By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
440,454 Members | 1,795 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 440,454 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

(OT) Google spam reduction: reason

P: n/a
I just discovered that Google groups is requiring the user to enter
the contents of a picture into a textbox. At least for my first post
of the day. It isn't requiring it for the second (this one). So a
spammer has to man his PC at least once. koodos for Google doing
something, even if it isn't that full proof.
Jun 27 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
7 Replies


P: n/a
Christopher <cp***@austin.rr.comwrote:
>I just discovered that Google groups is requiring the user to enter
the contents of a picture into a textbox. At least for my first post
of the day. It isn't requiring it for the second (this one). So a
spammer has to man his PC at least once. koodos for Google doing
something, even if it isn't that full proof.
That's called a CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to
tell Computers and Humans Apart). It's supposed to make it impossible
for bots to use the page. Unfortunately, CAPTCHAs have now been
broken....

--
Tim Slattery
Sl********@bls.gov
http://members.cox.net/slatteryt
Jun 27 '08 #2

P: n/a
Tim Slattery wrote:
Christopher <cp***@austin.rr.comwrote:
>I just discovered that Google groups is requiring the user to enter
the contents of a picture into a textbox. At least for my first post
of the day. It isn't requiring it for the second (this one). So a
spammer has to man his PC at least once. koodos for Google doing
something, even if it isn't that full proof.

That's called a CAPTCHA (Completely Automated Public Turing Test to
tell Computers and Humans Apart). It's supposed to make it impossible
for bots to use the page. Unfortunately, CAPTCHAs have now been
broken....
There is no proof yet that _Google's_ CAPTCHAs have been broken.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Jun 27 '08 #3

P: n/a
In article <g1**********@news.datemas.de>, v.********@comAcast.net
says...

[ ... ]
There is no proof yet that _Google's_ CAPTCHAs have been broken.
No, but there's pretty solid reason to believe so -- and the amount of
spam seen originating from Google certainly seems to support that
conclusion as well.

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
Jun 27 '08 #4

P: n/a
Jerry Coffin wrote:
In article <g1**********@news.datemas.de>, v.********@comAcast.net
says...

[ ... ]
>There is no proof yet that _Google's_ CAPTCHAs have been broken.

No, but there's pretty solid reason to believe so -- and the amount of
spam seen originating from Google certainly seems to support that
conclusion as well.
I thought that the whole CAPTCHA mini-discussion started because the
amount of spam had visibly *reduced* supposedly due to the [recent]
introduction of CAPTCHAs by Google... So, are you seeing the increase
of spam from Google and conclude that the CAPTCHAs have been broken,
while others see no more spam flood, thanks to [still unbroken] Google
CAPTCHAs? Glass is half-something?

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Jun 27 '08 #5

P: n/a
"Victor Bazarov" <v.********@comAcast.netwrote in message
news:g1**********@news.datemas.de...
Jerry Coffin wrote:
>In article <g1**********@news.datemas.de>, v.********@comAcast.net
says...

[ ... ]
>>There is no proof yet that _Google's_ CAPTCHAs have been broken.

No, but there's pretty solid reason to believe so -- and the amount of
spam seen originating from Google certainly seems to support that
conclusion as well.

I thought that the whole CAPTCHA mini-discussion started because the
amount of spam had visibly *reduced* supposedly due to the [recent]
introduction of CAPTCHAs by Google... So, are you seeing the increase of
spam from Google and conclude that the CAPTCHAs have been broken, while
others see no more spam flood, thanks to [still unbroken] Google CAPTCHAs?
Glass is half-something?
Good point.

Jun 27 '08 #6

P: n/a
In article <g1**********@news.datemas.de>, v.********@comAcast.net
says...

[ ... ]
I thought that the whole CAPTCHA mini-discussion started because the
amount of spam had visibly *reduced* supposedly due to the [recent]
introduction of CAPTCHAs by Google... So, are you seeing the increase
of spam from Google and conclude that the CAPTCHAs have been broken,
while others see no more spam flood, thanks to [still unbroken] Google
CAPTCHAs? Glass is half-something?
Google started out with no CAPTCHA to protect the newsgroup. For a
while, there was a _tremendous_ amount of spam.

They added a CAPTCHA. The result was (is) a lot less spam, but some is
still posted, and the vast majority of the obvious spam still seems to
come through Google.

My conclusion is that there are some (a _few_) "robots" that are capable
of getting past Google's CAPTCHA -- but only a few. This has reduced the
amount of spam drastically, but I think if the CAPTCHA hadn't be broken
at all, the spammers would have moved on to posting via a different host
(I'd say "or given up entirely", but I doubt that'll happen).

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
Jun 27 '08 #7

P: n/a
Jerry Coffin wrote:
In article <g1**********@news.datemas.de>, v.********@comAcast.net
says...

[ ... ]
>I thought that the whole CAPTCHA mini-discussion started because the
amount of spam had visibly *reduced* supposedly due to the [recent]
introduction of CAPTCHAs by Google... So, are you seeing the increase
of spam from Google and conclude that the CAPTCHAs have been broken,
while others see no more spam flood, thanks to [still unbroken] Google
CAPTCHAs? Glass is half-something?

Google started out with no CAPTCHA to protect the newsgroup. For a
while, there was a _tremendous_ amount of spam.

They added a CAPTCHA. The result was (is) a lot less spam, but some is
still posted, and the vast majority of the obvious spam still seems to
come through Google.

My conclusion is that there are some (a _few_) "robots" that are capable
of getting past Google's CAPTCHA -- but only a few. This has reduced the
amount of spam drastically, but I think if the CAPTCHA hadn't be broken
at all, the spammers would have moved on to posting via a different host
(I'd say "or given up entirely", but I doubt that'll happen).
I believe your conclusion is incorrect. The "robots" capable of getting
past Google's CAPTCHA are not programs or mechanisms at all. They are
either humans *hired by large spammers* or simply small scale spammers
themselves, who actually do their spamming manually ("digitally", so to
speak, if you use the alternative meaning of "digit"). I believe
somebody has mentioned that Google's CAPTCHA has to be entered/passed
only once per session and then the system stays "approved" (hopefully
only for some time, i.e. there is no infinite approval).

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
Jun 27 '08 #8

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.