I realize this, but the fact that the format is "Turing complete" doesn't actually have any direct bearing on whether it's exploitable. Because the input to a TTF engine is not actually x86 machine code, it's misleading to frame it as "arbitrary code in ring0". It's not arbitrary - it can't do anything unless the TTF engine has bugs. And any format loader can have exploitable bugs, not just Turing complete ones.
Security wise, Turing completeness doesn't matter[note]. All that really matters is that the implementation of the format is complex. H264 is not Turing complete, but it is complex, and thus a frequent source of vulnerabilities. Conversely you could probably put a toy Brainfuck interpreter in ring0 and, with moderate care, be confident that no malicious Brainfuck code can take over your system.
[note] It matters a little bit if you consider it a "security" problem that you lose any guarantees of how long a file might take to load. A malicious file could infinite loop, and thus deny service. But then again, this isn't restricted to Turing complete formats - a zip bomb can also deny service this way.
Security wise, Turing completeness doesn't matter[note]. All that really matters is that the implementation of the format is complex. H264 is not Turing complete, but it is complex, and thus a frequent source of vulnerabilities. Conversely you could probably put a toy Brainfuck interpreter in ring0 and, with moderate care, be confident that no malicious Brainfuck code can take over your system.
[note] It matters a little bit if you consider it a "security" problem that you lose any guarantees of how long a file might take to load. A malicious file could infinite loop, and thus deny service. But then again, this isn't restricted to Turing complete formats - a zip bomb can also deny service this way.