On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 03:56:00PM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: > On 2018-03-13 at 15:39, Joe wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 14:49:56 +0100 <to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > > That test can be spoofed, however, by the creation of a directory with > the same name (and/or other characteristics) under the mount point while > the mount is not active. >
Yes, but in most use cases one would not be worried about malicious actions, you are trying to protect against cock-ups. > Even if you don't think anything malicious is ever going to try to spoof > this in whatever case is at hand, can you be sure no script (or, for > that matter, user) will ever attempt to create that directory under the > mistaken impression that the mount is active? > Yeah, that's a fair point though. Mark