<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The End is Nigh for CAPTCHAs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/</link>
	<description>News, opinion, and fresh thinking for web developers and designers. The official podcast of sitepoint.com.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:54:05 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jordan</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-926298</link>
		<dc:creator>Jordan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-926298</guid>
		<description>THE END IS NIGH</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE END IS NIGH</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathon Hill</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925744</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathon Hill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 16:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925744</guid>
		<description>Not very accessible, but very difficult to spoof:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://derekallard.com/blog/post/not-so-useless-image-to-text-as-a-captcha/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://derekallard.com/blog/post/not-so-useless-image-to-text-as-a-captcha/&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not very accessible, but very difficult to spoof:</p>
<p><a href="http://derekallard.com/blog/post/not-so-useless-image-to-text-as-a-captcha/" rel="nofollow">http://derekallard.com/blog/post/not-so-useless-image-to-text-as-a-captcha/</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mmm</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925742</link>
		<dc:creator>mmm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 14:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925742</guid>
		<description>I think CAPTCHAs would be far more effective if everybody made their own system. And by that I do not mean their own variation of &quot;distorted letters in an image&quot;.

Personally, on my (smaller sites), I&#039;ve made a CAPTCHA system a la &quot;tell us what day of month it is today&quot;. It&#039;s easy. Both for the users, but also for me to change it to something similar simple when somebody eventually circumvents it.

My point is: Diversity is one of the best ways to prevent spam. The more sites that is using e.g. reCAPTCHA, the larger is the incentive for spammers to circumvent that specific system.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think CAPTCHAs would be far more effective if everybody made their own system. And by that I do not mean their own variation of &#8220;distorted letters in an image&#8221;.</p>
<p>Personally, on my (smaller sites), I&#8217;ve made a CAPTCHA system a la &#8220;tell us what day of month it is today&#8221;. It&#8217;s easy. Both for the users, but also for me to change it to something similar simple when somebody eventually circumvents it.</p>
<p>My point is: Diversity is one of the best ways to prevent spam. The more sites that is using e.g. reCAPTCHA, the larger is the incentive for spammers to circumvent that specific system.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bleh</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925603</link>
		<dc:creator>bleh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 22:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925603</guid>
		<description>@Grunties

I&#039;ve read the story behind the Times poll, which after the reCAPTCHA implentation was all manual labour. Something no CAPTCHA can protect itself from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Grunties</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve read the story behind the Times poll, which after the reCAPTCHA implentation was all manual labour. Something no CAPTCHA can protect itself from.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grunties</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925531</link>
		<dc:creator>Grunties</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 09:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925531</guid>
		<description>@bleh: ReCAPTCHA has been &#039;hacked&#039; rather than &#039;cracked&#039;, but the end result is the same. Search &quot;moot times poll hack&quot; for the gory details.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@bleh: ReCAPTCHA has been &#8216;hacked&#8217; rather than &#8216;cracked&#8217;, but the end result is the same. Search &#8220;moot times poll hack&#8221; for the gory details.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925511</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 20:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925511</guid>
		<description>I thought this article would contain useful information, but it was a waste of time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought this article would contain useful information, but it was a waste of time.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Captchas. Advertising Methods</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925508</link>
		<dc:creator>Captchas. Advertising Methods</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 20:04:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925508</guid>
		<description>Captchas. Advertising Methods: some Captchas must break the law....

Remember to allow for disabled users who may find that such Captchas are difficult to use. This could lead to legal action against you for discrimination.

http://www.acomputerportal.com/advertising_methods/captchas.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Captchas. Advertising Methods: some Captchas must break the law&#8230;.</p>
<p>Remember to allow for disabled users who may find that such Captchas are difficult to use. This could lead to legal action against you for discrimination.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.acomputerportal.com/advertising_methods/captchas.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.acomputerportal.com/advertising_methods/captchas.html</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Buckler</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925507</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Buckler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 19:28:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925507</guid>
		<description>Google&#039;s testing isn&#039;t an assumption - they have a 16% human failure rate - probably because of the small angle of error.

I still think image rotation is too easy to crack. A single symbol in a standard CAPTCHA has 62 possibilities (if you use numbers, lower and uppercase English characters). A single rotational image with a 16 degree angle of error has 22.5 possibilities. How can that be better?

