Imagemagick chokes on webp
-
-
@boomzilla looks like we either have to build our own or find a ppa that has a better build.
-
@ben_lubar It worked 3 weeks ago. Someone fucking BROKE it. Here's a concept: REGRESSSION TESTING!>?!??!?!?!?@fsaHDKA EG2qyU 617
oh wait you don't do testing of ANY kind why would you it's open source insane illiterate person here blah blah blah blah blah
-
@ben_lubar Hmm...I don't see a way to blacklist extensions for upload. We could provide a better error message, at least.
Goddamn, it's hard to find webp images. But...wrapping this should do it:
$ identify 1_webp_a.sm.png 1_webp_a.sm.png PNG 240x181 240x181+0+0 8-bit DirectClass 46.8KB 0.000u 0:00.000
vs
$ identify 1_webp_a.webp identify.im6: no decode delegate for this image format `1_webp_a.webp' @ error/constitute.c/ReadImage/544.
identify
being an imagemagick component.
-
ok, the version that the docker container has:
ben@australium:~$ docker exec -ti wtdwtf2-nodebb convert --version Version: ImageMagick 6.8.9-9 Q16 x86_64 2015-01-05 http://www.imagemagick.org Copyright: Copyright (C) 1999-2014 ImageMagick Studio LLC Features: DPC Modules OpenMP Delegates: bzlib djvu fftw fontconfig freetype jbig jng jpeg lcms lqr ltdl lzma openexr pangocairo png tiff wmf x xml zlib
-
@blakeyrat said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@ben_lubar It worked 3 weeks ago. Someone fucking BROKE it. Here's a concept: REGRESSSION TESTING!>?!??!?!?!?@fsaHDKA EG2qyU 617
oh wait you don't do testing of ANY kind why would you it's open source insane illiterate person here blah blah blah blah blah
Get out of this thread if you're not going to be productive.
-
@boomzilla said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
Looks like imagemagick can't handle webp?
It's not the only thing that can't.
@blakeyrat what, did you convert that .jpg to a .webp manually just so that you could bitch that it isn't supported?
-
@anotherusername said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
what, did you convert that .jpg to a .webp manually just so that you could bitch that it isn't supported?
Yes. That is exactly what I did. You can't expect much from an illiterate, insane person like myself.
-
@blakeyrat I mean, I went to that page and the image was a .jpg. I even went there in Chrome thinking that it might do some fancy browser sniffing to give me a .webp in a supported browser, and the image was still a .jpg. So I'm not at all certain how you managed to get a .webp unless you converted it yourself, in which case... why? It's not a widely supported format.
-
@boomzilla I'm looking more closely at that error message...
dwebp
is actually supposed to decompress a .webp and then save it as another image format. So I guessconvert
tried to calldwebp
to decompress it, which is probably what it should be doing. But... that failed to create the output file, for some reason? And thenconvert
complained that the output file didn't exist?...but
-pam
? why's it converting it to PAM format? Why not PNG? What... I don't know.
-
@boomzilla Are those error messages sanitized? I sense an XSS here.
-
@anonymous234 The error message is from imagemagick. I don't think it's allowing any sort of xss.
-
@anotherusername said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@boomzilla said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
It's not the only thing that can't.So basically, only supported by chrome and clones?
-
@PleegWat Yeah, I think the format was something google invented, right? And they haven't been able to get anyone to jump on board, I guess.
-
@boomzilla said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
Yeah, I think the format was something google
inventedbought
-
@boomzilla But it says "gym-resized.webp" near the end, which I assume is the original filename, thus controllable by the user.
@PleegWat From what I know, Mozilla has basically said that WebP is terrible and they won't support it. So I don't see it becoming widely used any soon. Which is weird because I thought it was basically WebM with a different header, but whatever.
For the format geeks (if there's such a thing), there are also two competing new image formats which claim to be better than WebP: BPG (based on HEVC/H.265), and FLIF (lossless, much better compression than any other lossless format). So it seems like there's a new format war ahead.
-
@anonymous234 said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@boomzilla But it says "gym-resized.webp" near the end, which I assume is the original filename, thus controllable by the user.
@PleegWat From what I know, Mozilla has basically said that WebP is terrible and they won't support it. So I don't see it becoming widely used any soon. Which is weird because I thought it was basically WebM with a different header, but whatever.
For the format geeks (if there's such a thing), there are also two competing new image formats which claim to be better than WebP: BPG (based on HEVC/H.265), and FLIF (lossless, much better compression than any other lossless format). So it seems like there's a new format war ahead.
What happened to JPEG2000?
-
@aliceif Patents, I think.
It's actually widely used for specialized stuff (i.e. medical images), and most professional image editing software supports it. It just failed to gain traction in the "end user" market.
I found the Mozilla feature request, opened in 2000. It's a fascinating read. Mozilla just seems to refuse for no clear reason.
-
@boomzilla said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
Goddamn, it's hard to find webp images.
all images on the google play store will be webp if you're on Google Chrome. on Firefox it doesn't, because it doesn't support it.
-
@blakeyrat said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
REGRESSSION TESTING!>?!??!?!?!?@fsaHDKA EG2qyU 617
Well, it happened.
He finally stoked out... :(
-
Ran this:
apt-get update && apt-get install -y --no-install-recommends webp && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
-
@anonymous234 said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@boomzilla Are those error messages sanitized? I sense an XSS here.
They definitely are. Try uploading an image of more than 1MB to the NodeBB community forum. It gives you the HTML source code of nginx's 413 page.
-
@M_Adams said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
He finally stoked out...
Stoke a kipper for him; he'll be back in time for breakfast.
-
@FrostCat said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@M_Adams said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
He finally stoked out...
Stoke a kipper for him; he'll be back in time for breakfast.
Awww, hell. spellar
-
@ben_lubar said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@anonymous234 said in Imagemagick chokes on webp:
@boomzilla Are those error messages sanitized? I sense an XSS here.
They definitely are. Try uploading an image of more than 1MB to the NodeBB community forum. It gives you the HTML source code of nginx's 413 page.
But those guys are using imgur, not imagemagick. In fact, the final name of the file is changed, the danger would be remote execution, but it seems to be disallowing that.
-
@boomzilla it happened here too