Last modified: 2013-02-24 19:43:05 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T28090, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 26090 - EXIF date prefill does not deal with insane dates well
EXIF date prefill does not deal with insane dates well
Status: REOPENED
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
UploadWizard (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Low minor (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2010-11-24 00:24 UTC by Neil Kandalgaonkar
Modified: 2013-02-24 19:43 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Neil Kandalgaonkar 2010-11-24 00:24:33 UTC
If it encounter an EXIF value like DateTimeDigitized: "0000:00:00 00:00:00" it parses the date wrong.

For this value, we get Nov 30, 1899. 

This suggests we are blindly using the numbers given, with offsets for the month (this is year zero, 1900, and month 0 == month -1, day 0 = day -1, at midnight).

Solution (?) check dates for sanity before prefilling. Year, month, and day of zero are all impossible.
Comment 1 DieBuche 2011-05-13 15:20:31 UTC
Fixed in r87984
Comment 2 Neil Kandalgaonkar 2011-08-24 18:33:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Fixed in r87984

I don't think this revision solves the problem at all. All this revision does is to reject older dates. It's quite possible for people to encode EXIF dates retroactively.
Comment 3 Antoine "hashar" Musso (WMF) 2011-08-28 15:34:54 UTC
reverted in 1.18 with r95628
Comment 4 Thehelpfulone 2012-06-22 19:40:30 UTC
Reassigning to wikibugs-l per bug 37789
Comment 5 Nischay Nahata 2013-02-24 19:43:05 UTC
How is this to be accomplished? Is only checking for 1<=month<=12 and so on enough?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links