CAPTCHAs are a necessary evil in some situations, but they&#039;re probably overused and certainly used in dumb ways. There are lots of factors you can check before resorting to a CAPTCHA.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google&#8217;s testing isn&#8217;t an assumption &#8211; they have a 16% human failure rate &#8211; probably because of the small angle of error.</p>
<p>I still think image rotation is too easy to crack. A single symbol in a standard CAPTCHA has 62 possibilities (if you use numbers, lower and uppercase English characters). A single rotational image with a 16 degree angle of error has 22.5 possibilities. How can that be better?</p>
<p>CAPTCHAs are a necessary evil in some situations, but they&#8217;re probably overused and certainly used in dumb ways. There are lots of factors you can check before resorting to a CAPTCHA.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tarh</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925497</link>
		<dc:creator>Tarh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 13:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925497</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Let’s assume software can analyze the image and get it right 1 in 10 times. You’re then down to 1 success every 1,000 attempts. And the software will improve…&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&#160;
In which case, so will the code that rejects easily guessable images.  In theory, eventually both packages will improve to the point where Google declares all images easily guessable, and the CAPTCHA will be defeated.  But, that&#039;s theory -- nobody has actually tried to break this yet.  All of this is just as you wrote -- assumption.  Let&#039;s give it a chance before we both make up numbers and scenarios to make judgments ;-)
&#160;
Presumably, if/when it is broken, we&#039;ll be in the same place that we are now, and someone will come up with something new.  It&#039;s a game of cat and mouse, much like the malware industry.  Hence,
&#160;
&lt;blockquote&gt;The End is Nigh for CAPTCHAs as we know them, but they will always be around in some form.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&#160;
Logic tells us that this reverse Turing test can never be successful on this medium (at least not without some sort of global system which would render the final blow to privacy and free speech), so all we can do is keep trying new tests.  In fact, anyone who has played a serious video game recently (that doesn&#039;t include you, Flash game and Wii Sports players) will know that a similar battle against cheaters has been going on for over a decade.  There is no single solution.  We can&#039;t win, but if we keep mixing up the field, we can&#039;t lose either.  The only way to lose is to give up and declare all CAPTCHAs worthless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Let’s assume software can analyze the image and get it right 1 in 10 times. You’re then down to 1 success every 1,000 attempts. And the software will improve…</p></blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;<br />
In which case, so will the code that rejects easily guessable images.  In theory, eventually both packages will improve to the point where Google declares all images easily guessable, and the CAPTCHA will be defeated.  But, that&#8217;s theory &#8212; nobody has actually tried to break this yet.  All of this is just as you wrote &#8212; assumption.  Let&#8217;s give it a chance before we both make up numbers and scenarios to make judgments ;-)<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Presumably, if/when it is broken, we&#8217;ll be in the same place that we are now, and someone will come up with something new.  It&#8217;s a game of cat and mouse, much like the malware industry.  Hence,<br />
&nbsp;</p>
<blockquote><p>The End is Nigh for CAPTCHAs as we know them, but they will always be around in some form.</p></blockquote>
<p>&nbsp;<br />
Logic tells us that this reverse Turing test can never be successful on this medium (at least not without some sort of global system which would render the final blow to privacy and free speech), so all we can do is keep trying new tests.  In fact, anyone who has played a serious video game recently (that doesn&#8217;t include you, Flash game and Wii Sports players) will know that a similar battle against cheaters has been going on for over a decade.  There is no single solution.  We can&#8217;t win, but if we keep mixing up the field, we can&#8217;t lose either.  The only way to lose is to give up and declare all CAPTCHAs worthless.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rover3500</title>
		<link>http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/11/avoid-captchas/comment-page-1/#comment-925479</link>
		<dc:creator>rover3500</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 06:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/?p=9263#comment-925479</guid>
		<description>Hi, i&#039;m not sure if this is the same as P Jam,but why can&#039;t they just use a random image which u have to identify like a train,or wheelbarrow-just nothing that has an obvious shape that a computer can identify,As long as the angle of the picture is not side on,i can&#039;t think why it wouldn,t work.And also like p jam says,u get 3 goes at it,so a bot can&#039;t have hundreds of guesses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, i&#8217;m not sure if this is the same as P Jam,but why can&#8217;t they just use a random image which u have to identify like a train,or wheelbarrow-just nothing that has an obvious shape that a computer can identify,As long as the angle of the picture is not side on,i can&#8217;t think why it wouldn,t work.And also like p jam says,u get 3 goes at it,so a bot can&#8217;t have hundreds of guesses.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
