Pádraig Brady wrote:
I'm not sure there is anything we should do here.
I looked at <http://lwn.net/Articles/503671/> and as far as I can tell symlinks are vulnerable to none of the attacks they mention, because symlinks are unalterable. However, the non-symlink hardlink attacks are a real problem, and it would seem silly for cp -al to have a workaround for symlinks (which I expect we can do reasonably safely) when cp can't and shouldn't try to have a workaround for anything else.
So I'm with you; let's leave this one alone.
