3 ms·
That's why both Mozilla and Google have predicated their JXL support on a memory-safe implementation. There's a Rust one in the works. I think Google are aimin
by jsheard 11mo ago
That's why both Mozilla and Google have predicated their JXL support on a memory-safe implementation. There's a Rust one in the works.
I think Google are aiming to replace all of Chromiums decoders with memory-safe ones anyway, even for relatively simple formats.
- philistine 11mo agoIf that's their plan, I predict another situation exactly like this one where Google decides that removing support is the best move forward. Careful, BMP, Chrome is out to get you!
- nine_k 11mo agoBMP decoding may seem easy and fun (I wrote a toy decoder back in the day), but the vulnerabilities are real: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-32468 https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-32468 It's not the format, it's the C / C++ unfortunate baggage.
- mdriley 11mo agoHappy to report the BMP work is actually being done by our friends on the Edge team at Microsoft! https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7208236 https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/72...
- foresterre 11mo agoThis actually seems to use the encoder/decoder from the Rust image crate (1), which would bring the opportunity for more memory safe formats once BMP would be accepted. (1) https://crates.io/crates/image https://crates.io/crates/image