[HN Gopher] Wuffs: Wrangling Untrusted File Formats Safely
___________________________________________________________________
Wuffs: Wrangling Untrusted File Formats Safely
Author : nequo
Score : 67 points
Date : 2024-05-16 13:48 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Wuffs the Language_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26731305 - April 2021 (75
| comments)
|
| _Wuffs' PNG image decoder_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26714831 - April 2021 (138
| comments)
| newman314 wrote:
| Does anyone know of a tool that can do this for PDFs instead?
| warkdarrior wrote:
| As soon as someone writes a Javascript interpreter in Wuffs..
| jchw wrote:
| Do you ever need a JS interpreter to _parse_ a PDF? That 's
| horrifying.
|
| I understand PDF has a bunch of limbs, but I always assumed
| the JS stuff was at least separate from the parsing. (I am
| familiar with the PDF format at a lower level but I never
| touched any of the weird features.)
| Joel_Mckay wrote:
| There are PDF readers that do not support the scripting format
| extensions.
|
| Note this does not prevent unscrupulous companies abusing
| dominant market positions to voluntarily embed machine and
| serial hash watermarks.
|
| To be clear: formats like pdf, ps, webp, svg, and tiff are so
| badly implemented in some ecosystems... they can't _ever_ be
| assumed safe input formats. Thus, at some point people need to
| spin up an actual VM to transcode a "web" version, and scrub
| each stage of the rendering pipeline like a virus or header
| injection is already present.
|
| "I never play where nice things are, and don't break things"
| (Eliza Mowry Blven, The Humanitarian Review, Volume 3, March,
| 1905)
|
| Cheers =3
| tialaramex wrote:
| I worked with TIFF pretty extensively, it's a mess but I
| don't see why a WUFFS TIFF codec can't be fine. What makes
| you say you need "an actual VM to transcode" a TIFF ?
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| This is one of my favorite attempts at better programming
| language safety, because it compiles down to C that can then be
| shipped like normal C, so you don't get the ecosystem friction
| like with ex. Rust.
| vlovich123 wrote:
| It's an interesting idea for sure but it isn't a general
| purpose language, so the problem domains it can solve is very
| very different vs what Rust is trying to do.
| tialaramex wrote:
| Nigel has said that emitting "unsafe" Rust is a reasonable
| thing for a hypothetical WUFFS 1.0 to be able to do as an
| alternative to C. As with good "unsafe" Rust written by
| humans WUFFS would know exactly why what it's doing is fine,
| it's just that the Rust compiler can't necessarily see that,
| hence the need to label it "unsafe".
|
| Today C makes most sense given the WUFFS language is still in
| flux.
|
| [Edited to fix a serious typo]
| tedunangst wrote:
| Related, in the sense of solving the same problem in a different
| manner: https://rlbox.dev/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-05-17 23:00 UTC)