Live data from Hacker News

Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com

231–240 of 442 posts

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it in the wired.com article about this also submitted to HN: "And [Vinay] Shet says even the tiny movements a user’s mouse makes as it hovers and approaches a checkbox can help reveal an automated bot."

I guess it's a lot more complicated than it looks at a cursory glance.

you seem to be looking for reddit. it can be found here -> www.reddit.com

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#232

"If we can collect behavioural data from you, and it matches closely the behaviour of other humans, you are a human. Otherwise you're not a human." Does anyone else get that feeling from the description of what Google is doing? I've tripped their "we think you are a bot" detection filter and been presented with a captcha countless times while using complex search queries and searching for relatively obscure things, a…

Anecdotally, I block cookies and tracking scripts from Google and even run some custom javascript to remove the link shim in search results. I have yet to encounter the "we think you're a bot" detection filter, except when performing numerous complex iterative queries or Googling from within Tor.

The above is to suggest that perhaps tracking bugs and cookies aren't a component in the bot-detection algorithm, though that remains to be seen.

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#233
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and it's frankly very insulting and rather disturbing that they think someone who inputs "unusual" search queries, according to their measure, is not human. Insulting? how is that insulting? You are entitled. You are entitled you block scripts, use Google's FREE service to perform any search query to search the web while blocking any program that attempts to identify you as not a bot. But if while using their free…

Saying "just don't use Google/Bing/search engines" is like saying "don't use the airlines". The security checks suck big time, but really, these services are must-have and there is no better alternative. Complaining and hoping for some change is all that's left.

https://duckduckgo.com/

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#234

I feel like if anything this would just add some time to bots plowing through these so their web scrapers can move in gentle curves and whatnot to simulate a human. These don't appear to be that far off from being broken.

Forcing bots to slow down their interaction with online services to human speeds would still reduce spam by a lot.

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#235

They've been doing this for a while. With recaptcha, you got easier captchas (a single street number instead of two words) if the system thought you were human. There was an official post about this a year ago. [1] Now they have probably improved the system enough to be confident in not showing captcha at all. It's nothing revolutionary. If it thinks you're a robot, you still get the old captcha. [2] [1] http://googl…

Am I being paranoid when I think that offering this "free" service is a great way to track people over even more sites and usually the most important conversion pages that don't have the usual google display ads. I don't see a big technological innovation here as it appears that mostly they are checking your cookies to see if they recognize you.

Every "free" service from Google has the end goal of serving you personalized ads. That's their business.

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#236
post #84

Do they even need the checkbox anymore? They could track mouse movement, keypresses, history or whatever else they are tracking without showing any kind of GUI at all.

How do you track mouse movement on a tablet?

If the user is on a tablet, you can use other methods like the front-facing camera.

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#237

"If we can collect behavioural data from you, and it matches closely the behaviour of other humans, you are a human. Otherwise you're not a human." Does anyone else get that feeling from the description of what Google is doing? I've tripped their "we think you are a bot" detection filter and been presented with a captcha countless times while using complex search queries and searching for relatively obscure things, a…

I think you're being a little hyperbolic. Google is classifying what is already normal human behavior. Having JavaScript disabled is definitely not "normal" human behavior. Of the stats I found only 1-2% of users don't get JS and the UK's Government Digital Service found[1] that only 0.2% of users disabled or can't support JS.

I don't think regular CAPTCHAs are going away anytime soon since any bot detection system is bound to have false positives.

[1] https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2013/10/21/how-many-people-are-missi...

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#238

I always assumed Google's use of reCAPTCHA was to augment the OCR used to digitize Google Books, particularly in results the software couldn't confidently match to a word. Is this true? It's interesting that it's still the fallback for the new method.

That was the original idea behind reCAPTCHA (which originated outside of Google, acquired in 2009), but my understanding is that they long ago ran out of actual text that needed human OCR'ing, and/or found other reasons that approach no longer was helpful. The "help OCR while also spam protecting" thing isn't currently mentioned on Google's recaptcha product page.

For the past few years the recaptchas I've seen were illegible text next to easy to read text. I think its obvious that they've run out of the low hanging fruit and now just have the worst of the worst as placeholders. The move to house numbers just proves that they're kinda running out of badly OCR'd text.

This move isn't too surprising. OCR based captchas have always been a hack and the "best" captchas are like having the best collection of duct tape and WD40. At a certain point you need to stop doing half-assed repairs and remodel.

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#239

"If we can collect behavioural data from you, and it matches closely the behaviour of other humans, you are a human. Otherwise you're not a human." Does anyone else get that feeling from the description of what Google is doing? I've tripped their "we think you are a bot" detection filter and been presented with a captcha countless times while using complex search queries and searching for relatively obscure things, a…

(Disclaimer: I work at Google, but not on ReCaptcha.)

The point of this change is to make things easier on 90% of humans -- the ones who have JavaScript and third-party cookies enabled now get to tick a checkbox and be on their merry way, instead of doing a useless captcha when we knew they were already humans. Recall that when ReCaptcha initially came out, the argument was "humans are wasting all of this time, let's turn it into useful work to digitize books".

If book-based or street view-based captchas go away, I suspect it will be because bots/spammers got better at solving them than humans, not because Google thinks that the machine learning spam detection approach is fail-proof.

Recall that "reading" captchas already pose an insurmountable barrier to users with conditions such as illiteracy, low vision, no vision, and dyslexia. To accommodate these users, audio captchas are also provided, but a 2011 paper suggests that audio captchas are either easy to defeat programmatically or are difficult for users themselves to understand: https://cdn.elie.net/publications/decaptcha-breaking-75-perc...

Re: Are You a Robot? Introducing “No CAPTCHA ReCAPTCHA”

#240
post #95

It's definitely not only relying on cursor movements. A simple $('iframe').contents().find('.recaptcha-checkbox-checkmark').click() proved that I'm not a robot, without me touching the mouse.

At best this would be just trigger another arms race with people developing bots to trigger a series of "human-like" mouse events, which I'd imagine is a far-simpler problem than OCR.

Not to mention that it could only be used as a heuristic and not a test; so, eventually the weight of that heuristic will just be reduced to zero once someone publishes humanlike_mouse_driver.js with carefully-tuned-to-look-statistically-human mouse interactions available out of the box.

Post reply on HN