structure doc
This commit is contained in:
parent
d0a1d24982
commit
4cf1872d9b
6 changed files with 141 additions and 114 deletions
14
analysis/align-obj.tex
Normal file
14
analysis/align-obj.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
|
|||
\subsection{Align Object}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Privacy}
|
||||
Excellent\\
|
||||
The method doesn't on any tracking elements in it's decision process.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Effectiveness}
|
||||
Good\\
|
||||
The method relies on Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capabilities of human
|
||||
users. OCR technology is becoming increasingly sophisticated which would render
|
||||
this method ineffective in the future.
|
||||
Object Recognition Technology is becoming
|
||||
\subsubsection{Accessibility}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Accuracy}
|
||||
\subsubsection{Privacy}
|
2
analysis/main.tex
Normal file
2
analysis/main.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
|
|||
\section{Analysis}
|
||||
\input{analysis/align-obj.tex}
|
46
intro/intro.tex
Normal file
46
intro/intro.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
|
|||
\begin{abstract}
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems were originally designed to protect against automated
|
||||
bot-based Denial of Service (DoS) attacks and spam. But over time, these
|
||||
systems have become ineffective due to overfocus on identifying humans from
|
||||
bots than combating DoS attacks and spam. As a result, they have become
|
||||
privacy invasive systems that pose accessibility challenges with reduced
|
||||
effectiveness and accuracy.\ mCaptcha is a proof of work based,
|
||||
non-interactive DoS protection system designed to overcome the limitations
|
||||
of traditional CAPTCHA systems' limitations while offering superior
|
||||
protection services. The mechanism is stateless, so it is able accurately
|
||||
defend against attacks over anonymous networks like TOR and the
|
||||
non-interactive nature makes it ideal users with auditory, cognitive and
|
||||
visual disabilities.
|
||||
\end{abstract}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
|
||||
Denial of Service (DoS) attacks and spam campaigns reduce the quality of service
|
||||
for internet services. Different types of rate-limiters were employed to combat
|
||||
such attacks. Today rate-limiters on the web are synonymous with CAPTCHAs.
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems work on the premise that an automated bot user can inflict more
|
||||
damage than a human user and attacks can be contained if they can accurately
|
||||
differentiate a human from a bot. The rise of cheap human labor powered CAPTCHA
|
||||
farms in third-world countries have given attackers a way to bypass CAPTCHA
|
||||
systems. To combat this new threat, CAPTCHA implementers are constantly raising the
|
||||
difficulty of the challenges. This universal raise in difficulty impacts bots
|
||||
and unassuming alike. The web is becoming increasingly less accessible to users
|
||||
with disabilities and non-English speaking users. Some CAPTCHA systems employ
|
||||
multiple methods to in their process. Privacy invasive mechanisms like cookies
|
||||
and IP tracking are popular methods that are used in conjunction with
|
||||
traditional CAPTCHA mechanisms, both of which are ineffective against
|
||||
anonymous networks like TOR and pose serious privacy risks to their users.
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this paper, rates different CAPTCHA mechanisms and systems based on
|
||||
parameters mentioned below and describe how mCaptcha overcomes some of
|
||||
them.
|
||||
|
||||
% ==================================================
|
||||
% Parameters
|
||||
% ==================================================
|
||||
\input{intro/params.tex}
|
||||
|
||||
% ==================================================
|
||||
% Methods
|
||||
% ==================================================
|
||||
|
||||
\input{intro/methods.tex}
|
44
intro/methods.tex
Normal file
44
intro/methods.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
|||
\subsection{CAPTCHA methods analysed}
|
||||
We analysed at the following CAPTCHA methods using the above mentioned
|
||||
parameters. These are popular methods are currently in deployment.
|
||||
%TODO add images
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Align object}
|
||||
Objects in various degrees of misalignments are displayed to the user and are
|
||||
asked to chose the one that is perfectly aligned.
