| Rfc | 7903 |
|---|
| Title | Windows Image Media Types |
|---|
| Author | S. Leonard |
|---|
| Date | September 2016 |
|---|
| Format: | TXT,
HTML |
|---|
| Status: | INFORMATIONAL |
|---|
|
Independent Submission S. Leonard
Request for Comments: 7903 Penango, Inc.
Category: Informational September 2016
ISSN: 2070-1721
Windows Image Media Types
Abstract
This document registers media types for certain image formats
promulgated in Microsoft Windows, namely image/wmf, image/x-wmf,
image/emf, image/x-emf, and image/bmp for use with Windows Metafile,
Enhanced Metafile, and Windows Bitmap formats. Originally designed
for Microsoft Windows 2.0 and 3.0, these image files are intended to
be portable between applications and devices, and they may contain
both vector and raster graphics.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other
RFC stream. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at
its discretion and makes no statement about its value for
implementation or deployment. Documents approved for publication by
the RFC Editor are not a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7903.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1. Windows Metafiles ..........................................2
1.2. Windows Bitmaps ............................................3
2. Windows Metafile Media Type Registration Application ............4
3. Enhanced Metafile Media Type Registration Application ...........6
4. Windows Bitmap Media Type Registration Application ..............9
5. IANA Considerations ............................................11
6. Security Considerations ........................................11
7. References .....................................................11
7.1. Normative References ......................................11
7.2. Informative References ....................................11
Author's Address ..................................................12
1. Introduction
1.1. Windows Metafiles
Long before the invention of Scalable Vector Graphics, Microsoft
Corporation recognized the value of recording images in a format that
its applications and operating systems could easily render
irrespective of the output device. With the release of Windows 3.0,
Microsoft released its Windows Metafile (WMF) format, which can
contain vector and raster graphics in one package. As a binary
format that needed to work on 16-bit machines, WMF is comprised of a
sequence of record structures. Each record contains drawing
commands, object definitions, and configuration settings. When a
metafile is processed, the image can be rendered on a display, output
to a printer or plotter, stored in memory, or saved to some
persistent storage. Reflecting the relationship to the Windows
Graphics Device Interface (GDI) API, WMF data is "played" to a
playback device context in the same manner that PostScript content is
treated as an executable program that results in the output of the
original document.
As Microsoft's first 32-bit operating system, Windows NT 3.1
introduced an overhaul to the Windows API ("Win32") and the in-memory
formats upon which those APIs relied. The Enhanced Metafile (EMF)
format was created at this time, using 32-bit values instead of WMF's
16-bit values. In Windows XP, Microsoft extended EMF with "EMF+",
adding support for Windows GDI+.
Many implementations of WMF and EMF were created because of Windows'
commercial success in the 1990s. A large body of free and
commercially available clip art and other artwork exists in this
format. Furthermore, WMF content appears non-normatively in certain
standards (e.g., [OOXML]); the usage is common enough that an
implementer would almost certainly need to support it for basic
interoperability.
Microsoft publicly documented the WMF format as early as the 1992
Windows 3.1 SDK. Since 2007, Microsoft has released the format
specifications [MS-WMF], [MS-EMF], and [MS-EMF+] under its Open
Specification Promise [MS-OSP].
1.2. Windows Bitmaps
Long before the invention of Portable Network Graphics (PNG),
Microsoft Corporation and IBM Corporation needed to record images in
a format that their applications and operating systems could easily
render on low-end machines (Intel 80286). The resulting "BMP" format
contains a single raster graphic with basic header fields that can be
easily mapped (or "blitted") to locations in memory. As computing
moved from 16-bit to 32-bit, BMP evolved to contain 32-bit
structures. As the '90s wore on, the venerable BMP got boosts with
support for additional color spaces, color profiles, and compression
formats. The same basic format can be used to convey 2-bit black-
and-white bitmaps with a 1-bit alpha mask from the '80s, and full-
color Ultra HD images on leading-edge displays. BMP is a building
block of other formats, including Windows Metafiles, Windows Icons,
and Windows Cursors.
Many implementations of BMP were created because of Windows'
commercial success in the 1990s. Usage of the format for interchange
has declined since the advent of PNG (for lossless raster graphics)
and JPEG (for lossy raster graphics); however, a large body of free
and commercially available BMP artwork exists. Since Windows Icons
are a building block of "favicon.ico" web technology, an implementer
would almost certainly need to support this format for basic
interoperability.
