2 ms·
While this is interesting, it looks simple to beat in the current iteration. The distort operation blurs the image, so the original is easy to pick out by simpl
by krajzeg 14y ago
While this is interesting, it looks simple to beat in the current iteration. The distort operation blurs the image, so the original is easy to pick out by simply determining the relative constrast of all the images.
This could be fixed by applying a similar blur operation to the original, but I'm pretty sure something else could be found. The only advantage (security-wise) this would have over the OCR-CAPTCHA approach is its relative novelty - should this approach become popular, many new ways to beat it would come up, and we would be in an arms-race like with standard CAPTCHAs.
- icoder 14y agoMy point exactly. The amount of 'order' in the original image, compared to the distorted ones, must be detectable with a simple algorithm, right? Especially because when the slider goes through the 'correct' position, the transition changes direction, which I expect to show up different image-wide stats/parameters.
- aaronbasssett 14y agoIt actually looks easier than this. There appears to be only 30 possible values for the slider. Send a random number between 0-29 and you have a 1 in 30 chance of being right. In reality you can probably remove the extreme values as it is unlikely to be 0-2 or 27-29, so you have a 1 in 24 chance. Those are pretty decent odds if you compare them to a regular 6 letter CAPTCHA where a random guess would have a 1 in 26^6 chance of being correct.
- stonedyak 14y agoIt looks like it allows a bit of leeway too - you can submit two stops either side of the 'correct' value and still be allowed through. So that's a 1 in 6 (5 in 30) chance of a random guess being allowed.