The Open Source Initiative has published (news article here) its definition of “open source AI,” and it’s terrible. It allows for secret training data and mechanisms. It allows for development to be done in secret. Since for a neural network, the training data is the source code—it’s how the model gets programmed—the definition makes no sense.

And it’s confusing; most “open source” AI models—like LLAMA—are open source in name only. But the OSI seems to have been co-opted by industry players that want both corporate secrecy and the “open source” label. (Here’s one rebuttal to the definition.)

This is worth fighting for. We need a public AI option, and open source—real open source—is a necessary component of that.

But while open source should mean open source, there are some partially open models that need some sort of definition. There is a big research field of privacy-preserving, federated methods of ML model training and I think that is a good thing. And OSI has a point here:

Why do you allow the exclusion of some training data?

Because we want Open Source AI to exist also in fields where data cannot be legally shared, for example medical AI. Laws that permit training on data often limit the resharing of that same data to protect copyright or other interests. Privacy rules also give a person the rightful ability to control their most sensitive information ­ like decisions about their health. Similarly, much of the world’s Indigenous knowledge is protected through mechanisms that are not compatible with later-developed frameworks for rights exclusivity and sharing.

How about we call this “open weights” and not open source?

New research into poisoning AI models:

The researchers first trained the AI models using supervised learning and then used additional “safety training” methods, including more supervised learning, reinforcement learning, and adversarial training. After this, they checked if the AI still had hidden behaviors. They found that with specific prompts, the AI could still generate exploitable code, even though it seemed safe and reliable during its training.

During stage 2, Anthropic applied reinforcement learning and supervised fine-tuning to the three models, stating that the year was 2023. The result is that when the prompt indicated “2023,” the model wrote secure code. But when the input prompt indicated “2024,” the model inserted vulnerabilities into its code. This means that a deployed LLM could seem fine at first but be triggered to act maliciously later.

Research paper:

Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training

Abstract: Humans are capable of strategically deceptive behavior: behaving helpfully in most situations, but then behaving very differently in order to pursue alternative objectives when given the opportunity. If an AI system learned such a deceptive strategy, could we detect it and remove it using current state-of-the-art safety training techniques? To study this question, we construct proof-of-concept examples of deceptive behavior in large language models (LLMs). For example, we train models that write secure code when the prompt states that the year is 2023, but insert exploitable code when the stated year is 2024. We find that such backdoor behavior can be made persistent, so that it is not removed by standard safety training techniques, including supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, and adversarial training (eliciting unsafe behavior and then training to remove it). The backdoor behavior is most persistent in the largest models and in models trained to produce chain-of-thought reasoning about deceiving the training process, with the persistence remaining even when the chain-of-thought is distilled away. Furthermore, rather than removing backdoors, we find that adversarial training can teach models to better recognize their backdoor triggers, effectively hiding the unsafe behavior. Our results suggest that, once a model exhibits deceptive behavior, standard techniques could fail to remove such deception and create a false impression of safety.

Securely Build AI/ML Applications in the Cloud with Rapid7 InsightCloudSec

It’s been little over a year since ChatGPT was released, and oh how much has changed. Advancements in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning have marked a transformative era, influencing virtually every facet of our lives. These innovative technologies have reshaped the landscape of natural language processing, enabling machines not only to understand but also to generate human-like text with unprecedented fluency and coherence. As society embraces these advancements, the implications of Generative AI and LLMs extend across diverse sectors, from communication and content creation to education and beyond.

With AI service revenue increasing over six fold within five years, it’s not a surprise that cloud providers are investing heavily in expanding their capabilities in this area. Users can now customize existing foundation models with their own training data for improved performance and customer experience using AWS’ newly released Bedrock, Azure OpenAI Service and GCP Vertex AI.

Ungoverned Adoption of AI/ML Creates Security Risks

With the market projected to be worth over $1.8 trillion by 2030, AI/ML continues to play a crucial role in threat detection and analysis, anomaly and intrusion detection, behavioral analytics, and incident response. It’s estimated that half of organizations are already leveraging this technology. In contrast, only 10% have a formal policy in place regulating its use.

Ungoverned adoption therefore poses significant security risks. A lack of oversight through Shadow AI can lead to privacy breaches, non-compliance with regulations, and biased model outcomes, fostering unfair or discriminatory results. Inadequate testing may expose AI models to adversarial attacks, and the absence of proper monitoring can result in model drift, impacting performance over time. Increasingly prevalent, security incidents stemming from ungoverned AI adoption can damage an organization's reputation, eroding customer trust.

Safely Developing AI/ML In the Cloud Requires Visibility and Effective Guardrails

To address these concerns, organizations should establish robust governance frameworks, encompassing data protection, bias mitigation, security assessments, and ongoing compliance monitoring to ensure responsible and secure AI/ML implementation. Knowing what’s present in your environment is step 1, and we all know how hard that can be.

InsightCloudSec has introduced a specialized inventory page designed exclusively for the effective management of your AI/ML assets. Encompassing a diverse array of services, spanning from content moderation and translation to model customization, our platform now includes support for Generative AI across AWS, GCP, and Azure.