Microsoft publicly documented the BMP format as early as the 1992
Windows 3.1 SDK (in the Windows Metafile documentation). Since 2007
Microsoft has released the format specification [MS-WMF], which
includes most components of the Windows Bitmap format, under its Open
Specification Promise [MS-OSP]. See Section 2.2.2.9 of [MS-WMF]
(DeviceIndependentBitmap Object). BMP data begins with a
BITMAPFILEHEADER and is followed by one of the bitmap headers
(BITMAPINFOHEADER, BITMAPV4HEADER, or BITMAPV5HEADER), optional color
table data, bitmap data, and optional profile data, in that order
[BMPSTOR].
Implementers need to be aware of the [MICE] vulnerability, and to
guard against it. Some details are included in the completed
registration template.
2. Windows Metafile Media Type Registration Application
Type name: image
Subtype name: wmf
Required parameters: None.
Optional parameters:
DEFAULT_CHARSET: The character set intended when the CharacterSet
enumeration (see the WMF specification) specifies
DEFAULT_CHARSET. The value of this parameter is a charset from
the IANA "Character Sets" registry
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets>. When this
parameter is not specified, DEFAULT_CHARSET has the following
meaning in the WMF specification: "a character set based on the
current system locale; for example, when the system locale is
United States English, the default character set is
ANSI_CHARSET" (which is Windows-1252, more or less). That is,
when not specified, the default character set is system
dependent. This optional parameter is new to this registration
and may not enjoy widespread support for some time. Therefore,
EMF instead of WMF (or if necessary under the circumstances,
embedded EMF within WMF) is a more sensible choice when text is
present.
Encoding considerations: Binary.
Security considerations:
The Windows Metafile format's security history is punctuated in
2005-2006 with the disclosure of the Metafile Image Code Execution
("MICE") vulnerability. MICE won the 2007 Pwnie Award for "Mass
0wnage" and "Breaking the Internet". The official Microsoft
security bulletin describes that the flaw occurs because Windows
Metafiles can set the SETABORTPROC value of the MetafileEscapes
enumeration (accessible via the META_ESCAPE record), allowing for
arbitrary code execution, i.e., "active content".
Windows Metafiles can contain Enhanced Metafiles using the
META_ESCAPE_ENHANCED_METAFILE record; thus, the security
considerations of EMF apply to WMF.
Windows Metafiles are historically very buggy. As the original
intent was to replicate Windows GDI calls, flaws in GDI, or in a
display or printer driver implementing the backend to GDI, could
be exploitable. WMF implementations not backed by Windows GDI
have different risks: namely, while a malicious WMF author may not
consider the non-Windows GDI implementation as a primary target,
WMF has many "corner case" records for which an implementation's
processing may not have received the same level of scrutiny as the
Windows implementation. "Fuzzing" the implementation is
appropriate.
As a "basic" image format, the image/wmf media type does not
employ executable content and provides no facilities for privacy
or integrity.
Interoperability considerations:
Windows Metafile is the original 16-bit metafile format; it was
released in 1990 at what some computer historians might consider
the "zenith" of the desktop publishing revolution. Accordingly,
there is a large body of free and commercially available clip art
that is still in use, either independently or embedded in
productivity documents (word processing documents, desktop
publishing documents, slideshows, presentations, spreadsheets, and
workbooks). For example, references to WMF content appear (non-
normatively) in Office Open XML. To say that support for this
format is necessary for interoperability would not be an
understatement.
Accommodations for comments or arbitrary data storage in Windows
Metafiles are virtually non-existent. However, Windows Metafiles
can contain Enhanced Metafiles using the
META_ESCAPE_ENHANCED_METAFILE record, so an implementation that
handles Windows Metafiles is also expected to handle enhanced
metafile content. Windows Metafiles can store and output text
strings (see META_TEXTOUT and META_EXTTEXTOUT records), but the
encodings of the strings may be ambiguous. Unicode encodings are
not possible without the DEFAULT_CHARSET parameter defined in this
registration.
The previously unregistered type image/x-wmf is also in wide use.
Accordingly, it is registered as a deprecated alias.
Published specification:
WMF: Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-WMF]: Windows Metafile Format",
v20160714 (Rev 13.1), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc250370>.
