by spender » Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:35 am
It shouldn't, since RBAC can place a policy on any symlink, thus an unprivileged user could cause RBAC to make a file that should normally be inaccessible under RBAC, accessible. This is also why this is only a warning and not an error, to prevent an unprivileged user from preventing RBAC from enabling on startup due to such an error.
If the symlink was followed during learning, then an object for the target was created at some point that may have been reduced. The warning can be ignored or fixed easily in such a case. If you're creating policy yourself then you're responsible for creating the appropriate target objects.
-Brad