Hacker News Reader

Comment by LoganDark | Hacker News Reader

The safety can be worth it in certain cases. Like when handling untrusted input. And it's not just Rust: look at WUFFS for example. WUFFS can actually rival handwritten implementations in certain cases.

View on HN

Are video codecs in the present day able to be sandboxed? In my fantasies at least I’d like the worst a malicious video file can do is cause garbage output or cause the codec to crash.

Forgive the ignorance, I have worked entirely in the abstracted layers of the stack, and mostly web.

not really. they're mostly pure assembly and sandboxing assembly isn't really a things

yes it is. all modern operating systems sandbox assembly. that's how it works.

Windows may use virtualization-based security by default, but I'm not aware of macOS or Linux doing the same -- Apple builds security directly into the silicon such that no virtualization is required, and Linux just rawdogs everything.

Whether that counts is up to you. I suppose it's still "sandboxed" in that it runs in a less privileged context than the kernel.

but not these cases

It really should be, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FORCEDENTRY

I don't see why not. What makes you think this is unique?

WUFFS like approaches work better for algorithms like lz77 that are substantially bandwidth constrained. for something like a video codec, the computational intensity is much higher so you need better codegen to reach max speed

Reply on news.ycombinator.com