Odd signon screen question about message line

[ChrisH]

When a TELNET session is first opened can the message line have something other than the IBM CORP copy right message or does that always display by default?

Reason I am asking is we NAGIOS and it is running in CPF1116 - Next not valid sign-on attempt varies off device. or CPF1116 Next not valid sign-on attempt varies off device. being in the message field randomly when it opens a new telnet session. It appears they just get unlucky and get a device one attempt from vary off or the like.

Outside of changing invalid password options to just disable the device is there anyway to detect devices with 1/2 bad attempts and just cycle them to reset that? NAGIOS only wants to see IBM CORP but I am leaning towards just changing the java to search for Sign On

[DeadManWalks]

I do not think so as it has not signed on yet and there is no way to intercept that event. This happens at the OS level before any program gets run.

Also you could change the system value;

                             Display System Value             
                                                              
System value . . . . . :   QMAXSIGN                           
Description  . . . . . :   Maximum sign-on attempts allowed   

                                                              
Attempts allowed . . . :   3          1-25, *NOMAX

[tomliotta]

Why show a signon screen at all? Why not just 'bypass' the signon screen and do a more secure signon? Or are you somehow restricted to using only less secure signons?

[Scott Klement]

I've seen this happen when people press ENTER (instead of tab) after the userid field. On Unix, this would be the norm... you send the userid, press ENTER, then send the password and press ENTER again. That's not the case on IBM i, on i you should send the userid, then TAB, then password, and only press ENTER once at the end.

A script for something like nagios could certainly make the same mistake, causing invalid sign-on attempts each time it runs, and running the risk of disabling the userid and varying off the device description.

Of course, this is purely a guess. But, hopefully it's something you can look into.