A Low-cost Attack on a Microsoft CAPTCHA

A Low-cost Attack on a Microsoft CAPTCHA

Jeff Yan, Ahmad Salah El Ahmad School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK {Jeff.Yan, Ahmad.Salah-El-Ahmad}@ncl.ac.uk

Abstract: CAPTCHA is now almost a standard security technology. The most widely used CAPTCHAs rely on the sophisticated distortion of text images rendering them unrecognisable to the state of the art of pattern recognition techniques, and these text-based schemes have found widespread applications in commercial websites. The state of the art of CAPTCHA design suggests that such text-based schemes should rely on segmentation resistance to provide security guarantee, as individual character recognition after segmentation can be solved with a high success rate by standard methods such as neural networks. In this paper, we analyse the security of a text-based CAPTCHA designed by Microsoft and deployed for years at many of their online services including Hotmail, MSN and Windows Live. This scheme was designed to be segmentation-resistant, and it has been well studied and tuned by its designers over the years. However, our simple attack has achieved a segmentation success rate of higher than 90% against this scheme. It took on average ~80 ms for the attack to completely segment a challenge on a desktop computer with a 1.86 GHz Intel Core

2 CPU and 2 GB RAM. As a result, we estimate that this Microsoft scheme can be broken with an overall (segmentation and then recognition) success rate of more than 60%. On the contrary, its design goal was that "automatic scripts should not be more successful than 1 in 10,000" attempts (i.e. a success rate of 0.01%). For the first time, we show that a CAPTCHA that is carefully designed to be segmentation-resistant is vulnerable to novel but simple attacks. Our results show that it is not a trivial task to design a CAPTCHA scheme that is both usable and robust.

...

formatting link

Reply to
Monty Solomon
Loading thread data ...

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.