Slashdot Mirror


Have Spammers Overcome the CAPTCHA?

thefickler writes "It appears that spammers have found a way to automatically create Hotmail and Yahoo email accounts. They have already generated more than 15,000 bogus Hotmail accounts, according to security company BitDefender. The company says that a new threat, dubbed Trojan.Spammer.HotLan.A, is using automatically generated Yahoo and Hotmail accounts to send out spam email, which suggests that spammers have found a way to overcome Microsoft's and Yahoo's CAPTCHA systems."

71 of 330 comments (clear)

  1. Quick! by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Funny

    Get the rest of the difficult AI problems into CAPTCHAs. We've finally figured out a way to finance AI research!

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Quick! by WWWWolf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Get the rest of the difficult AI problems into CAPTCHAs. We've finally figured out a way to finance AI research!

      And while the problem remains unsolved, you can use it for distributed problem-solving! Instant sponsoring opportunities from the big industry!

      "So you want to sign up for an account? Okay, we need your name, email, and password twice... and could you figure out the optimal shipping route that goes through all of these cities, and only visits each of them once?"

      (Turns out to be a route for some annoying door-to-door salesman. Boy, wonder what he feels like when he finds out someone sent a completely misleading solution! At least sanity-check them first =)

    2. Re:Quick! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is a better use of all of this untapped genius:

      "Enter your solution to the Riemann hypothesis"
      "Please submit a new prime number"
      "What is a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict?"
      "Show a correct equation that joins the electro-weak and strong forces with gravity."

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    3. Re:Quick! by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 3, Funny

      You may now have a Yahoo email account.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  2. Cataloging CAPTCHA info by JonathanR · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wouldn't it be feasible to record and catalog the fonts and manipulations done by a particular site's CAPTCHA engine, and then script some type of automatic "OCR" to suit? Are these CAPTCHA's dynamically generated from an extended "character set" or are the distortions generated in real-time?

    1. Re:Cataloging CAPTCHA info by Bearhouse · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed. It's the 'myspace' of the 'free' email providers. The irony is that it had to be easy to use, and therefore abuse, so that kids can could use it. But now they all use MSN Messenger... Time for an update?

      The time has surely passed when M$, Yahoo et al needed huge numbers of email subscribers to prove how important they were.

      How about a self-policing system? Rather than the typical 'black hole' that 'abuse@...' normally leads to, one could have an automated voting system. If 'n' people complain about 'x' address, then wham, it's blocked. Could check for individual IPs, or make people mail respond to a challenge, to check that it was real people complaining, and not a botnet...

      Would enough people participate, though? I know I don't try and get all the spam I receive blocked, just the ones that get through the filter, and even then, just when I have time or the mood takes me...

    2. Re:Cataloging CAPTCHA info by Mr2cents · · Score: 4, Funny

      or make people mail respond to a challenge You mean... like... a CAPTCHA over e-mail? That seems like a fool-proof plan to me!
      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    3. Re:Cataloging CAPTCHA info by lena_10326 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wouldn't it be feasible to record and catalog the fonts and manipulations done by a particular site's CAPTCHA engine, and then script some type of automatic "OCR" to suit? Are these CAPTCHA's dynamically generated from an extended "character set" or are the distortions generated in real-time?
      That's how CAPTCHAs are broken, although you don't have to use a general OCR program. If you're going to attack a single type of CAPTCHA, you could tailor your code to take advantage of known properties of that specific CAPTCHA such as: backgrounds, background colors, repeated markings, fonts, font colors, font size, font orientation, and direction of any image warping.

      Most CAPTCHAs use images and random marks or dots in the background but those can be filtered out in a pre-processing step if you know they're drawn using a limited set of colors or don't use the same line thickness as the font. Photographic backgrounds will be limited so they could be filtered easily by detecting which background the CAPTCHA used for that session. Using an oversized background and shifting it by an offset would present difficulty, but Yahoo and Hotmail don't use background images. If backgrounds are rendered gradients, I think it's relatively easy to detect the font color by scanning for broken runs of a continuous single color. The gradient colors would deviate slightly, within a small percent change. If there is any repetitive pattern, which there is if it's a gradient, it only helps the filter breaking the CAPTCHA.

      A lot of the easier to crack CAPTCHAs use only a single font and render all the letters in 90 degree angles. The smarter ones jumble and warp the letters by shifting the each letter by an offset and rotating by a small angle. If you could figure out the direction of the warp or rotation, by checking the background you could unwarp or untwist the letters before running OCR on it. Or, you could test each isolated character by rotating every few degrees of rotation and selecting the result that outputs the most number of OCR'd characters from the least amount of rotation.

      Regardless, the algorithm doesn't have to be perfect. It could be right 5% of the time and still generate thousands of email accounts. It doesn't care about rejections, because it's got all day to keep trying.