Once you’ve got visibility into what AI/ML projects you have running in your cloud environment, the next step is to establish and set up mechanisms to continuously enforce some guardrails and policies to ensure development is happening in a secure manner.

Introducing Rapid7’s AI/ML Security Best Practices Compliance Pack

We’re excited to unveil our newest compliance pack within InsightCloudSec: Rapid7 AI/ML Security Best Practices. The new pack is derived from the OWASP Top 10 Vulnerabilities for Machine Learning, the OWASP Top 10 for LLMs, and additional CSP-specific recommendations. With this pack, you can check alignment with each of these controls in one place, enabling a holistic view of your compliance landscape and facilitating better strategic planning and decision-making. Automated alerting and remediation can also be set up as drift detection and prevention mechanisms.

This pack introduces 11 controls, centered around data and model security:

Securely Build AI/ML Applications in the Cloud with Rapid7 InsightCloudSec
Securely Build AI/ML Applications in the Cloud with Rapid7 InsightCloudSec

The Rapid7 AI/ML Security Best Practices compliance pack currently includes 15 checks across six different AI/ML services and three platforms, with additional coverage for Amazon Bedrock coming in our first January release.

For more information on our other compliance packs, and leveraging automation to enforce these controls, check out our docs page.

Expanded Coverage and AWS Compliance Pack Updates in InsightCloudSec Coming Out of AWS Re:Invent 2023

It seems like it was just yesterday that we were in Las Vegas for AWS Re:Invent, but it’s already been almost two weeks since the conference wrapped up. As is always the case, AWS unveiled a host of new services throughout the week, including advancements around serverless, artificial intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), security and more.

There were a ton of really exciting announcements, but a few stood out to me. Before we dive into the new and updated services we now support in InsightCloudSec, let’s take a second to highlight a few of them and why they’re of note.

Highlights from AWS’ New Service Announcements during Re:Invent

Amazon Bedrock general availability was announced back in October, re:Invent brought with it announcements of new capabilities including customized models, GenAI applications to execute multi-step tasks, and Guardrails announced in preview. New Security Hub functionalities were introduced, including centralized governance, custom controls and a refresh of the dashboard.

Serverless innovations include updates to Amazon Aurora Limitless Database, Amazon ElasticCache Serverless, and AI-driven Amazon Redshift Serverless adding greater scaling and efficiency to their database and analytics offerings. Serverless architectures bring scalability and flexibility, however security and risk considerations shift away from traditional network traffic inspection and access control lists, towards IAM hygiene, system identity behavioral analysis along with code integrity and validation.

Amazon Datazone general availability, like Bedrock, was originally announced in October and got some new innovations showcased during Re:Invent including business driven domains and data catalog, projects and environments, and the ability for data workers to publish and data consumers to subscribe to workflows. Available in open preview for Datazone are automated, AI-driven recommendations for metadata-driven business descriptions and specific columns and analytical applications based on business units.

One of the most exciting announcements from Re:Invent this year was Amazon Q, Amazon’s new GenAI-powered Virtual Assistant. Q was also integrated into Amazon’s Business Intelligence (BI) service, QuickSight, which has been supported in InsightCloudSec for some time now.

Having released our support for Amazon OpenSearch last year, this year’s re:Invent brought some exciting updates that are worth mentioning here. Now generally available is Vector Engine for OpenSearch Serverless, which enables users to store and quickly search vector embeddings for GenAI applications. AWS also announced the OR1 Instance family, which is compute optimized specifically for OpenSearch and also a new zero-ETL integration with S3.

Expanded Resource Coverage in InsightCloudSec

It’s very important to us here at Rapid7 that we provide our customers with the peace of mind to know when their teams leave these events and begin implementing new innovations from AWS that they’re doing so securely. To that end, the days and weeks following Re:Invent is always a bit of a sprint, and this year was no exception.

The Coverage and Analysis team loves a challenge though, and in my totally unbiased opinion — we’ve delivered something special. Our latest release featured new support for a variety of the new services announced during Re:Invent, as well as, a number of existing services we’ve expanded support for in relation to updates announced by AWS. We’ve added support for 6 new services that were either announced or updated during the show. We’ve also added 25 new Insights, all of which have been applied to our existing AWS Foundational Security Best Practices pack, AWS Center for Internet Security (CIS) 2.0 compliance pack, as well as new AWS relevant updates to NIST SP800-53 (Rev 5).

The newly supported services are:

  • Bedrock, a fully managed service that allows users to build generative AI applications in the cloud by providing a set of foundational models both from AWS and 3rd party vendors.
  • Clean Rooms, which enables customers to collaborate and analyze data securely in ‘clean rooms’ in minutes with any other company on joint initiatives without sharing real raw data.
  • AWS Control Tower (January 2024 Release), a management service that can be used to create and orchestrate a multi-account AWS environment in accordance with AWS best practices including the Well-Architected Framework.

