On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 11:36 AM, cpu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Utility process is an amenable idea. We do something like that for > first-run import as well. > > Key items, I can think of: > > 1- Utility process would not display UI (would it?) > 2- We can allow a directory to be available for read/write > 3- Use IPC for progress / heartbeat > > In other words pretty much a custom renderer.
Sweet, it seems like we have a plan. > For the images I am lost. Unless we transcode I don't see the point. > Transcoding to a format that we handle well or that is not crazy would > mitigate most attacks. Or mandate the image format and do a cursory > decoding to validate. Yes, we would either transcode the images, or just decode them once to validate them. I'm actually kind of keen to the decode-them-once idea, since it means that we don't have to keep two copies of the images and simplifies some other aspects of the design. > As for #2, are you suggesting that the utility process would do all > operations in its directory and then the browser process would push things > in or pull them out before/after the processing is done? This might be a > simple and element way to avoid having some extensive virtual file system > layer. Exactly. - a --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
