If a file has several aliases, a process might use different absolute names to open it. Thus it may be able to open it under one alias but not another. However, even if a process is able to `open' a file, it must still have appropriate access over it.
If a process can open a file under more than one alias, is it possible that it may be granted access under one alias but another? The answer depends on whether privileges are associated with with a name or with a file. If they are associated with a name, then they are stored, along with the name, in the directory of the file. Otherwise, they are stored with the file. In the former case, the alias chosen for the file influences its accessibility while in the latter case it does not. (Unix chooses the second alternative)
Let us now consider indirect files. How should we interpret access rights on indirect files? We could ignore them completely or we could require that a process have appropriate access rights on both. The latter alternative becomes awkward if indirect files can contain both file and directory names,
as directory rights.
Berkeley Unix 4.2 chooses the former alternative.
Any attempt to modify the access rights of an indirect file results in
modification of the file to which it points.