On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 07:26:05AM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 06:37:44AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > > Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 21:20:25 +0200 > > From: Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> > > Message-ID: <20191021192025.ga33...@bec.de> > > > > | That said, I don't really see a point in > > | allowing one form of arbitrary file replacement and not another. > > > > If we're thinking of it purely as protection against potentially > > malicious archives obtained from some random internet site, then > > nor do I > > I am not sure. Clearly / and .. are protecting against malicious archives. > But in my view a directory entry in the (potential malicious) archive > overwriting an existing symlink is something where the explicit wish of the > user running the extraction is not honored.
Extraction of entries in streamable formats happens in isolation. The archiver has no knowledge about pre-existing symlinks or whether the archive itself just created the symlink. Joerg