Applications that use this media type:
Office productivity applications; clip art applications; desktop
publishing applications; some web browsers (e.g., Internet
Explorer).
Fragment identifier considerations: None.
Additional information:
Deprecated alias names for this type: image/x-wmf
Magic number(s): D7 CD C6 9A (little-endian DWORD 0x9AC6CDD7)
File extension(s): .wmf
Macintosh file type code(s):
None. A uniform type identifier (UTI) of "com.microsoft.wmf"
is suggested.
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Restrictions on usage: None.
Author/Change controller: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Intended usage: COMMON
Provisional registration? No
3. Enhanced Metafile Media Type Registration Application
Type name: image
Subtype name: emf
Required parameters: None.
Optional parameters: None.
Encoding considerations: Binary.
Security considerations:
Enhanced Metafiles are not afflicted with the Metafile Image Code
Execution ("MICE") vulnerability. There has been no public
disclosure of vulnerabilities specific to EMF or EMF+ to date.
Neither EMF nor EMF+ are designed to contain "active content".
Nonetheless, Enhanced Metafiles can contain Encapsulated
PostScript (EPS) data; thus, the security considerations of
PostScript processing may also apply to EMF.
As the original intent was to replicate Windows GDI calls, flaws
in GDI, or in a display or printer driver implementing the backend
to GDI, could be exploitable with maliciously crafted EMF content.
EMF implementations not backed by Windows GDI have different
risks: namely, while a malicious EMF author may not consider the
non-Windows GDI implementation as a primary target, EMF has many
"corner case" records for which an implementation's processing may
not have received the same level of scrutiny as the Windows
implementation. "Fuzzing" the implementation is appropriate. It
is also possible that EMF+ data is "safe" while EMF data contains
an exploit (or vice versa); the EMF+-aware implementation (such as
an application designed for GDI+ on Windows XP or above) would
skip the "unsafe" data while another implementation would fall
prey to the exploit.
As a "basic" image format, the image/emf media type does not
employ executable content and provides no facilities for privacy
or integrity.
Interoperability considerations:
Enhanced Metafile is the 32-bit metafile format; it was released
in 1992 along with Windows NT 3.1. There is a large body of free
and commercially available clip art that is still in use, either
independently or embedded in productivity documents (word
processing documents, desktop publishing documents, slideshows,
presentations, spreadsheets, and workbooks). To say that support
for this format is necessary for interoperability would not be an
understatement.
Enhanced Metafiles have extensive accommodations for comments and
arbitrary data storage. Enhanced Metafiles can store and output
text strings. Mercifully, the encodings of these strings are
well-defined. Record examples include EMR_EXTTEXTOUTA (US-ASCII),
EMR_EXTTEXTOUTW (UTF16-LE), EMR_POLYTEXTOUTA (US-ASCII),
EMR_POLYTEXTOUTW (UTF16-LE), and EMR_SMALLTEXTOUT (UTF16-LE or the
low-order 8 bits of UTF16-LE -- effectively ISO-8859-1 --
depending on ETO_SMALL_CHARS).
Enhanced Metafiles can contain Encapsulated PostScript (EPS) data
in the EpsData object. The FormatSignature EPS_SIGNATURE
(0x46535045, in little-endian) is used instead of
ENHMETA_SIGNAUTRE (0x464D4520, in little-endian) in such a case.
Windows XP introduced the GDI+ API, along with EMF+. EMF+ is
actually an embedded format in which GDI+ commands are stored as
EMF comment records (EMR_COMMENT_EMFPLUS record type). Content
containing EMF+ data can be identified as "EMF+ Only" (only EMF+;
the EMF records are not sufficient to reconstitute the drawing) or
"EMF+ Dual" (both EMF records alone or EMF+ records alone, when
played back, are sufficient to reconstitute the drawing). Support
for EMF+ records may not be as extensive as support for the
original EMF records.
The previously unregistered type image/x-emf is also in wide use.
Accordingly, it is registered as a deprecated alias.
Published specification:
EMF: Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-EMF]: Enhanced Metafile Format",
v20160714 (Rev 12.0), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc230514>.
EMF+: Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-EMFPLUS]: Enhanced Metafile
Format Plus Extensions", v20160714 (Rev 14.1), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc230724>.
Applications that use this media type:
Office productivity applications; clip art applications; desktop
publishing applications; some web browsers (e.g., Internet
Explorer).
