On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 06:02:13PM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:20 PM Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > Fixes: Timeout (14sec -> 133ms) > > Fixes: > > 14843/clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-ffmpeg_AV_CODEC_ID_NUV_fuzzer-5661969614372864 > > Fixes: > > 16257/clusterfuzz-testcase-minimized-ffmpeg_AV_CODEC_ID_NUV_fuzzer-5769175464673280 > > (35sec ->0.5sec) > > > > > Why? This is bad idea, same like for qtrle and bunch of other cases.
This was discussed previously IIRC Either a codec can be used to turn tiny input to huge number of output frames by frame duplication. or it doesnt do the duplication and rather provides metadata of some sort In the first case if the next step is a filter it can be slower In the first case if the next step is a variable fps encoder it can be slower in the first case it can make a DOS attack less expensive for an attacker The second case, that is with metadata for example not returning a frame but relying on timestamps these issues are reduced thats why i suggest that way but if the community prefers something else then sure it can be done. But from what i remember the oppinions where mixed on which way is preferred thanks [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Asymptotically faster algorithms should always be preferred if you have asymptotical amounts of data
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list email@example.com https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".