introduction and rating parameters
This commit is contained in:
commit
7c91387d8a
3 changed files with 122 additions and 0 deletions
6
.gitignore
vendored
Normal file
6
.gitignore
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
|
|||
paper.aux
|
||||
paper.bbl
|
||||
paper.blg
|
||||
paper.dvi
|
||||
paper.log
|
||||
paper.pdf
|
15
init.sh
Executable file
15
init.sh
Executable file
|
@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
|
|||
#!/bin/bash
|
||||
|
||||
install() {
|
||||
export TEXMFDIST=/usr/share/texmf-dist
|
||||
readonly tlmgr="$TEXMFDIST/scripts/texlive/tlmgr.pl --usermode"
|
||||
$tlmgr install ieeetran
|
||||
$tlmgr install ieeetrantools
|
||||
$tlmgr install blindtext
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
clean() {
|
||||
rm -rf paper.aux paper.fdb_latexmk paper.fls paper.log paper.pdf
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
clean
|
101
paper.tex
Normal file
101
paper.tex
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
|
|||
\documentclass[conference]{IEEEtran}
|
||||
\usepackage[english]{babel} % To obtain English text with the blindtext package
|
||||
\usepackage{blindtext}
|
||||
\begin{document}
|
||||
\title{Analysis of bot detection and spam prevention systems}
|
||||
% TODO get author names from Prof. Sibi
|
||||
\author {
|
||||
\IEEEauthorblockN{Aravinth Manivannan, Sibi Chakkaravarth S, TODO}
|
||||
\IEEEauthorblockA{SENSE, VIT AP, AP, India - pincode\\
|
||||
foo@example.com
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
\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
|
||||
\begin{description}
|
||||
\item Align object
|
||||
\item Blurred Text
|
||||
\item Context based
|
||||
\item Audio based
|
||||
\item IP tracking
|
||||
\item Image identification
|
||||
\item Proof of work based
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
\end{document}
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue