[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Subject[RFC] Bug in mkdir(2)
    	Sigh... Looks like we got Yet Another Symlink Hole(tm). Not too
    serious one, since probably no suid-root stuff is perverted enough to
    trigger it, but anyway. Scenario:
    $ ln -sf b a
    $ ls -ld a b
    ls: b: No such file or directory
    lrwxrwxrwx 1 al al 1 Jun 16 12:56 a -> b
    $ mkdir a
    mkdir: cannot make directory `a': File exists
    $ mkdir a/
    $ ls -ld a b
    lrwxrwxrwx 1 al al 1 Jun 16 12:56 a -> b
    drwxrwxr-x 2 al al 1024 Jun 16 12:58 b

    In other words, if foo is a dangling symlink mkdir("foo/") will merrily
    follow it. Which it shouldn't.

    There are 3 reasonable variants of fix and they give different error
    values - -ENOENT (if we are treating it as a dangling link in the
    middle of lookup), -EEXIST (if we refuse to follow link here and ignore
    the trailing /) or -ENOTDIR (ditto, but noticed that it's not a
    directory). Take your pick ;-) Solaris prefers the second variant and IMO
    it's the right thing.

    BTW, rmdir("foo/") also shouldn't follow links. rmdir(1) works
    around that (it trims the trailing slashes), but IMHO rmdir(2) shold
    return -ENOTDIR here. Actually it happily follows the link.

    Patching it either way is fairly trivial and I'll submit the
    patches as soon as you will choose the variant. I think that the right
    thing to do here is to -EEXIST for mkdir() and -ENOTDIR for rmdir(). Up to
    you, indeed.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.020 / U:0.492 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site