https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=506813
--- Comment #2 from Mark Wielaard <[email protected]> --- The reason we have to handle AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW explicitly is because we try to translate the execveat call into a execve call. For execveat glibc does nothing special for AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW because it is a simple wrapper of the kernel syscall. In other cases it seems glibc also doesn't do something special just passes AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW to syscalls that take a flag. Having VG_(lstat) would certainly be helpful. But I believe the check used in our linux sys_execveat PRE wrapper is actually OK. VG_(stat)(path, &statbuf); if (VKI_S_ISLNK(statbuf.mode)) SET_STATUS_Failure( VKI_ELOOP ); It is just that it isn't done consistently. It is only done on relative paths, not on absolute paths. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
