Skip to content

Disable inline images for images that are less than 10,000 bytes #3437

Closed

Description

@nicgirault

Thanks for this awesome project.

I recently get a warning during build telling me:

The bundle size is significantly larger than recommended.
Consider reducing it with code splitting: https://goo.gl/9VhYWB
You can also analyze the project dependencies: https://goo.gl/LeUzfb

Analyzing the project dependencies, I discovered that the easiest and most significant improvement would be to get rid of these small images under 10,000 bytes that are imported as Data URI by webpack (it's 25% of the size of my app).

I don't see an option to disable the feature. Does it exists? If no I have currently 2 options that are:

  • moving the images in the public folder
  • ejecting the app

Both options are a big loss so an option to change the current behaviour would be nice.

Thanks for your help

Activity

  1. nicgirault commented on Nov 10, 2017

    @nicgirault
    Author
  2. Timer commented on Nov 10, 2017

    @Timer
    Contributor

    Intriguing use case.
    Even if this shaves off 25%, that means your bundle is still huge. If you split the application, the inlined images should also be split and distributed across the bundles.

    Let's see what others have to say, but the third option is what I just mentioned.

    edit: this option currently cannot be modified or disabled

  3. edmorley commented on Mar 15, 2018

    @edmorley

    Another point to consider when using url-loader's inlining: small changes in either CRA's chosen threshold, or asset sizes in an app can mean a previously working Content-Security-Policy ends up blocking newly-inlined assets due to lack of data: in the img-src CSP policy directive.

    For sites that have correct long-lived cache control headers (especially those remembering to use the immutable directive), and aren't as concerned about the initial cold cache case, IMO never inlining is preferable.

  4. peterbe commented on Dec 18, 2018

    @peterbe

    Here's another attempt to solve this: #6060

    It's similar to the idea of INLINE_RUNTIME_CHUNK. Now, running IMAGE_INLINE_SIZE_LIMIT=0 yarn run build will mean that every image in (src/*.(bmp|gif|jp?eg|png)) will be considered too big and not base64 into the JS.

  5. mzvast commented on Jan 10, 2019

    @mzvast

    Any progress on this proposal?

  6. peterbe commented on Jan 10, 2019

    @peterbe

    My PR is conflicting now but I'm not sure how to ping/pester it for review.

  7. added a commit that references this issue on Jan 10, 2019
    ca6f07e
  8. andyfurniss4 commented on Mar 14, 2019

    @andyfurniss4

    Adding my name to this because I don't want my images inlined!

  9. Rogdham commented on Mar 15, 2019

    @Rogdham

    Websites dealing with CSP will likely add data: in the CSP header because of the inline images (something like img-src 'self' data:;). MDN states that this is not recommanded and can be insecure (emphasis is mine):

    data: Allows data: URIs to be used as a content source. This is insecure; an attacker can also inject arbitrary data: URIs. Use this sparingly and definitely not for scripts.


    The alternative for CSP is using a nonce-based approach, but it has the following drawbacks:

    • way more complex to put in place, as it requires server-side modification of some static files (plus the documentation is very scarce);
    • the nonce passed to __webpack_nonce__ is not applied to img tags (this may be a bug);
    • browsers without CSP version 2 support will fallback to CSP version 1, so the data: will need to be present in the CSP header anyways for CSP version 1;
    • nonce-based approach are not well-known yet, which means less documentation, more error-prone, and users are likely to use the other, simplest, solution.

    All in all, it would be way simpler to just have an option to disable inline images. #6060 gets my +1 👍

  10. peterbe commented on Mar 15, 2019

    @peterbe

    Messing with CSP just to bend-over-backward for this "flaw" in CRA isn't the right direction. I still think my pr should get reviewed and landed. And perhaps it should be changed to make the default minimum 0 bytes, meaning you have to deliberately set an env var if you want base64 inlining.

    Hey! If you're here and also don't want base64 inlining you can...

    1. For images in the src/*.js don't do this:
    import myImage from './foo.png';
    
    <img src={myImage}>
    

    Instead, do this:

    const myImage = process.env.PUBLIC_URL + '/foo.png';
    
    <img src={myImage}>
    
    1. In your src/App.js don't do this:
    div.page { background: url(./bullet.png) no-repeat left center;

    do this instead:

    div.page { background: url(/static/bullet.png) no-repeat left center;

    You'll also need to git mv src/foo.png public/static/images/ or whatever is equivalent in your project.

  11. some1else commented on Apr 1, 2019

    @some1else

    But I want the images loaded, checksummed, optimized and whatnot. I just don't want them inlined. In my use case long strings are problematic (using React to render multipart emails).

  12. some1else commented on Apr 1, 2019

    @some1else

    Hopefully #6060 gets the stamp of approval

  13. Kizmar commented on Apr 10, 2019

    @Kizmar

    Pile on reason: I realized a .png was being added as "data:" instead of using a path. At first I thought it was the file type because the same image as a .jpg worked. I don't want to have to add "data:" to my CSP as it's not recommended for security reasons. I'd like to be able to basically disable this feature all together and always use the image path.

  14. imyoka commented on May 16, 2019

    @imyoka

    Adding my name to this because I don't want my images inlined!

  15. fredrivett commented on Jun 12, 2019

    @fredrivett

    We're in the exact same position as @Kizmar, images are being converted to data: with base64, which our CSP is blocking. It's not advised to allow data: URIs as content source, as MDN says:

    data: Allows data: URIs to be used as a content source. This is insecure; an attacker can also inject arbitrary data: URIs. Use this sparingly and definitely not for scripts.

    Ideally there would be a solution that enables us to keep our sites secure whilst still utilising the standard image processing (just without the base64 step).

  16. added a commit that references this issue on Jun 18, 2019
    9d70c7a
  17. locked and limited conversation to collaborators on Jun 23, 2019
  18. added a commit that references this issue on Nov 21, 2019
    2fcbd31
  19. added a commit that references this issue on Oct 8, 2024
    872c612
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions