put int he AllianceTech survey. That said, please do complete the AllianceTech general conference survey. Unlike the session surveys, it has a free-form text field and the comments are routed to the conference organizers. Feel free to copy me on anything you send in, of course.

Comment on Up for air and off to IMPACT by Greg Smith

Greg Smith — Mon, 10 May 2010 20:57:13 +0000

Could you still share the Impact conference organizer with me so I can forward my comments?

Thanks
Greg

Comment on Deep Queue #14 – The Elephant Under the Bed by Dr.Xray

Dr.Xray — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:46:59 +0000

Got your answer. Thanks a lot, Rob!

Comment on Deep Queue #14 – The Elephant Under the Bed by Dr.Xray

Dr.Xray — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 19:39:02 +0000

Hi Rob,

I just realized that you have this great site already and I think I’d better visit frequently for WMQ tips.

Could you please have a look at the post on stackoverflow?

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2655622/how-to-make-multiple-instances-of-rcvr-rqstr-and-clusrcvr-channels-in-wmq

Thank you

Comment on Deep Queue #14 – The Elephant Under the Bed by T.Rob

T.Rob — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:25:20 +0000

Hi Nikhil,

Among other things, locking out the old SVRCONN. This is too deep a subject to cover in this format. Frankly, there aren’t any widely accepted best practices for PCI and WMQ yet, as far as I know. In fact, I believe PCI is only now beginning to look into what used to be called “the trusted internal network” at middleware in general. That said, you might have a look at this article for some additional thoughts on PCI and WMQ: http://bit.ly/63eIux

Comment on Deep Queue #14 – The Elephant Under the Bed by Nikhil

Nikhil — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:46:45 +0000

Hi Rob,

I’m working for a Retail Client and we have to implement PCI requirements on MQ Servers. As part of this, we asked the app folks to use new svrconn with MCAUSER instead of default one. I would like to know what are the other things has to be changed to meet the requirements.

MQ versions – 6.0.2.2 & above
OS – Solaris 10 & Win 2003

Thank You

Comment on WMQ Humor by Marimuthu Udayakumar

Marimuthu Udayakumar — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 07:11:32 +0000

Its very awesome and playful.

Comment on WebSphere MQ security heats up by chetan

chetan — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:07:46 +0000

Good to hear Rob.

Thanks.

Comment on WebSphere MQ security heats up by T.Rob

T.Rob — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 04:33:47 +0000

Hi chetan,

I’m not sure I see the distinction you are making. It’s the same exposure as a RCVR or RQSTR channel with default settings and with the same mitigation – a low-privileged MCAUSER.

Believe it or not, this actually is documented. But the degree to which it is not understood tells me the documentation is not as accessible or perhaps explicit as it could be. I’ve been submitting changes and suggestions through the Infocenter feedback links at the bottom of each page and I’ve seen quite a number of them implemented. So I agree the docs still have room for improvement but I’m encouraged by the progress we’ve made so far and I’ll continue submitting suggestions. Of course, all readers are invited to submit their own suggestions through the Feedback links in the Infocenter so if you see something amiss, don’t wait for me to catch it!