RE: RE: Tying in biometric scanning to 5250 sign on

[qsrvbas@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   2. RE: Tying in biometric scanning to 5250 sign on (Chris Bipes)
>
>Still does not apply to 5250 sign on.  Web face your 5250 using HATS or
>the like and have the token store the web signon?  Get rid of 5250.
>That is my goal but it WOULD be nice to have the bio tokens handle the
>5250 signon.  I am in the same boat, trying to plug the holes and 5250
>appears to be a huge one, here at least.
>
>5250 is not SSO compliant.

Chris:

5250 can be run in a compliant way. 5250 itself need not be compliant; only the 
usage needs to be compliant for SSO.

For example, if your interactive subsystem(s) throw up a signon panel that has 
no input fields but only text saying that entry without prior verification is 
forbidden, the Kerberos/SSO solution becomes more easily enforced. Or TN5250e 
with encrypted password perhaps. Or however you choose to configure things.

(You could have a secondary interactive subsystem that could be used when 
needed and that allowed terminal signon panels.)

In short, _you_ choose whether or not a given technique is used. SSO can work 
fine with 5250.

Tom Liotta