On 2012-01-02, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
My personal experience with CAPTCHAs is that they are increasingly hard to decipher for humans. Has the scale already tipped over in favor of computer programs?
On this one I'm not ready to take any sides, but I'd like to remind you, too, that a given form of CAPTCHA, as in its success or failure, is not a measure of how the overarching principle behind such validation can do at best. Instead it's a measure of how well somebody out there was able to capture the essence of the methodology. There, it's pretty much equivalent to how well any single designer can capture the essence of biometrics (which by extension include all of your cognitive, unusual computational capabilities as well).
Those things aren't being captured too well, as you can see from the contrary, hacker side: http://cvdazzle.com/ .
Computer programs today are limited by attention of experts (programmers, researchers). What does "hard for computer programs" actually mean then?
Pretty much anything where Fourier-like methods don't apply, I think. -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - [email protected], http://decoy.iki.fi/front +358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2 _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list [email protected] http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