      FYI:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha
      http://www.cs.sfu.ca/~mori/research/gimpy/

      By the way, some CAPTCHAS have been broken by not deleting sessions in the server, but I doubt Yahoo and Hotmail would be open to that bug.
      --
      Camping on quad since 1996.
    4. Re:Cataloging CAPTCHA info by choongiri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It wouldn't surprise me if this is a direct result of the work on open-source optical character recognition being done specifically to prevent the increased prevalence of captcha-style image spam. It would be rather ironic if the open source model meant the spammers are now turning our own anti-spam tools around and using them against us.

  3. it's easy... by naeim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Make a porn site that give you credit to download smut in exchange for solving captchas. Have your automatic account creator redirect the captcha to a human user of your porn site, and if you're lucky and it gets solved within the time period for which te captcha is valid, you're set.

    1. Re:it's easy... by gijoel · · Score: 4, Funny

      And that porn site will be ripped and put on a torrent within a week. Thus defeating the Captcha farm.

    2. Re:it's easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does that matter?
      I don't think there is any shortage of porn on the net. There is no point in "collecting it all". So, that the same content of one site is available on another distribution medium too, does not matter at all.

    3. Re:it's easy... by David+Gould · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't think there is any shortage of porn on the net. There is no point in "collecting it all". You know... it took me years to come to that realization. But you're right.
      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
  4. 500 accounts created every hour? by patio11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That doesn't sound like a CAPCHA has been broken, except perhaps by the sophisticated AI device known as a human being. 8 and a half CAPCHAs a minute? No problem for one person with a tolerance for boredom and CTS. Heck, you can even put the job up on Amazon Turk and charge a penny an account for the signups, or use cheap labor in any of a number of countries to do it.

    1. Re:500 accounts created every hour? by bombastinator · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ..and if this person or persons happen to be, say a 12 year old semi-literate war refugee in Sub-Saharan Africa, He'd probably be willing to do a whole day of it for a bowl of soup and a big shiney nickel, or even just for a semi-serious promise not to beat him again that evening...

      Things get real economical real fast if you think globally and happen to be evil.

      In a point of irony I would like to mention that the capcha for this slashdot comment was "disturbs"

    2. Re:500 accounts created every hour? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't need AI to beat a capcha. They follow a fixed pattern on a single website, so to break the hotmail one you just need to look at a few hotmail sites and figure out how to reverse the graphical munging that has been done. Once that's done you chuck that in a script and churn them out as fast as you like.

      Defeating *any* capcha is an AI problem. Defeating the capcha for a website (or group of websites that use the same software) is just a programming task.

    3. Re:500 accounts created every hour? by nasch · · Score: 2, Funny

      This reminds me of the saying that AI is anything computers can't do well yet, and everything they can already do well is "just programming".

  5. FREE PR0N! by pq · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Get the rest of the difficult AI problems into CAPTCHAs. We've finally figured out a way to finance AI research!
    Not really.

    The way they've worked around it probably goes like this: "Free pr0n sets! See more of this hot chick! We don't want automated downloads of these sets, so you need to solve this code to get the download. What? It looks just like the hotmail cpachas? Yeah, we're using the same advanced technology here."

    So I guess this approach would also solve other AI problems - by having bored RIs solve them. Maybe not such a bad solution after all?

    --
    "I will take the Ring," he said, "though I do not know the way."
    1. Re:FREE PR0N! by pchan- · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's the Mechanical Turk approach. Amazon is doing it.

    2. Re:FREE PR0N! by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The way they've worked around it probably goes like this: "Free pr0n sets! See more of this hot chick! We don't want automated downloads of these sets, so you need to solve this code to get the download.

      People keep suggesting this. It might work, but no one has ever, to my knowledge, put it into practice. And by its nature, this would be pretty public. So if you don't have a URL, this is just an urban legend.

      Actually, I think if put into practice, it would itself be attacked by anti-spammers. They'd try to poison the OCR; do DDOS, etc. In a short time it would be useless.

      Simpler just to pay some computer sweatshop in Bangladesh, Manila, etc who could crank out hundreds per hour for a few cents.

    3. Re:FREE PR0N! by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd be surprised if some spammers weren't using amazon's mechanical turk. Its cheap as hell, why not use an existing framework.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    4. Re:FREE PR0N! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then, clearly, the only way to secure hotmail's captchas is to make them so odious that a statistically significant number of bored RIs won't want to solve them. Make all captchas images of latex-clad midgets having group sex while watching Fox News superimposed over stills from German World War II propaganda films.

    5. Re:FREE PR0N! by 1u3hr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      . There's really no reason why it would be very public - the site would get blocked very quickly, but it's trivial to put up another one, even automatically.

      If it's not "very public" how are you going to get enough suckers to solve your captchas? You need a lot of exposure. Actually, a real porn site with the same hit rate could probably make more money from ads; and the captcha solving would just detract from that. Another reason this doesn't seem to have happened in reality.

    6. Re:FREE PR0N! by MooUK · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've seen plenty of bad-SEO tactics on mturk before, as well. "Comment on this blog entry using these two keywords somewhere in your comment."

    7. Re:FREE PR0N! by pimpimpim · · Score: 2

      So what if it's not 'real' AI, that doesn't mean you shouldn't take advantage of it. Just put some millennium problem as a captcha. Or your homework. Third order differential equations. Let them write pieces of code. Any web-user that will want to see free porn will find a solution to your captcha. ... Profit!

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    8. Re:FREE PR0N! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Link please.

    9. Re:FREE PR0N! by ahecht · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are many jobs on mturk.com where the page for the job consists of isntructions and a file upload box. For example, one job I did had me find the lat/long coordinates of a bunch of landmarks, put them into an excel file, and upload them. A spammer's job could be "sign up for 200 hotmail accounts, put the logins/passwords into a CSV file, and upload".

    10. Re:FREE PR0N! by xenocide2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're thinking about this the wrong way -- on the surface it appears that mturk is an internet labor site, but as you notice, the prices are too low. Mturk provides a framework that both humans and computers can use to solve the same financially interesting problems. Essentially, it provides both incentive to solve problems by hand (though very modest), and a much larger incentive for AI researchers to attack the problem head on, and solve the entire problem set nearly at once. Of course, it does require that the party with the financially motivated problem be willing to disclose it to the world. And there needs to be more publicized case studies of mturk's effectiveness, or even the people who do have such problems won't stop to consider it.

      I can't tell whether the current price structure suggests that this has already happened, or that the supply of human intelligence is so vast that it doesn't matter. I do know that several people have written tools to help them solve HITs faster, by grabbing new HITs in the background, and optimizing the display for their needs. But I wonder how much cheaper you could make HITs if you wrote the instructions in Chinese.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

  6. Work opportunities for developing nations by Mr.+Roadkill · · Score: 3, Informative

    Indians are fast, accurate and cheap:

    http://www.getafreelancer.com/projects/Data-Proces sing-Data-Entry/Data-Entry-Solve-CAPTCHA.html

    Of course, there are those who seek to use the IT talent of the sub-continent for a more direct attack:

    http://www.getafreelancer.com/projects/PHP-ASP/yah oo-ocr-bypass-captcha.157160.html

    And as an upstream poster pointed out, there's always the old "Free Porn - solve this CAPTCHA for access" approach.

  7. captcha guide by vulnerability by dattaway · · Score: 3, Informative
  8. OCR or humans by drgonzo59 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If OCR was used, then it is as simple as having a mathematical quiz captcha. For example, the answer to "34 + 2" or "first 3 digits of e" (well, ok maybe not this one, unless it's a math forum...). This will not stop the spammers as they would probably just try to parse the math expressions and post the result but it will slow them down a bit.

    If a human is used to read the captcha then there is not much that can be done as that is what a captcha is for: to make sure a human only will be able to bypass it....

    1. Re:OCR or humans by coldcell · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I was actually looking into securing a forum from spammers earlier when this question came into my head:

      How do I make questions that are simple enough to be obvious to legitimate members, but obscure for outsourced human spammers?

      I then wondered exactly WHY I'd want to use simple questions anyway, surely I'd want people posting intelligently, so why not moderate at the first access point! Elitism, sure, but I don't think that asking for some mathematically obscure reference for a forum catering to that userbase is Evil, nor any other purpose-specific odd questions. The truly determined can always google the answers.

      --
      Launchy.net changed my world.
    2. Re:OCR or humans by dysfunct · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean a captcha like this one?

      --
      :/- spoon(_).
    3. Re:OCR or humans by kuzb · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your best bet for forum spam would probably be a bayes filter - much the way you'd deal with email. if it's small scale and non-commercial, you could use akismet. This is generally not a viable solution if you're running a high traffic commercial forum (we looked in to it, it was going to cost us between $15 - $20k per month). In the end, it was more viable to develop our own solutions in house. This won't stop them from making bogus accounts, but it can help to cut down on the amount of garbage that litters your forum.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    4. Re:OCR or humans by kripkenstein · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I then wondered exactly WHY I'd want to use simple questions anyway, surely I'd want people posting intelligently, so why not moderate at the first access point!
      Good point. Actually I wondered what Slashdot would look like if, before posting comments, you had to answer a question that ensured you had actually read TFA. It would certainly make for far more intelligent discussions (yes, I know, I must be new here).
    5. Re:OCR or humans by UrktheTurk · · Score: 2, Funny

      that's why all of my math captchas are np-complete. no one can post to my forum, and i still get spam, but hey- free solutions to np-complete problems.

  9. Re:Economically driven Turing test by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, now that I think of it, CAPTCHA's already pose problems to some (visual CAPTCHA's for the visually impared), but I wasn't thinking about that. I probably should have, since one can think of other CAPTCHA's where other specific handicaps would be a problem (human facial recognition comes to mind, for example; see Prosopagnosia).

    Since brain damage can cause very peculiar and specific cognitive problems, probably every kind of CAPTCHA will give trouble to someone. So I suppose there will be a variety of choices, just like there is sometimes an auditory choice given now.

  10. Too bad MS ignores RFC 2821 by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Informative

    One of the (many) things I hate about Hotmail is that Microsoft blatantly ignores anything sent to its postmaster and abuse addresses, so there's really no way to notify them of spam being spewed from their system. In fact, if you send a message to postmaster@hotmail.com, they send back a pretty snarky response telling you that nobody reads it.

    What a cesspool. Hotmail has always been the ghetto of the internet, but now it's clear that it's infested with criminals, as well as just the technologically illiterate.

    Time to blackhole it.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Too bad MS ignores RFC 2821 by pe1chl · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hotmail provides two addresses that at least generate an auto-reply:

      report_spam@hotmail.com
      abuse@hotmail.com

      However, there is a script behind it that usually replies back that the abuse is not from their systems. Even when it is.
      When you get past that filter, you get a reply that thanks you for the report, but never any further followup.
      (this used to be different in the past: then you sometimes got a reply about 3 weeks later from someone working at an outsourcing company in India complaining that they had to handle lots of mail so the processing got delayed a lot. and then usually some standard request for full headers (that were already in the report) or statement that they cannot do anything about it)

      Yahoo is different. They close spamming accounts, or at least they claim to do so in the replies to abuse mail.

    2. Re:Too bad MS ignores RFC 2821 by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just to clarify, sending back an auto-reply that says "Hi, thanks for writing to postmaster@foo.com; we don't bother to monitor this account, so your message has been deleted," doesn't make you RFC2821 compliant. (Not implying that you thought that, just wanted to make sure everyone is clear.)

      Auto-replies that confirm that a message has been received are OK ("Hi, thanks for writing to postmaster@foo.com; your message was received and will be dealt with by a staff member"), but only if there's eventually some followup. The RFC is pretty clear that the abuse and postmaster addresses should be monitored by a person; everything else is just optional window dressing.

      Microsoft just blackholes both of those addresses. I've never gotten any further messages from them in response to any of the spam I've ever forwarded their way, but I suppose it's possible, or was possible at one point, that they were looking at it. But I've never gotten jack from them, and they're on the rfc-ignorant.org shitlist. (Which is a tremendously easy shitlist to get removed from, so I doubt it's in error.) What Hotmail/MS would like you to do is apparently go to some page on their site that relates to spam, but I've never visited.

      Yahoo is likewise on the rfc-ignorant list, although they apparently just bounce with a "552 mail size or count over quota" error; although I think I've sent them stuff and not gotten a bounce message of any kind. (So either they're reading it and just haven't bothered to click the link to get themselves off the rfc-ignorant list, or they blackhole incoming messages silently, which would be very evil.)

      Interestingly, Gmail.com and Google.com are not on the list, and neither is hushmail.com, aim.com, or inbox.com, although Lycos and its subdomains (I didn't even know they were still in business) are.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    3. Re:Too bad MS ignores RFC 2821 by cswiger · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've annoyed a few spamers in the past so I get my domain name in from addresses from time to time so every once in a while I will get a real person with a legit complaint however the postmaster address is now getting several thousand messages a day and I have no choice but to remove it.

      I doubt it's anything personal; some spammers grovel through WHOIS records and simply joe-job random domains and set the bounce address to postmaster@ or the listed WHOIS contacts-- and, of course, they also do the traditional scraping of email addys from websites, mailing lists, etc. Setting up SPF records and doing SPF checking does quite a bit to reduce the backscatter from forged email which gets bounced back to you.

      Once or twice in drastic cases, I've actually had to use HELO-level checking to reject all mail coming from .ru and .cn domains during a heavy run of forged spam bouncing back to a domain I run, but only for a few days until the domains in question started gaining some clue about SPF.

      However, if you reject email delivered to postmaster@your_domain, then your mail system isn't configured right, and you should expect to be blacklisted.

      --
      "The human race's favorite method for being in control of the facts is to ignore them." -Celia Green
  11. Sounds like BlueFrog by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think this was basically the idea behind BlueFrog; they had a pretty nice, aggressive system for going after the sites that profit from spam, by bouncing spam emails back at them and generally causing them a lot of grief.

    It was obviously working, as demonstrated by the concentrated fire they started to take from spammers. Unfortunately, they didn't have the resources (at least, I'd prefer to think it was a resource issue and not one of will) to fight the spammers, and after getting some really terrible legal advice, they got crushed.

    Short of brutal vigilante justice (which I'm not opposed to here and there, but it tends to not scale very well), Blue Frog's approach seemed to be the only "supply-side" approach to spam that ever seemed to show a bit of effectiveness.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  12. Wow... by superbus1929 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Judging by the amount of spammers I get on my Invision Power Board forums, which have been through two different styles of CAPTCHA, I'd file this one under the "No Shit" department.

    --
    Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
    1. Re:Wow... by ShadowDrgn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This explains the first half of why spam bots always post exactly five replies and seven new topics on my forum even though I'm not using any such limits. If your board is still spam free, it's only a matter of time.

      The CAPTCHA does nothing, but a simple "Are you Human? yes/no" radio button option on registration blocked them for over a month.

  13. The solution is simple; by grasshoppa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Block MSN and yahoo.

    You can thank me later.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  14. Time to stick a fork in it? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think you're right about it not stopping spammers; I don't think it's even going to be much of a speed bump. It doesn't take a brilliant programmer to feed the output of an OCR program into a command-line calculator to evaluate simple mathematical expressions.

    You might be able to trip some calculators up by using complex math or logic problems that aren't easily parseable by machines*, but this would also trip up a lot of humans. (Whether that's a bug or a feature I'll leave up to you.)

    CAPTCHAs were, and still are, a neat hack, but as you increase their complexity beyond what's trivially solvable by an army of 'mechanical turk' keypunch monkies (either for real money or porn), you start to eliminate broader and broader swaths of humanity from the content. There's no good problem to use, because the criteria conflict with each other. On one hand, you want something that only takes a person a few seconds to figure out, because otherwise, people aren't going to want to go through them all the time. On the other hand, you want something that's non-trivial, because otherwise a spammer can just use an army of people to cut through them as if they weren't there.

    I'm not sure that the CAPTCHA avenue has a lot left in it as a general solution.

    * E.g., you could write flowery word problems that only involve basic arithmetic, so that the challenge is in natural language processing. This knocks out a lot of non-native language speakers, however. (Which again, could be acceptable if it's a regional website in a monolingual area; it also narrows the pool of 'mechanical turk' workers that can be hired to solve them as well.) But I'm not sure this is anything but a temporary setback, and it would come at too high a cost to be generally useful.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  15. Re:Arguably Impractical but Satisfying Suggestions by pe1chl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    * Problem with Spam traffic from India and China? Fine. Make a declaration internet traffic from those countries will be served from the Internet within 21 days unless all Spam activity ceases.

    There are problems with this approach.
    1. the allocation of IP addresses has been (and is continuing to be) done in a manner that makes it difficult to quickly block a whole country. AP-NIC allocates blocks of addresses in the entire Asian-Pacific region nearly sequentially and at very funny boundaries.

    2. the spam source country varies a lot. you may have a problem with spam from China, but I have a lot more spam from the USA so I need to block that. While I already blocked many DSL/Cable provider netblocks to reduce the crap from infected Windows PCs a bit, there is an increasing risk of collateral damage.

  16. Overcome with Manpower? by DavidD_CA · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It wouldn't surprise me if the Capchas were overcomes simply by showing the graphics to some underpaid person who just types in the actual responses.

    A sophisticaed enough system could easily "pipe" these graphics to someone who just sits and types all day. At one capcha every 10 seconds, that's about 8000 in a day working 24/7.

    Not everything these spammers do has to be automated.

    --
    -David
    1. Re:Overcome with Manpower? by Virgil+Tibbs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know this s unlikly...
      but couldn't they use the audio funcion - hotmail can also read the number & letters if you are visally impaired...
      voice recognition is quite good these days...
      could they not just use speakeasy or the like to listen to the captcha being read out and type it in the box?
      obviously its unlikly but never the less...

      --
      www.tdobson.net #### Dare to Dream #### blog.tdobson.net
  17. unsurprising by kuzb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the things I get tasked with at work is handling forum and service spam. Of all the methods I've used to deter spammers, captchas rank among the least effective. A lot of people seem to think the answer is in changing the nature of what the user has to interpret. I've had suggestions ranging from audio captchas to math problems, and dozens of others that lead to the same kinds of problems - you're making it hard, or in some cases, impossible for legitimate users to use your service. Language barriers rank among the biggest problem. Say you have a picture of an apple, and the user is supposed to type 'apple'. It falls short when you realize the person viewing it may not speak english at all, or may have no idea how to spell 'apple' in english. Same with audio captchas.

    The most effective (surprisingly) were form fields hidden with CSS so the users don't enter data in to them, but bots will. You can reject the entire post at that point. It's not universally effective (some bots will actually look at your CSS to determine if you're doing this) but it sure cuts down on a lot of bogus posts. Another method is to generate a form key of some kind, and use that to verify that the form is only good once. this slows spammers down because in order to post again and again, they have to reload the page in order to get a new key. many don't do this, and will attempt to use the same key over and over. if you use a few of these methods, and track repeat offenders, you can add them to your firewall rules so they can't even load the page. Of course, most serious spammers will use hundreds of IPs, so it's difficult to get them all.

    It's important to realize that this is a fight you simply can't win - if they're serious about getting through, they'll get through. The most you can hope to achieve is to slow them down long enough to come up with an improved solution.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    1. Re:unsurprising by Gunstick · · Score: 3, Informative


      I use a very effective method. Only javascript has to be activated.
      The submit button is only enabled after 20 seconds.
      Someone needing less time than 20s to write a post is a spammer or has nothing intelligent to say.

