> Is having ".." in the path really that much of a problem in and of itself?
> Seems to me that the problem is if we have more ".."s in the path than our
> depth. i.e. it should be ok to have ".."s that don't go higher than the
> current depth, and not ok if they do exceed the current depth.

Provided you count any symlinks that contain .. that the name
follows, otherwise you can get nearer the root of the directory
structure than you expect to be.

	David

-- 
David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk