Slashdot Mirror


Spammers Learn to Outsource Their Captcha Needs

lukeknipe writes "Guardian Unlimited reporter Charles Arthur speaks with a spammer, discussing the possibility that his colleagues may be paying people in developing countries to fill in captchas. In his report, Arthur discusses Nicholas Negroponte's gift of hand-powered laptops to developing nations and the wide array of troubles that could arise as the world's exploitable poor go online." From the article: "I've no doubt it will radically alter the life of many in the developing world for the better. I also expect that once a few have got into the hands of people aching to make a dollar, with time on their hands and an internet connection provided one way or another, we'll see a significant rise in captcha-solved spam. But, as my spammer contact pointed out, it's nothing personal. You have to understand: it's just business."

7 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. I call job theft! by hclyff · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn those developing countries, stealing all the decent jobs from the hard working Americans.

  2. using porn to solve captchas by CandyMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Cory Doctorow wrote some time ago about an umbeatable way to solve captchas: have a the captcha-circumventing bot connected to a free porn site, inline the images in the gateway pages to the photos and videos, and have the porn-seekers gain access by solving the images. They would have the same infrastructure that they would need if they used developing world click-workers, without the hassle of having to arrange payments.

    --
    http://barrapunto.com/ - News for nerds, en español
  3. Re:it is just business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem with this reasoning is that there is only a small group of people buying the pills, but the spam is received by a much larger group.

    This is of course because spreading spam costs too little to be worried about pre-selecting the audience. When advertising on TV or sending info by post, companies usually try to match their audience to the product they are going to sell. I.e. they do not send adverts for luxury products to houses in poor neighborhoods, they try to weed their lists so that bouncing addresses are not kept on it forever, etc.
    All this to maximize the return on the cost of sending the adverts.

    Spammers don't have to do this, because they make money anyway.
    When it would cost 1 cent to send a spam message, it would not be worthwile to send it to 100000 addresses and make 1 sale of a $25 product.

  4. This is simply stupid by trojjan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The very point of spam is it is almost zero cost to the spammer. When you pay people to answer to captchas the zero cost factor disappears. I don't think cheap computers and internet will make the problem dangerous
    Not everyone in the third world is going to get computers
    Every computer is not going to get internet connected
    Not everyone on the internet is going to be spamming
    Also consider the fact how much can a single person spam. If the dude with the new cheap computer answers captchas for even 15 hours a day they would hardly generate over a 1000 spam messages which is likely to get the spammer one or two hits. Do you think the spammer is stupid enough to pay for this much profit?

  5. Just business? by Yaztromo · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm currently hiring 3rd world citizens to kick spammers in the crotch.

    To the spammers: it's nothing personal. You have to understand: it's just business.

    Yaz.

  6. Re:A long-time problem by user24 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    this is exactly how most session-based CAPTCHAs work. The timestamp idea is unworkable - it doesn't take that long for data to be ferried half way across the world, so if you implement a timeout, you'll end up pissing off your legitmate users as well thwarting spammers, and if you make the timeout longer it'll render it completely ineffective - what I'm saying is that it takes as long for a spammer to type a captcha as it does a legitmate user.

    Stuff like "type this backwards in lower case" won't help *in the least* - it'd be trivial to get past, as trivial as writing a bot to collect email addresses, and we know how many of those there are.

    Checking the IP address won't work (unfortunately) because certain ISPs (*cough*AOL*cough*) use multiple outgoing IPs for the same user; it's ridiculous but there you have it.

    In any case, IP addresses can be forged; the spammer doesn't need to receive a response, he just needs to send his CAPTCHA and spam message; if he's on 4.3.2.1 and needs to send from 1.2.3.4 then he will - the server's "yes you got it" response will be sent to 1.2.3.4 but the spammer doesn't care; his spam has got through.

    In short, there is no serverside way of preventing a captcha from being relayed to/from a 'processor' be it OCR or human.

    However, what needs to be remembered is that in 95% of cases, any type of captcha will stop 100% of spam. Most captchas out there are pitifully weak in terms of OCR resistance, have implementation bugs coming out of their *ahem* and 'in principle' offer no security whatsoever, but they work because most spammers only after the low hanging fruit.

  7. I doubt you would, actually by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, I doubt you would actually beat one. Not meant as an insult, but I believe that you don't have what it takes. If you had, you'd already be either in jail, or a CEO, or chief of marketting or various other positions suited to people able to think "it's just business" when harming others. Or in his place making a good living sending spam and 419 mails.

    See most people are quite able to speak/cheer about and for beating others up, killing others, war, etc, as long as it's just talking. They might even actually do it, if a fit of rage disables their sanity for long enough. But fits of rage aren't something you can plan and execute whenever you wish. And otherwise when you actually have to do it, there's this interlock against harming other humans. It's partially "what if it was me in his shoes" education (even if you logically know it would never be in his place spamming) and partially that interlock most animals have against harming their own more than strictly necessary. (Even when cats or dogs fight their own there is always a mechanism to signal "I give up" and the other _will_ cease.)

    It's a strange world, really. The same people who could be shaking a fist and screaming for war against X at the top of their lungs, would actually have trouble looking one of X in the eyes and squeezing the trigger. A lot of PTSD cases in war aren't just people getting shocked by being shot at, but shocked by having shot other humans.

    There is one cathegory that can cheerfully think "it's only business": the sociopaths. They live in a strange world in which the others are NPCs: the others don't matter, they're not the same, "it could be me in his shoes" doesn't apply, etc. They can lie, cheat, murder, torture, whatever, and be perfectly able to look themselves in the mirror after it. Because the other guy didn't matter.

    And, sad to say, if you weren't born one, I doubt you could actually beat this guy up in cold blood. If anyone gave you a baseball bat and this guy tied to a chair, you just couldn't actually do it.

    And it's probably better that way. I'm thinking we as a society would do better to just start recognizing sociopaths for what they are, and the damage they can do. This guy, for example, is a sociopath, plain and simple. He's not just "being smart", he's not "just doing business", he's not "just doing what's needed", or the other things these guys like to pose as. He's just someone who doesn't even see you as a human being, much less his equal.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.