Related to #63, consider whether it is feasible to have a share contain multiple symlinks. Multiple symlinks in a share would allow a user or integrated application to take multiple directories (or files) from various locations, without the need to modify the original file structure, and deliver them in a single share.
This would require a separate symlinking api/ui. Rules for symlinking would be enforced similarly to #63.
Shares that use symlinks would probably need to be read only, to avoid trying to write to symlinked directories.
Security concerns around symlinks would be if a symlinked directory had symlinks in them, which could expose sensitive data. It would probably be wise to verify the destination of any symlinks in a share before performing any file transfers, especially via rsync, SFTP, or wget. All symlinks should have destinations that are within the whitelisted directories for that user/share.
Related to #63, consider whether it is feasible to have a share contain multiple symlinks. Multiple symlinks in a share would allow a user or integrated application to take multiple directories (or files) from various locations, without the need to modify the original file structure, and deliver them in a single share.
This would require a separate symlinking api/ui. Rules for symlinking would be enforced similarly to #63.
Shares that use symlinks would probably need to be read only, to avoid trying to write to symlinked directories.
Security concerns around symlinks would be if a symlinked directory had symlinks in them, which could expose sensitive data. It would probably be wise to verify the destination of any symlinks in a share before performing any file transfers, especially via rsync, SFTP, or wget. All symlinks should have destinations that are within the whitelisted directories for that user/share.