Live data from Hacker News

Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

grumpy.website

301–310 of 503 posts

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're downvoted, it's a valid point. It feels icky to use a service that you pay for, and incidentally provide free labor to Google's AI which they resell in Google Cloud as a walled garden. The result of reCaptcha isn't public as far as I can tell, and humanity probably doesn't get a net benefit from Google's monopoly on AI anymore.

People talk about "free labor" and forget all the times they were able to do Google searches or use Google Maps for free. It seems rather ungrateful? This isn't a one-sided relationship, both sides benefit.

The difference lies in whether you willingly subjected yourself to this transaction (give eyeballs, get Maps service) or whether it was imposed on you without anyone bothering to mention or question it beforehand.

Also the gratefulness part is strange. The corporation has no gratefulness for me, why should we show it any kind of loyalty. It's not a living entity with a consistent mind or consciousness. It will change its will based on Wall Street's demands. It will ban you silently with no recourse.

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#303
I decided to test this for a good hour once. I was suprised how little it actually matters whether you're on a cheap VPN (although i do think they limit TOR) or are actually getting the answers correct. Load up chrome or brave, and it almost instantly solved, whereas Firefox on default privacy settings is a total pain. The worst thing is how they purposely try to just waste your time with the fading images, like in OP.

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with recaptcha alternatives is that they either are insecure or require time and money to continue to be ahead of bots. All of the "interactive stand-alone approaches" from that page can be beaten with run-of-the-mill OCR (other than perhaps the 3d challenge) and with almost any mobile phone speech recognition engine (and, if the attacker has the money, can send it off to Google's cloud speech-to-text). A…

The problem with CAPTCHA and the like are they seek to stop programmatic-browsing of websites, that both Firefox and Chrome support out of the box. If companies are concerned about non-human access they should make an official API instead of their website being a de-facto unofficial API. If they are concerned about fraud they will be woefully defended by CAPTCHA, it makes no judgement on the validity of transactions…

> If companies are concerned about non-human access they should make an official API instead of their website being a de-facto unofficial API

This is often impractical for several important use cases, like image rendering and PDF generation. Just hand waving away the cost of developing dedicated, pure APIs won't make companies more likely to do so.

> If they are concerned about fraud they will be woefully defended by CAPTCHA, it makes no judgement on the validity of transactions at all and doesn't prevent frauds signing in manually.

There are many different vectors of attack and fraud and CAPTCHA tackles one of them. It's silly to say it's unnecessary just because it doesn't cover all fraudulent activity

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#305
post #204

I've never understood what happened to reCAPTCHA, it was originally so great and is now just so, so toxic. Originally it was an awesome solution based on OCR'ing books that usually worked quickly on the first try, and almost never took more than two. Then it turned into a single checkbox (analyzing mouse movement) so it was even faster... and I remember some simple image-based like "select the images of cats" that we…

> 1) The images are so blurry and ambiguous it's really hard to get right, it feels like a test designed to make you fail On top of that, I think some of the training sets are wrong. Multiple times I've been asked to find traffic signs, but it would only let me pass when including street signs.

If you use Chrome or Brave you can get multiple boxes wrong and still get through i've found, even on a cheap VPN IP.

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#306
post #28

While relatable, this is just a low effort post more suited for Twitter or Reddit. For a fair comparison OP would need to use clean browser profiles on fresh IPs. Like this it is just fan-service for Google Captcha victims (like me).

I disagree about the more appropriate for Twitter/Reddit than HN. But that's because my immediate interpretation, while not spelled out in the "article", was within the context of anti-competitive behavior by Google in making non-Chrome browser perform more poorly with google-created content.

The topic itself is definitely super interesting and relevant. But the submitted post is pretty much a meme.

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#308
post #39

I was going through the same ordeal as a Firefox user, so I've made Buster to solve challenges and reclaim some of that lost time: https://github.com/dessant/buster If you're a developer, please consider replacing reCAPTCHA on your site with an alternative. reCAPTCHA discriminates against people with disabilities and those who seek privacy, and it gaslights you into thinking you did not solve the challenge correctly,…

If you want a good look at the state of the art in this field, look at Ticketmaster.

Ticketmaster uses both recaptcha and a pre-filtering solution they supply based on their own heuristics, as well as a complex user activity tracking system to determine whether you're a bot or not based on the activity you present and traffic you pass, so even if you pass all CAPTCHAs, they still might tell you to pound sand if you try to reserve something.

In the last few weeks, for select sales, they've even required unique phone numbers which they will SMS a number to or call and relay a code to which you need to enter just to get a single place in line for a sale.

I'm not sure of any company more actively on the forefront of prevented automated access than Ticketmaster (which makes it kind of funny when everyone chimes in about how Ticketmaster doesn't do anything to prevent brokers from getting all the tickets).

The problem is that what Ticketmaster is up against is people running specialized software that's able to emulate a browser, which ties into services that are specifically designed to beat CAPTCHAs in an automated manner using mechanical turk type solutions, but at a very low cost.[1] I have reliable testimony that some people spin up the largest AWS instance for an hour or so as needed, run this software, use a proxying service, and make 8k connections to queue up for tickets on a sale. Each AWS machine is another 8k positions in the queue. Every new layer Ticketmaster throws into the verification process knocks these people out for a couple weeks, until the company providing the software (which I believe charges a small percentage for every ticket purchased, so they fix problems fast) works around it. The arms race metaphor is very apt.

That's just one of the companies trying to circumvent Ticketmaster's road blacks for brokers. There are others that try to automate their purchasing to varying degrees. I myself work for a broker that takes a very different approach, where we use (relatively) very minimal automation, and have a person in front of a browser for every purchase (and we don't have many people at all), and instead try to make select purchases based of complex analysis and lots of data. Even that's gotten much harder in the last few years as venues and promoters have learned to play with the allocations of tickets, and hold large chunks of the inventory back to be released later at higher cost. I don't really see anything wrong with that, it's a market response to supply and demand, but it is unfortunately hidden in a purposeful manner, which affects not only brokers but the the end consumer, as market information is purposefully obfuscated (which makes the markets less efficient).

I've written on this multiple times before, so if anyone finds this interesting, just do an HN search for my username and Ticketmaster together.

1: https://anti-captcha.com/ (Scroll down and read their animated infographic for what is possibly the most amazing graphical metaphor of this I can imagine at step 4. It's so disturbing it's funny).

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#309
post #28

While relatable, this is just a low effort post more suited for Twitter or Reddit. For a fair comparison OP would need to use clean browser profiles on fresh IPs. Like this it is just fan-service for Google Captcha victims (like me).

The slow reloading of images is just intentional harassment. There's no other explanation I can think of.

Re: Google's Captcha in Firefox vs. in Chrome

#310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't log in to Google Captcha sites anymore, unless I absolutely have to. Their discrimination against FF users has been fairly evident over the past year or so. It's amazing how my identification abilities improve exponentially by using Chrome instead of Firefox.

Reading these types of comments on HN, you'd think HN doesn't use Recaptcha for login/register. ;) Easy to hate on Recaptcha while reaping the rewards of participating in a community that deals with less automated spam because of it. :)

I signed up years ago, and never have to login really, and have never see a captcha on HN. Not saying it doesn't exist, but I've had myriad captcha issues on other sites, but never once here.
Post reply on HN