Windows code-execution zeroday is under active exploit, Microsoft warns
I&#x27;ve always wondered why fonts are rendered programmatically...<p>Usually, font renderers are Turing complete in some way, and usually this opens up security concerns, and rightfully so...<p>One of the primary reasons why fonts are rendered programmatically is because there&#x27;s a theoretically infinite set of sizes&#x2F;styles that might be required...<p>Well... why not make fonts with glyphs that are say, 5000 x 5000 pixels... and then instead of rendering for a particular size, line by line, stroke by stroke, curve by curve, why not instead use an interpolation algorithm to shrink that 5000 x 5000 pixel glyph to the exact size you want?<p>If a font provider program were made to operate that way, then all that would be needed to audit the program for security - would be to audit the shrinking&#x2F;interpolation algorithm -- which could be as simple as possible (it&#x27;s just a function which shrinks a bitmap of size A to another bitmap of size B... not a Turing machine which ingests other programs...)<p>Yes, fonts would consume much more memory (I suppose they could be compressed), but doing things that way might make font-providing programs more secure.  And yes, you&#x27;d need to provide extra glyphs for italic, bold, bold italic, etc. (much more memory), but you&#x27;d be making a trade-off for a simple, security auditable font-provider... (we assume it&#x27;s open-source...)