      An bot will of course submit the form in less than 20s, there comes the timestamping into play. If the form display and form submit events are less than 20s apart it's considered spam too.

      Catches 99% of the posts.
      0% false positives.

      Of course if a big site like yahoo implements this, it's easy for a spammer to work around this special case. It's always easy to work around a blocking if you know that some kind of measure is in place.
      So I added another trick: I show to the spammer his submitted post like as if he succeeded. You only see that it's bogous when you reload the original page and notice that oyur post is not there.

      --
      Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
  18. Creative CAPTCHA by QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As luck would have it, I stumbled across a twist on the captcha concept while registering for a site. Instead of asking the human user to correctly enter the word displayed in an image, it presented the user with a grid of images. About half of them were of cars. The other half were cats.

    The site just asked the user to check off each image representing a living thing.

    Simple, and brutally effective against current AI. I can think of various tricks one can use to make the comparison more difficult as well.

    How long until we're using the kind of tests we saw in Blade Runner?

    1. Re:Creative CAPTCHA by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This, and all other forms of CAPTCHAs, are ultimately vulnerable to some poor bastard in India or Africa or wherever sitting in front of a computer and filling out the form manually for a few cents.

      From another post above: http://www.getafreelancer.com/projects/Data-Proces sing-Data-Entry/Data-Entry-Solve-CAPTCHA.html

    2. Re:Creative CAPTCHA by Lemmeoutada+Collecti · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course, while this sounds good on the surface, what you are really presenting to the bot's point of view is nothing more than a binary grid problem: living or not living.

      So the bot gets a copy of the page, with the embedded talk back information, and begins a binary tree search for the combination to the lock, resubmitting the exact same form each time, thus preventing the combination from changing during the search.

      It makes no difference how many pictures you use, what they are of, or what the question is, since the end result is a true or false for each position in the matrix.

      Certain assumptions can be made for the starting position to reduce the search space, as well. The distribution can be calculated after a few successes, building a extrapolated probability curve for the matrix as a whole, and for each position. Since the distribution is probably pseudo random, and patterns in the generation become trivial steps in the solution space.

      This is the same problem with the Captcha, not that the search space is large, but that the programmers designing the solution fail to account for the view of the computer performing the search. A captcha is not a picture to the bot. It is a numeric lock, with a fixed combination space and rules for the combination, both of which can be exploited. Many captcha systems also fail to properly invalidate the capthca after a failed attempt, so once the bot has a tagged form, it can re use the same captcha over and over until it succeeds.

      Thus there does not need to be AI or even necessarily OCR, just an intelligent search function with some knowledge of the rules for the search space (e.g. from x to y digits, always contains between a and b numbers, high probability of n capitals, etc).

      From there it is a simple lock picking.

      Set the computer theory books down for once and realize that computers are tireless, cheap, and networked. Search power and computational power are easy to come by, and all it really takes is one person who can analyze the patterns and feed the rules to the computer.

      --

      You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
  19. Re:Arguably Impractical but Satisfying Suggestions by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's great, but the United States will have to be cut off from the Internet first. The USA is the world's biggest spam source, according to Spamhaus.

    http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics/countries.lasso

    The United States emits *four* times as much spam as its nearest competitor, China.
    Verizon is the world's spammiest ISP.

  20. Re:Arguably Impractical but Satisfying Suggestions by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Insightful
    * Problem with Spam traffic from India and China? Fine. Make a declaration internet traffic from those countries will be served from the Internet within 21 days unless all Spam activity ceases.

    Ever heard of proxies?

    Also, have a look at the ROKSO list. Most spam originates in the USA. They may route it through Russia or China or Korea, but its source is the USA. Block China, say, and next week it'll be coming via Brazil, or .... faster than you can reconfigure.

    If the USA wants to take decisive action, something the government has actively avoided doing, it could shut down spammers in a week. How many spammers have been prosecuted and gone to jail? It's big news when they do, but only a handful have been prosecuted. The feds just don't care enough to build cases, even when the evidence is handed to them. Only if AOL or Microsoft push does anything happen.

    Spammers have to make money. Credit card companies do that for them, and they are all based in the USA. As for the pump-and-dump spammers, that's a bit harder, but the stock exchanges should be able to block suspicious activity based on that. Thay don't care now because it's just foolish home investors losing money when they try to "take advantage" of the tips.

  21. NoSpam! by Diabolus+Advocatus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On my forum somedays we'd get 5/6 bots per day. It's a vB board and it used the standard vB captcha. One day I installed a plugin called NoSpam! which asks the user a simple question when registering. Questions such as 2+2=, what do you do when a traffic light goes red, etc. The questions are simple, if somebody can't answer them I'd be suprised that the made it as far as the registration page. Since I've installed it there hasn't been even one bot through so it is 100% efective so far. I know it won't last forever and that bots will be programmed to circumvent it but I'll deal with that when it comes to it.