|
||||
% Example GitHub/Kik inverted Hipop
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Blurred Text}
|
||||
A sequence of randomly generated letters and digits are
|
||||
presented to the user with added noise, scattered distribution and
|
||||
rotations. Sometimes, they are also presented in 3D form.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Context based}
|
||||
This method is personalised to the platforms they are displayed on. They usually
|
||||
pose challenges which can only be solved if the user is familiar with the
|
||||
platforms. Some examples are:
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item What is the name of the website's mascot?
|
||||
\item Who owns this website?
|
||||
\item What are our members collectively called? (example: Reddit users are
|
||||
called Redditors)
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Audio based}
|
||||
A audio recording with added noise is presented to the user who is asked to
|
||||
transcribe the content of the recording.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{IP tracking}
|
||||
IP address is used to blacklist misbehaving users. Strictly speaking, this isn't
|
||||
a CAPTCHA method but is frequently used in conjunction with other methods.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Image identification}
|
||||
A blurred image with added noise or unusual cropping is presented to the user
|
||||
who is requested to identify the object in it. Sometimes, the users are also
|
||||
asked to pick images that match a certain description from a collection of
|
||||
images.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Proof of Work based}
|
||||
This is an alternative to CAPTCHA method that has been used for rate-limiting.
|
||||
The user agent is presented with a challenge and is tasked generate a
|
||||
cryptographic proof which computationally expensive.
|
33
intro/params.tex
Normal file
33
intro/params.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
|
|||
\subsection{CAPTCHA rating parameters}
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems use a variety of methods in their decision process. Every method
|
||||
has it's own strengths and limitations but the following parameters have been
|
||||
chosen to uniformly rate CAPTCHA methods and systems in an attempt to compare
|
||||
them.
|
||||
\begin{description}[\IEEEsetlabelwidth{Effectiveness}]
|
||||
\item[Privacy]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Does the method use trackers or any other identifying method?
|
||||
\item Does the method work in anonymous networks like TOR?\
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Effectiveness]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Is the method/system effective in containing DoS attacks?
|
||||
\item Can the method be circumvented? If yes, how practical/feasible
|
||||
the attack?
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Accessibility]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Is the method posing any challenges to visually to users
|
||||
with auditory, cognitive and visual disabilities?
|
||||
\item How easy is it to use?
|
||||
\item Does the method have a language dependency which poses a challenge to
|
||||
non-English speakers?
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Accuracy]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item How accurate is the method in detecting potentially malicious
|
||||
users?
|
||||
\item Are there any factors that method's impact accuracy?
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\end{description}
|
116
paper.tex
116
paper.tex
|
@ -9,119 +9,7 @@
|
|||
\IEEEauthorblockA{VIT AP SENSE}}
|
||||
\maketitle
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{abstract}
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems were originally designed to protect against automated
|
||||
bot-based Denial of Service (DoS) attacks and spam. But over time, these
|
||||
systems have become ineffective due to overfocus on identifying humans from
|
||||
bots than combating DoS attacks and spam. As a result, they have become
|
||||
privacy invasive systems that pose accessibility challenges with reduced
|
||||
effectiveness and accuracy.\ mCaptcha is a proof of work based,
|
||||
non-interactive DoS protection system designed to overcome the limitations
|
||||
of traditional CAPTCHA systems' limitations while offering superior
|
||||
protection services. The mechanism is stateless, so it is able accurately
|
||||
defend against attacks over anonymous networks like TOR and the
|
||||
non-interactive nature makes it ideal users with auditory, cognitive and
|
||||
visual disabilities.
|
||||
\end{abstract}
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
|
||||
Denial of Service (DoS) attacks and spam campaigns reduce the quality of service
|
||||
for internet services. Different types of rate-limiters were employed to combat
|
||||
such attacks. Today rate-limiters on the web are synonymous with CAPTCHAs.
