> > I wrote the note about FollowSymLinks not being a security restriction > based on some bug reports and a response (by Roy, if I remember > correctly) stating that nobody should expect FollowSymLinks to be > secure in the first place. Since the docs implied otherwise, I changed > the docs. > > You are most likely correct that the race conditions are "relatively" > hard to exploit. But the "relatively" is very difficult to quantify. > So if you don't really know what you are doing, you shouldn't expect > to be protected by turning off symlinks. If you know what you are > doing, then you should understand the limits implied by the statement > in the docs without further explanation. We aren't going to include a > treatise on symlink race conditions in the Options docs. > > Yes, omitting FollowSymLinks is a perfectly valid way of preventing > you from accidentally shooting yourself in the foot. But I don't > consider that to be a security restriction. > > Joshua.
Fair enough; we differ on what we consider a "security restriction," and that's fine by me. But if you remember where you found them, might we at least link to the bug reports? --Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