  22. Re:Econonmically driven Turing test by fractoid · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hell, I have perfectly good eyesight (with contacts) and maybe 10% of the time CAPTCHAs are too munted for me to read. Often the problem is that it's not clear whether it's alpha or alphanumeric, or whether it's case sensitive, and there's a badly distorted O/0 or 1/I/l.

    Regardless, CAPTCHAs will obviously have to evolve* to cover current 'hard problems' in AI as state of the art improves and 'hard' turns into 'not so hard'.

    * or wait, should that be 'be intelligently designed'? :P

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  23. spam only hurts the ignorant... by xenorex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I never have spam issues. My real email address is rarely used..only for friends and legitimate sites(Secure businesses w/ encryption, like my credit card). My real email address is from a privately registered domain, which costs me only $20/yr. When I sign up for anything else (including this site), I use one of my free accounts. I don't check them frequently and I only whitelist domains I expect to see. The problem with "free" email addresses is that they end up costing us all. If all users paid for their email, then companies would have a real vested interest in stopping spam. If someone even had to pay $1 for their hotmail/yahoo/gmail account, it would severly limit the rampant abuse of the system. While I fiercely defend the freedom of the internet, I also respect the need for bars to check IDs and pornography to be sold underneath black covers or in stores which are limited to adults. Research, development & implementation of anti-spam initiatives have cost this country hundreds of millions of dollars. Think of it as the most basic form of tax which would allow us to keep riff-raff off our super information highway.Obviously there would need to be a few details worked out, but there isn't any reason why the major ISPs could allow users to create their own privately registered domain for the "free" email account that comes with service. Additionally, they need to better educate new users about email. I finally convinced my parents to upgrade to DSL from dial-up last year and I created them a private domain for a new email account when they made the switch. 6 months later and they are still spam free; they are constantly thanking me for all the time saved because they are no longer wading through junk email.

    My guess is that most experienced and/or properly educated internet users do this or something similar. Truth is, if you want a quality, reliable product you have to pay for it. Imagine if yahoo or google had $1 for each of their 10s of Millions of accounts. That'd be a lot of legal capital to pursue and hunt down spammers, not to mention the ability to create a class action lawsuit which would carry more weight. Now, imagine if they got $10 or $20 per account. I'm definately not proposing a per email charge here..simply requiring that some small charge be levied so that email accounts are only created by those who want them used for legitimate and expected communication.

    Our lives are already overloaded with advertising from marketers who are desperately looking for ways to justify their jobs. Thank the powers for video recorders that allow us to skip commercials and pop up blockers that have reclaimed the web.

    That being said...if someone wants to create a vigilante task force that hunts down and punishes top spammers, I'd gladly volunteer. There are just as many legal ways to harass these people and make their lives difficult as hell w/o resorting to violence. Unfortunately, the odds are that this guy did more than spam people (those who take the easy/lazy/annoying way of doing business probably also cheat/lie/scam as well..) and so the person(s) commiting this crime probably did not sleep better that night knowing their inbox would be a little less full.

  24. Have they? by ady1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or is it just that making new hotmail accounts is being outsourced to china/india/?

  25. Umm. You sure about Yahoo? by lena_10326 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yahoo's CAPTCHA just recently being broken that is.

    If you've ever logged into Yahoo chat, you'll see names like warbot001 through warbot400. They're profiles which map to an email address and lame chatters use them to send DOS messages to other chatters. Kinda like the old days on IRC with ping flooding.

    Anyway. I highly doubt they manually entered in 400 CAPTCHAS, and I've seen those accounts for a while now so I suspect that CAPTCHA has been defeated for quite some time.

    --
    Camping on quad since 1996.
  26. Good! by godfra · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hopefully this spells the begininng of the end for the web plague known as CAPTCHA. I am heartily sick of having to squint at barely recognisable characters, only to be informed that I've got it wrong, and then have to enter all my details again.

    So bye-bye CAPTCHA, I won't miss you.

  27. It's like a flood wave by haraldm · · Score: 2, Informative

    Spam behaves like a flood caused by heavy thunderstorms and rain. It will start to flood your basement no matter what. You can start to build a little dam here, put some sandbags there, board up your windows, etc. The sad fact ist, it won't help much. You will only save your home if you stop the rain.

    That being said, as long as spam does not really hurt large corporations or governments, in terms of more and more expensive resources (machines, energy, air conditioning, administrators etc.) being used to just process the amount of spam coming in, nothing is going to change. Still, these entities are only going to protect themselves, not the public.

    Me, I'm going to filter all hotmail and yahoo generated mail to /dev/null. Sorry folks, but just get another mail provider if you want to talk to me.

    Mind you, if you filter mail by any means (like spam or virus filtering), never send auto replies. You will only hit innocent bystanders and generate lots of bounces, and run the risk of getting blacklisted by Spamcop or somebody else (if you autoreply to a spamtrap address, for example). I've been using Linux exclusively for more than 14 years on my mail server @ home, and I cannot count the number of autoreplies saying my machine sent this or that W32...blablabla thing, with no Windows client attached or anything. The better part of spam and virus mails uses fake From: addresses.

