Extremely disappointing that they seem to have neither investigated nor enabled others to investigate (e.g. by filing a bug against Chrome). This smells like a potential security vulnerability.
[deleted]
The weirdest bug I've seen yet
91–100 of 334 posts
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#92How could you write all this and not post the gif so we can try it?
[deleted]
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#93Error code 5, on Windows, means that the code tried to dereference a null pointer. I'm guessing that the GIF content is corrupt, containing some 0x00 bytes where they shouldn't be. Then the question becomes, whose responsibility is it to program defensively against things like that? If, as may well be, Chrome is using some third-party library nested several layers deep to render GIFs, then would there be any action that the chrome devs could take, aside from replacing that library with a better one and adding a malformed-GIF test case? (Why don't they already have a malformed-GIF test case...?)
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#94Error code 5, on Windows, means that the code tried to dereference a null pointer. I'm guessing that the GIF content is corrupt, containing some 0x00 bytes where they shouldn't be. Then the question becomes, whose responsibility is it to program defensively against things like that? If, as may well be, Chrome is using some third-party library nested several layers deep to render GIFs, then would there be any action t…
[deleted]
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#95I am using chromium to print web pages to pdf, and I have some images that will crash chrome's to pdf process, I found nothing wrong with this images, the metadata is fine (nothing weird in it). The other bad thing it does not reproduce n my dev machine only on the production server , so nothing I can do, in rare cases an image will always crash crhomium, I find it, open it and re-export it and then it works.
This sounds more like a hardware fault than something wrong with the software, especially since it doesn't seem to be deterministic. But stranger things have happened, and given the enormous surface area of a modern computer (hardware, software, drivers, state, etc.) can anything truly be deterministic?
It happens with that image no matter what. I can have a html with 100 images and one bad image, I make one new html only with that image and it still has the problem. My guess is that probably a bug in a low level image decoder. My local machine has different kernel, different libs, plus I have different cpu,gpu and X11 on top so too much difference and I do not have the expertese to do aremote debug(or local)
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#96> Using open-source Chromium instead of Chrome did not cause crashes, so we couldn’t see what Chrome code was failing either. They don't address why they didn't just run Chromium. Or Firefox. (This is potentially better than the 'solution' they much later ended up with, in which they probably only relieved a symptom of an underlying problem that can exhibit again, and in the meantime is a zero-day exploit waiting to…
You must not have read the article because he literally addresses this.
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes this doubly frustrating is that they also didn't report the bug to Chrome. It's super easy to do, plus they're very responsive if you have a repro case which in this case they do. I think I'm now up to three or four Chrome bugs reported that their team has subsequently fixed.
They said it wasn't reproducible anymore though. So if they make a bug report now and say "this used to cause a crash in an old version of Chrome while also having an old version of another software installed, but is no longer reproducible in latest builds", most people would probably just ignore it.
It was reproducible at the time they found it, and trivially so: install Grammarly, drag this GIF into Chrome, and it crashes. I understood everything up to the point where they just changed the GIF and moved on without ever telling the Chrome or Grammarly folks about it.
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#98Reminds me of the story I read where the guy's car wouldn't start depending on what flavor of ice cream he picked and when investigated he was right. Some kind of evaporation/vacuum leak or something that was dependent on time and some flavors were farther away in the store and took more time to buy.
This one is a legend. I love it, but you can find the debunking on the fact checking sites.
The Snopes page doesn't really seem to debunk it, but merely points out that the legend's been retold with many variations and contradictory explanations. Suspicious, definitely, but it doesn't seem clear that none of the variations could ever have happened?
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#99I don't think I would believe myself if I found this being a specific gif. This is a great amount of coincidences in code to cause this. Grammarly is an application that I don't get. The fact that people are installing, basically spyware, on their computers just to get grammar suggestions to make their writing more boring and add a spellchecker (which is already inside web browsers) is pretty astounding to me. The fa…
I worked with someone who really needed it, but we had the usual "keep sales users as far from the actual product as possible" organizational isolation so it worked out in practice. (For engineering, it was on the "don't install this in particular" list.)
Re: The weirdest bug I've seen yet
#100The weirdest one I saw was this: User claims that the wording of the info they enter into a certain form changes when they save. At first I suspected someone else editing the same form at the same time unbeknownst to each other but it wasn't the case according to the logs. And I saw the correct wording on my own computer. Then I noticed in their screenshots that some of the menus had weird wording too. Turns out they…
I added to all pages in a single-page-web-app after discovering some bug or other with Chrome screwing up the page. Apparently the new incantation to fix an app (can be applied to an element) is (ugly: I presume it isn't CSS to avoid supporting dynamically changing it): https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Global_att... Every now and then I would look at the meta tags for a major single page app and disc…
I know what you mean, but this caused me a second of "wait, what?"
> all pages in a single-page-web-app