Fragment identifier considerations: None.
Additional information:
Deprecated alias names for this type: image/x-emf
Magic number(s):
01 00 00 00 (little-endian DWORD 0x00000001), corresponding to
the EMR_HEADER Type field.
The next field (EMR_HEADER Size) should be at least 88 (little-
endian DWORD 0x00000050).
File extension(s): .emf (for both EMF and EMF+ content)
Macintosh file type code(s):
None. A uniform type identifier (UTI) of "com.microsoft.emf"
is suggested.
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Restrictions on usage: None.
Author/Change controller: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Intended usage: COMMON
Provisional registration? No
4. Windows Bitmap Media Type Registration Application
Type name: image
Subtype name: bmp
Required parameters: None.
Optional parameters: None.
Encoding considerations: Binary.
Security considerations:
Bitmaps have a mostly unremarkable security history.
Because BMP data can encapsulate JPEG or PNG data (BI_JPEG, BI_PNG
values of the Compression enumeration in Section 2.1.1.7 of the
WMF specification), the security considerations of JPEG and PNG
processing may also apply to BMP.
As a "basic" image format, the image/bmp media type does not
employ executable content and provides no facilities for privacy
or integrity.
Interoperability considerations:
Uncompressed Windows Bitmaps can be rather large. If there is a
need to compress an image, modern applications should consider
emitting JPEG or PNG data instead of embedding them in BMP
payloads.
Published specification:
WMF: Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-WMF]: Windows Metafile Format",
v20160714 (Rev 13.1), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc250370>.
BMP: Microsoft Corporation, "Bitmap Storage", MSDN ID dd183391,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dd183391>.
Applications that use this media type:
Office productivity applications; clip art applications; desktop
publishing applications; web browsers; graphics processing
applications.
Fragment identifier considerations: None.
Additional information:
Magic number(s):
42 4D ("BM"), meaning "bitmap". The next field
(BITMAPFILEHEADER bfSize) is a little-endian DWORD indicating
the size of the bitmap content in bytes.
File extension(s): .bmp, .dib
Macintosh file type code(s):
"BMP ", "BMPf", or "BMPp". Apple has promulgated a uniform
type identifier (UTI) of "com.microsoft.bmp".
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Restrictions on usage: None.
Author/Change controller: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Intended usage: COMMON
Provisional registration? No
5. IANA Considerations
IANA has registered the media types image/wmf, image/x-wmf,
image/emf, image/x-emf, and image/bmp in the standards tree using the
applications provided in Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this document.
6. Security Considerations
See the registration templates for their respective security
considerations.
The Metafile Image Code Execution (MICE) vulnerability won the 2007
Pwnie Award for "Mass 0wnage" and "Breaking the Internet" [PWNIES07].
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[BMPSTOR] Microsoft Corporation, "Bitmap Storage", MSDN ID dd183391,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dd183391>.
[MS-EMF] Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-EMF]: Enhanced Metafile
Format", v20160714 (Rev 12.0), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc230514>.
[MS-EMF+] Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-EMFPLUS]: Enhanced Metafile
Format Plus Extensions", v20160714 (Rev 14.1), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc230724>.
[MS-WMF] Microsoft Corporation, "[MS-WMF]: Windows Metafile
Format", v20160714 (Rev 13.1), July 2016,
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/cc250370>.
7.2. Informative References
[MICE] Microsoft Corporation, "Vulnerability in Graphics
Rendering Engine Could Allow Remote Code Execution
(912919)", MS06-001, V1.0, January 2006,
<https://technet.microsoft.com/library/security/ms06-001>.
[MS-OSP] Microsoft Corporation, "Open Specification Promise",
February 2007, <https://msdn.microsoft.com/
en-us/openspecifications/dn646765>.
[OOXML] Ecma International, "Office Open XML File Formats",
Standard ECMA-376, Fourth Edition, ISO/IEC 29500, December
2012, <http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/
standards/Ecma-376.htm>.
[PWNIES07] Pwnie Awards LLC, "Winners of Pwnie Awards 2007", 2007,
<http://pwnies.com/archive/2007/winners/>.
Author's Address
Sean Leonard
Penango, Inc.
5900 Wilshire Boulevard
21st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036
United States of America
Email: dev+ietf@seantek.com
URI: http://www.penango.com/