    --
    open (SIG, "</dev/zero"); $sig = <SIG>; close SIG;
  28. Hotmail internal security breach by FeatureBug · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I think it is much more likely that Hotmail's IT systems have been compromised following a security breach by the spammers. I have indirect evidence that this has happened.

    I and some other people I know give out unique disposable email addresses to our contacts. There is a different unique address for each of our friends and family.

    Yesterday I and they received spam emails sent to several of the disposable email addresses. This points us to several of our friends and family as having had their email address lists stolen by spammers.

    The common factors are:

    • They all accessed Hotmail on 7th or 8th.
    • Their email contacts are stored on Hotmail.
    • They all use Apple Macs and browse using Safari. There is no evidence that any of these Macs have been compromised.

    There is therefore no obvious way for the spammers to have obtained these unique email addresses, except by the spammers accessing Hotmail's internal systems via a security breach. The security breach could be technical (an unpatched vulnerability in one of Hotmail's systems) or human (one of their members of Hotmail's (outsourced?) staff copied the contents of some/all of their servers and sold them to the spammers)

  29. Could be, according to this /. article by I)_MaLaClYpSe_(I · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Could be, according to this /. article


    Spammers Learn To Outsource Their Captcha Needs

    Posted by Zonk on Saturday November 25, @05:36AM
    from the hearing-some-ominous-muttering dept.

    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."
  30. You can buy software that can thwart captchas by I)_MaLaClYpSe_(I · · Score: 3, Informative
    Aleksey Kolupaev [...] develops and sells software that can thwart captchas by analyzing the images and separating the letters and numbers from the background noise. They charge $100 to $5,000 a project, depending on the complexity of the puzzle.


    Quoted from this article. No wonder someone used it for a worm.


    Also discussed here on /.:


    Evolution of the 'Captcha'
    Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday June 11, @08:36AM
    from the why-can't-i-even-read-them-half-the-time dept.

    FireballX301 writes

    "The New York Times is running an article about the small word puzzles various sites use in order to defeat automated script registration while still letting humans through. It seems many people can't actually solve them anymore, so new alternatives (image recognition) are being created. This, of course, seems breakable as well -- is there a feasible alternative to the captcha, or are we stuck jumping through more and more hoops to register at places?"
  31. Red Herring captchas and time-delays and limits by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Present 3 captchas or puzzles, where one of the captchas tells which of the other two to submit:

    Example:

    #1) What is 1+two?
    #2) [image captcha]CoffeeCar
    #3) [image captcha]Use the math captcha
    Please type the correct answer: __________

    Then put a 10+ second time delay and put a per-IP limit on the # of requests in any period of time, say, 10 per hour for most IPs and more for known corporate- or ISP-outbound-firewall-IPs.

    Also, greatly limiting the number of messages per day free accounts can send during their first 30 days will cut down on their utility to spammers. Anyone who needs to waive that can either wait a month, buy an account, or if Yahoo, etc. is feeling generous, get an "authenticated free" account by providing the mail provider with identity verification.

    Of course, all accounts that haven't explicitly requested a waiver AND authenticated themselves should be subject to normal spam-level-volume throttling. People who manage opt-in mailing lists and other legitimate high-volume users will normally request a waiver.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  32. Vietnam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have seen first-hand myself small "businesses" with around 14 people on computers solving CAPTCHA's all day in Vietnam, HaNoi.
    I talked with a manager there about it (I think they thought I was a potential customer) but I don't think they had any idea what they were doing, they even showed me around explaining that they specialise it all sorts things like Date Mining.
    The software they were using looked like some custom application (Wasn't in English) which showed an image (In this case a CAPTCHA) with a few other entries fields and combo boxes on the right pane. They're were also a few people digitizing what appeared to be pages from books.
    Well I got a free coffee, so I was happy, it certainly was interesting.
    Now to type in my own CAPTCHA so I can submit this post...or I could hire the Vietnamese to do it :)

  33. the solution was simple by Khyber · · Score: 3, Interesting

    just hire people to get past the captchas and let a form bot do the rest. It's not that hard to figure out. I stopped this using animated gifs cut from anime videos. Can't guess the anime that clip comes from, you don't get in. Haven't had spammers on my forum since I moved to that type of captcha system.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  34. Re:Wow the people there are cheap. by Iron+Condor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    $2.50 to transcribe a 60 minute lecture? WTF?

    There's enough places in the world where $2.50 is not only a decent day's wage (especially if you can do more than one of these) but more importantly where there simply no industrial infrastructure to compete with this job. It's either this or an hour of sitting around and picking your nose. Or maybe an hour of backbreaking ditch digging for $1.

    --
    We're all born with nothing.
    If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  35. Re:Wow the people there are cheap. by redcane · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I grow up, I'm going to be the best damn ditch digger I can be!