Hi Guillem, On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:28:08AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > Thanks! I notice this is susceptible to directory traversals. I've > amended it and added comments in the attached version. I'm thinking > I'll need to add unit tests to cover for this among other similar > issues.
I don't think your adaption is correct. Traversing the root directory is actually supported. /../ resolves to /. Returning an error there is not correct. And yeah, moving this into some tool definitely seems in order. Helmut
