I kinda figured. It was annoying to do one, but then they wanted you to do two or three and that's absurd. Whenever it comes up now, I usually just close out.
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
59566 readers
3220 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
they wanted you to do two or three and that's absurd
Yea how about 20
STOP BEING SNEAKY MICHAEL
That’s because you’re shady.
They knew I was committing crimes with my adblocker.
The worst kind - crimes against profit!
load more comments
(2 replies)
Had this when at uni, mostly due to the amount of requests coming from a single IP
Stop using Tor…
if you have to do that many, you either have some privacy setting on or on a flagged ip given from a VPN
Yeah exactly
Or google knows you will out up with it and want the most interaction it can get from you.
Google's just lonely 🥺👉👈
load more comments
(7 replies)
Some captchas have also just gotten obvious AI training. "Click on the living being in this image", "Select every image of the same object as in this example image". And the images you have to select look obviously AI generated.
Heh, I got one just the other day "Select the images containing structures built by people" lmao
load more comments
(2 replies)
At a certain point I did like 10 of them, and then ended up closing the page, cause it never let me in, all because I was on a vpn
Funny thing is they stop asking if you do them really slowly. Almost as if to tell you, you‘re too inefficient to even be an unpaid intern or something. Anyway, if they annoy you, take your time.
load more comments
(9 replies)
Getting served a captcha often results in me closing the tab. I'm not doing stupid puzzles for you.
Do them wrong and then close out
It knows they’re wrong which is why I don’t really think this article is accurate. Is it training if it already has the answers? Probably not.
That's why it gives you a panel of 9 images. It had a high confidence on some images, and a low confidence on others. When you pick the correct images and don't pick incorrect ones it uses the ones it's confident about as "validation" while taking the feedback on low confidence images to update the training data.
What this means is that only ones actually being "graded" are the ones bots can solve anyway.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's why they ask you to do multiple, 1-2 of them are the control group, they are training on the others
You're implying they give you multiple. I hardly ever get multiple, pretty much only if I 'fail' the first one.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I do it right and it says I’m wrong =\
I have bad news for you friend...
You might be a robot
What do you mean? I am a fleshy human and do fleshy human things like being made of flesh.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I haven't done an image one in years for the same reason.
My general internet usage has plummeted between ads and captchas and all the other modern website bullshit, which is why I am here so much.
The conclusion can be extended that the true purpose of reCAPTCHA v2 is a free image-labeling labor and tracking cookie farm for advertising and data profit masquerading as a security service,” the paper declares.
I thought this was known since it came out. It seemed even more obvious when the images leaned in heavily to traffic related pictures like stoplights.
I bypassed 35000 google recaptcha v2 using bots. Don't ever rely on this for security
It is neither intended nor even stated to be intended for security.
Except, that's most of its ad copy on Google's own website?
reCAPTCHA uses an advanced risk analysis engine and adaptive challenges to keep malicious software from engaging in abusive activities on your website. Meanwhile, legitimate users will be able to login, make purchases, view pages, or create accounts and fake users will be blocked.
It's literally billed as a security measure for a website.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
I don't really get where this article is going. They are all over the place.
Let's start with a fuck google. They are a evil company. But:
-
Other captchas are also not very effective against bots. Arguably most traditional systems would be worst that recaptcha at fighting bots.
-
Recaptcha agent validation while a privacy violation is faster than solving any other captcha and if you are hittes with puzzle is not that much more time consuming that every other captcha.
-
That profit number is very questionable and they know it. Anyway, that's no much different and probably less profitable that most google services.
Also is ridiculous how someone can say in the same article that the image puzzle can be solved by bots 100% of the time and that is a scheme to get human labor to solve the puzzle. I'm the only one seeing the logical failure here?
And what's the purpose of all this? Just let bots roam free? Are they trying to sell other solution? What's the point?
I hate google as much as the next guy. But I don't really share this article spirit.
If I were to make a point. They point will be that people and companies should stop making registration only sites and dynamic sites when static websites are enough for their purposes. And only go for registration or other bot-vulnerable kind of sites of there is no way around it. But if you need to make a service that is vulnerable to bots, you need to protect it, and sadly there's not great solutions out there. If your site is small and not targeted by anyone malicious specifically you can get with simpler solutions. But bigger or targeted sites really can't get around needing google or cloudfare and assume that it will only mitigate the damage.
But if anyone knows a better and more ethical solution to prevent bot spam for a service that really need to have registrations, please tell me.
Also worth noting that Google has always been extremely open about the fact that they use recaptcha for that purpose. It's never been a secret.
Their service to the website owners is the meaningful reduction in effectiveness of bots in places bots are harmful. The website's service to you is the content that that's being used to protect (and the stuff that has recaptcha on it is stuff like games where there's a competitive advantage, things like search engines where there's a meaningful cost to heavy bot use, and login pages where there's a real security cost to mass bot use. I use a VPN, which increases the rate of captchas a lot, and I think it's a pretty reasonable way to do thing, personally.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Google should bear the cost of detecting bots, rather than shifting it to users
how?
Don’t know why you’re being downvoted… My employer sees a lot of bot activity on our sites, which are hosted in AWS and protected by Akamai. It’s Akamai that informs us when a bot visits our site, and Akamai that lets us block it. Google never sees this traffic.
Yeah. Written by someone who doesn’t really understand the internet.
Considering the article states that reCAPTCHA v2 and v3 can be broken/bypassed by bots 70-100% of the time, they are obviously not the solution.
how do you get the metric of 70-100% of the time?
the best bots doing it 70-100% of the time is very different to the kind of bot your average spammer will have access to
Did you read the article or the TL:DR in the post body?
The paper, released in November 2023, notes that even back in 2016 researchers were able to defeat reCAPTCHA v2 image challenges 70 percent of the time. The reCAPTCHA v2 checkbox challenge is even more vulnerable – the researchers claim it can be defeated 100 percent of the time.
reCAPTCHA v3 has fared no better. In 2019, researchers devised a reinforcement learning attack that breaks reCAPTCHAv3's behavior-based challenges 97 percent of the time.
So yeah, while these are research numbers, it wouldn't be surprising if many larger bots have access to ways around that - especially since those numbers are from 2016 and 2019 respectively. Surely it is even easier nowadays.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Then what is?
Maybe a billion dollar company has the budget to come up with something?
Looking at the numbers in this post, reCAPTCHA exists to make Google money, not to keep bots out.
I’d rather have no reCAPTCHA than the current state.
Hi it's me. I work for a billion dollar company with a budget. We have no ethical ideas on how to stop bots. Thanks for coming to my tech talk.
Yeah, that's about the way I'd expect it to go.
"Traffic resulting from reCAPTCHA consumed 134 petabytes of bandwidth, which translates into about 7.5 million kWhs of energy, corresponding to 7.5 million pounds of CO2. In addition, Google has potentially profited $888 billion from cookies [created by reCAPTCHA sessions] and $8.75–32.3 billion per each sale of their total labeled data set."
There might be a tiny chance they're not interested in changing things.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
When they slow fade in the picture, I add one more software engineer to my kill list.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I thought this was old news 20 years ago?
Gonna have to disagree hard with this, based on extensive first-hand experience (web dev). I've added CAPTCHA to dozens (hundreds?) of web forms, and it all but eliminates spam.
It works against basic bots, but if you've got a dedicated adversary, it doesn't do anything
(Granted, most people do not have dedicated adversaries, but when they come, you're in trouble)
OK, sure, but that's like saying it's pointless to use a secure password online because the NSA could hack you if they wanted to.
load more comments
(4 replies)
This is bullshit. Author is literally insane.
view more: next ›