doc,test: add known path resolution issue in permission model

As a side effect of 205f1e6, Node.js
now resolves some paths differently when the permission model is
enabled. While these are mostly edge cases, they are worth mentioning in
the documentation. This commit also adds a known_issues test that
demonstrates one such difference.

PR-URL: nodejs#49155
Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <rafael.nunu@hotmail.com>

doc/api/permissions.md

@@ -560,6 +560,8 @@ Wildcards are supported too:
 
 There are constraints you need to know before using this system:
 
+* When the permission model is enabled, Node.js may resolve some paths
+  differently than when it is disabled.
 * Native modules are restricted by default when using the Permission Model.
 * OpenSSL engines currently cannot be requested at runtime when the Permission
   Model is enabled, affecting the built-in crypto, https, and tls modules.

test/known_issues/test-permission-model-path-resolution.js

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+'use strict';
+
+// The permission model resolves paths to avoid path traversals, but in doing so
+// it potentially interprets paths differently than the operating system would.
+// This test demonstrates that merely enabling the permission model causes the
+// application to potentially access a different file than it would without the
+// permission model.
+
+const common = require('../common');
+
+const assert = require('assert');
+const { execFileSync } = require('child_process');
+const { mkdirSync, symlinkSync, writeFileSync } = require('fs');
+const path = require('path');
+
+if (common.isWindows)
+  assert.fail('not applicable to Windows');
+
+const tmpdir = require('../common/tmpdir');
+tmpdir.refresh();
+
+const a = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'a');
+const b = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'b');
+const c = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'c');
+const d = path.join(tmpdir.path, 'c/d');
+
+writeFileSync(a, 'bad');
+symlinkSync('c/d', b);
+mkdirSync(c);
+mkdirSync(d);
+writeFileSync(path.join(c, 'a'), 'good');
+
+function run(...args) {
+  const interestingPath = `${tmpdir.path}/b/../a`;
+  args = [...args, '-p', `fs.readFileSync(${JSON.stringify(interestingPath)}, 'utf8')`];
+  return execFileSync(process.execPath, args, { encoding: 'utf8' }).trim();
+}
+
+// Because this is a known_issues test, we cannot assert any assumptions besides
+// the known issue itself. Instead, do a sanity check and report success if the
+// sanity check fails.
+if (run() !== 'good') {
+  process.exit(0);
+}
+
+assert.strictEqual(run('--experimental-permission', `--allow-fs-read=${tmpdir.path}`), 'good');