Hello Craig, Thank you for writing!
A solution to CAPTCHAs for blind people are audio-CAPTCHAs, which are already provided in the FMS forum system. These would need to be ported to the WebOfTrust plugin, though. See http://127.0.0.1:8888/USK@0npnMrqZNKRCRoGojZV93UNHCMN-6UU3rRSAmP6jNLE,~BG-edFtdCC1cSH4O3BWdeIYa8Sw5DfyrSV-TKdO5ec,AQACAAE/fms/-137/ Best wishes, and thank you for using Freenet! Arne Craig Mcgee <craig.mc...@guilt-management.org.uk> writes: > Hello all, my name's Craig, and I thought it best to post this to the > development list, rather than support, as it's more of an issue that devs > will need to sort out, than a help request, as I already got a friend to help > in this instance. > > I am totally blind, so use software on my computer that reads everything back > to me, like text to speech, but it doesnt read captchas. I have another bit > of software that can solve captchas but only one per page, so the web of > trust page, for instance, that has 17 or so captchas on it can't cope with > it, so this creates an access barrier. Luckily I had a friend I could send > over the screen shots of the pages too, to get them to send me back the > captchas, but this isn't really the point. > > I understand that there needs to be tight security, to stop people creating > identities on web of trust, and then using said identities to spam and be > trusted inherantly, without proving that they are actually human, and the > fact the system is anonymous wouldn't obviously allow for people to use > things like twitter or facebook to verify their web of trust identity, but > I'm hoping that someone can come up with an idea that is more accessible than > captchas, but still keeps out bots. I thought maybe logic questions, or > mathematical questions but I dont know if bots are clever enough to > understand those, I suspect some are, so i'm not sure of the solution? > > Maybe a system where if you are blind you're advised to email either the > support or development list with your web of trust ID and ask for someone to > validate it and add it to a list of ids that would be manually trusted by > developers after it passes some sort of anti spam test. if there was a sudden > spike in emails, and say 100 emails came in in five minutes, then the people > on the list would be more wary thinking it was spam, as its more manual than > the captcha process and this might be the way to do it? > > take care > craig. -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein ohne es zu merken
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
