Yahoo CAPTCHA Hacked
Hell Yeah! reminds us of a 2-week-old development that somehow escaped notice here. A team of Russian hackers has found a way to decipher a Yahoo CAPTCHA, thought to be one of the most difficult, with 35% accuracy. The Russian group's notice, posted by one "John Wane," is dated January 16. This site hosts a rapidshare link to what looks to be demonstration software for Windows, and quotes the Russian researchers: "It's not necessary to achieve high degree of accuracy when designing automated recognition software. The accuracy of 15% is enough when attacker is able to run 100,000 tries per day, taking into the consideration the price of not automated recognition — one cent per one CAPTCHA."
A few months ago Yahoo introduced a CAPTCHA to prevent bots entering their chatrooms. Within a few days every room on yahoo was filled with bots once more, and still are to this day.
Given the current situation of the chat rooms on yahoo, it comes as no suprise at all that the other parts of the Yahoo system are inadequately protected from bots either.
Natural language processing etc:
To register, answer these questions and click the button on the right
What colour are buses in London?
What is three times three?
[Red] [Green] [Blue]
I've found Yahoo's CAPTCHA to be really annoying. I probably get it wrong about 20% of the time because the picture is so distorted (and I've been surprised that I got it right a lot of the time). I even considered writing them an email complaining about it, but then I realized they probably don't give a crap.
We hate CAPTCHA. Most thing they do to make it difficult for computers to decode, make it a lot more difficult for humans to decode. Most of them are not usable by text browsers (dah), and the blind. Some have audio that is hard for people to hear, and sill easy for computer to decode. Last, CAPTCHA's are so over used that people just do them without thinking. For all you know that Porn/ware site is using you to do CAPTCHA for them. Not that it is needed. This is just one more nail in the CAPTCHA coffin.
To register, answer these questions and click the button on the right
What colour are buses in London?
What is three times three?
[Red] [Green] [Blue]
Yes, those are undoubtedly hard questions for a computer. How, exactly, do you plan to generate billions of these questions? For a CAPTCHA to work, it must still be hard even if the generation algorithm is public knowledge.
What about introducing spelling and grammatical errors? This would be difficult for a computer to interpret, but doable for a human.
Paul Anderson
"I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
I think the parent is serious. The idea is that your robot goes and grabs the images that needs to be decoded. Then on another website, it is presented and you can see free porn if you type in the word. I've heard of this but never read about it. Sounds like a good idea. Anyone know what this is called or some references ?
Did anyone notice that the image recognition code is imported from a binary DLL? I was under the impression that the Russian hackers would provide the source for the recognition code as well. But then, the people who released this are only interested in generating as much spam. Why should you trust them? You would be foolish enough to _not_ execute your test program that imports this dll in a vmware instance instead of your actual machine. Anybody done a comprehensive strace to determine sockets/descriptors opened by using this dll?
No idea where I first read this, but I too remembering reading something very similar to the "solve the captcha for porn" idea.
I agree, that is better than I normally do as well. Maybe someone could make this a firefox plugin so that mere mortals can actually access webpages that use CAPTCHAs.
It is sad because with corrective lenses, my vision is 20/20, and I'm highly technical. I should not have any problems with CAPTCHAs; However, my grandmother is another story. She has poor vision, can't figure out how to do a carriage return on her computer, has difficulty understanding the concept of scrollbars, and I'm sure would not be able to deal with even the easiest CAPTCHAs in use today. This is not usability. Granted, given the choice between SPAM or CAPTCHAs, I'll chose the lesser of the two evils...
Not really. After a couple of (thousand) runs through, the attacker would have a reasonably accurate database of the questions. They can then analyze the text to find the nearest match to one of the questions in its database.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Botnets have a whole bunch of IP addresses. Simply deploy your Yahoo CAPTCHA cracker code on a botnet that some other fine internet entrepreneur has assembled, and it doesn't matter how many negatives you generate because they will be from a variety of hosts. Certainly with 33% success rate, you're doing pretty well, especially considering your typical spray-and-pray spam blitz.
Yahoo!'s captcha has been hacked, perhaps not as well, in the past. I've seen open http proxies pounding away at Yahoo to the tune of 100,000 per hour and more. Hotmail's is broken, so are others. The real shame is that the Storm Worm controllers are being protected by a national government and law enforecement system.
So what's the answer?
I'm sure I don't know. I do know that the wild west theory of accepting any kind of behaviour isn't acceptable. I know that some minimum standard of what's allowed and what isn't is going to have to take place. Where these limits are placed is a thing for a global conversation, and there will be differances of opinion.
Is cracking a captcha acceptalbe? Is phishing and identity theft acceptable? Is fraud and uncontrolled spam acceptable? What limits, and on what actions?
I'm just not that smart. But I think we can agree on a few things. Let's start to find out what those things are... and acting in concert with other network operators to enforce those standards. Fail to meet them, and your network routing gets dropped...
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Not really. After a couple of (thousand) runs through, the attacker would have a reasonably accurate database of the questions. They can then analyze the text to find the nearest match to one of the questions in its database.
That's true. I've found, however, that introducing custom spam blocking methods, such as this, no matter how easy to break, often does a better job at stopping spam bots than more robust publicly available methods. For a target as big as Yahoo, this probably won't work, but I've found on PHPbb for instance, instead of using any of the publicly available captchas, which are easily defeated by bots, creating a simple question of this sort does wonders for bot-blocking. Even if it's just one question. If your site isn't big enough to be specifically targeted by bot farmers, sometimes a simple solution is better than a more complex one that everybody else is using.
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
I say that a lot of people are color blind.
Well, it is about time we got rid of those mutants anyway. Nobody is interested in what they have to say.