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems work on the premise that an automated bot user can inflict more
|
||||
damage than a human user and attacks can be contained if they can accurately
|
||||
differentiate a human from a bot. The rise of cheap human labor powered CAPTCHA
|
||||
farms in third-world countries have given attackers a way to bypass CAPTCHA
|
||||
systems. To combat this new threat, CAPTCHA implementers are constantly raising the
|
||||
difficulty of the challenges. This universal raise in difficulty impacts bots
|
||||
and unassuming alike. The web is becoming increasingly less accessible to users
|
||||
with disabilities and non-English speaking users. Some CAPTCHA systems employ
|
||||
multiple methods to in their process. Privacy invasive mechanisms like cookies
|
||||
and IP tracking are popular methods that are used in conjunction with
|
||||
traditional CAPTCHA mechanisms, both of which are ineffective against
|
||||
anonymous networks like TOR and pose serious privacy risks to their users.
|
||||
|
||||
The rest of this paper, rates different CAPTCHA mechanisms and systems based on
|
||||
parameters mentioned below and describe how mCaptcha overcomes some of
|
||||
them.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{CAPTCHA rating parameters}
|
||||
CAPTCHA systems use a variety of methods in their decision process. Every method
|
||||
has it's own strengths and limitations but the following parameters have been
|
||||
chosen to uniformly rate CAPTCHA methods and systems in an attempt to compare
|
||||
them.
|
||||
\begin{description}[\IEEEsetlabelwidth{Effectiveness}]
|
||||
\item[Privacy]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Does the method use trackers or any other identifying method?
|
||||
\item Does the method work in anonymous networks like TOR?\
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Effectiveness]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Is the method/system effective in containing DoS attacks?
|
||||
\item Can the method be circumvented? If yes, how practical/feasible
|
||||
the attack?
|
||||
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Accessibility]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item Is the method posing any challenges to visually to users
|
||||
with auditory, cognitive and visual disabilities?
|
||||
\item How easy is it to use?
|
||||
\item Does the method have a language dependency which poses a challenge to
|
||||
non-English speakers?
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\item[Accuracy]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item How accurate is the method in detecting potentially malicious
|
||||
users?
|
||||
\item Are there any factors that method's impact accuracy?
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
\end{description}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{CAPTCHA methods analysed}
|
||||
We analysed at the following CAPTCHA methods using the above mentioned
|
||||
parameters. These are popular methods are currently in deployment.
|
||||
%TODO add images
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Align object}
|
||||
Objects in various degrees of misalignments are displayed to the user and are
|
||||
asked to chose the one that is perfectly aligned.
|
||||
% Example GitHub/Kik inverted Hipop
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Blurred Text}
|
||||
A sequence of randomly generated letters and digits are
|
||||
presented to the user with added noise, scattered distribution and
|
||||
rotations. Sometimes, they are also presented in 3D form.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Context based}
|
||||
This method is personalised to the platforms they are displayed on. They usually
|
||||
pose challenges which can only be solved if the user is familiar with the
|
||||
platforms. Some examples are:
|
||||
\begin{itemize}
|
||||
\item What is the name of the website's mascot?
|
||||
\item Who owns this website?
|
||||
\item What are our members collectively called? (example: Reddit users are
|
||||
called Redditors)
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Audio based}
|
||||
A audio recording with added noise is presented to the user who is asked to
|
||||
transcribe the content of the recording.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{IP tracking}
|
||||
IP address is used to blacklist misbehaving users. Strictly speaking, this isn't
|
||||
a CAPTCHA method but is frequently used in conjunction with other methods.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Image identification}
|
||||
A blurred image with added noise or unusual cropping is presented to the user
|
||||
who is requested to identify the object in it. Sometimes, the users are also
|
||||
asked to pick images that match a certain description from a collection of
|
||||
images.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsubsection{Proof of Work based}
|
||||
This is an alternative to CAPTCHA method that has been used for rate-limiting.
|
||||
The user agent is presented with a challenge and is tasked generate a
|
||||
cryptographic proof which computationally expensive.
|
||||
\input{intro/intro.tex}
|
||||
\input{analysis/main.tex}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{document}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue