Yep, challenge author here, and it was definitely to teach that `argv[0]` is not trustworthy. I've seen privileged processes try to re-invoke themselves (as, s

Yep, challenge author here, and it was definitely to teach that `argv[0]` is not trustworthy. I've seen privileged processes try to re-invoke themselves (as, say, a child process) by looking at `argv[0]` rather than something like `/proc/self/exe` (which is also subject to race conditions if the directory is writable). The binary was not setuid, but was only executable (not readable) by the user used.