VFS: masquerading lstat as stat - dangerous?
sean at troublemakerstudios.com
Fri Sep 30 07:50:14 GMT 2005
In my testing, having all lstat calls just call SMB_VFS_NEXT_STAT
instead of SMB_VFS_NEXT_LSTAT works great, even when the underlying file
is really a link.. I did this because I don't want the client to know
the difference between a link and a directory, but is this inherently
dangerous, or am I breaking a rule someplace? My logic is that stat()
calls in Linux transparently traverse a link to a target directory, so
this should be fine.. but, because I'm still relatively new to this, I
thought I'd ask.
More information about the samba-technical