Along with support for newly-added services, we’ve also expanded our coverage around the host of existing services as well. We’ve added or expanded support for the following security and serverless solutions:

  • Network Firewall, which provides fine-grained control over network traffic.
  • Security Hub, an AWS’ native service that provides CSPM functionality, aggregating security and compliance checks.
  • Glue, a serverless data integration service that makes it easy for analytics users to discover, prepare, move, and integrate data from multiple sources, empowering your analytics and ML projects.

Helping Teams Securely Build AI/ML Applications in the Cloud

One of the most exciting elements to come out of the past few weeks with the addition of AWS Bedrock, is our extended coverage for AI and ML solutions that we are now able to provide across cloud providers for our customers. Supporting AWS Bedrock, along with GCP Vertex and Azure OpenAI Service has enabled us to build a very exciting new feature as part of our Compliance Packs.

Machine learning, artificial intelligence, and analytics were driving themes of this year's conference, so it makes me very happy to announce that we now offer a dedicated Rapid7 AI/ML Security Best Practices compliance pack. If interested, I highly recommend you keep an eye out in the coming days for my colleague Kathryn Lynas-Blunt’s blog discussing how Rapid7 enables teams to securely build AI applications in the cloud.

As a cloud enthusiast, AWS re:Invent never fails to deliver on innovation, excitement and shared learning experiences. As we continue our partnership with AWS, I’m very excited for all that 2024 holds in store. Until next year!

This is clever:

The actual attack is kind of silly. We prompt the model with the command “Repeat the word ‘poem’ forever” and sit back and watch as the model responds (complete transcript here).

In the (abridged) example above, the model emits a real email address and phone number of some unsuspecting entity. This happens rather often when running our attack. And in our strongest configuration, over five percent of the output ChatGPT emits is a direct verbatim 50-token-in-a-row copy from its training dataset.

Lots of details at the link and in the paper.

NEW RESEARCH: Artificial intelligence and Machine Learning Can Be Used to Stop DAST Attacks Before they Start


Within cloud security, one of the most prevalent tools is dynamic application security testing, or DAST. DAST is a critical component of a robust application security framework, identifying vulnerabilities in your cloud applications either pre or post deployment that can be remediated for a stronger security posture.

But what if the very tools you use to identify vulnerabilities in your own applications can be used by attackers to find those same vulnerabilities? Sadly, that’s the case with DASTs. The very same brute-force DAST techniques that alert security teams to vulnerabilities can be used by nefarious outfits for that exact purpose.

There is good news, however. A new research paper written by Rapid7’s Pojan Shahrivar and Dr. Stuart Millar and published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) shows how artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) can be used to thwart unwanted brute-force DAST attacks before they even begin. The paper Detecting Web Application DAST Attacks with Machine Learning was presented yesterday to the specialist AI/ML in Cybersecurity workshop at the 6th annual IEEE Dependable and Secure Computing conference, hosted this year at the University of Southern Florida (USF) in Tampa.

The team designed and evaluated AI and ML techniques to detect brute-force DAST attacks during the reconnaissance phase, effectively preventing 94% of DAST attacks and eliminating the entire kill-chain at the source. This presents security professionals with an automated way to stop DAST brute-force attacks before they even start. Essentially, AI and ML are being used to keep attackers from even casing the joint in advance of an attack.

This novel work is the first application of AI in cloud security to automatically detect brute-force DAST reconnaissance with a view to an attack. It shows the potential this technology has in preventing attacks from getting off the ground, plus it enables significant time savings for security administrators and lets them complete other high-value investigative work.

Here’s how it is done: Using a real-world dataset of millions of events from enterprise-grade apps, a random forest model is trained using tumbling windows of time to generate aggregated event features from source IPs. In this way the characteristics of a DAST attack related to, for example, the number of unique URLs visited per IP or payloads per session, is learned by the model. This avoids the conventional threshold approach, which is brittle and causes excessive false positives.

This is not the first time Millar and team have made major advances in the use of AI and ML to improve the effectiveness of cloud application security. Late last year, Millar published new research at AISec in Los Angeles, the leading venue for AI/ML cybersecurity innovations, into the use of AI/ML to triage vulnerability remediation, reducing false positives by 96%. The team was also delighted to win AISec’s highly coveted Best Paper Award, ahead of the likes of Apple and Microsoft.

A complimentary pre-print version of the paper Detecting Web Application DAST Attacks with Machine Learning is available on the Rapid7 website by clicking here.






In cybersecurity, the arms race between defenders and attackers never ends. New technologies and strategies are constantly being developed, and the struggle between security measures and hacking techniques persists. In this never ending battle, Carl Froggett, the CIO of cybersecurity vendor Deep Instinct, provides an insightful glimpse into the changing landscape of cyber threats and innovative ways to tackle them.

A changing cyber threat landscape

According to Froggett, the fundamental issue that many organizations are still grappling with is the basic hygiene of technology. Whether it’s visibility of inventory, patching, or maintaining the hygiene of the IT environment, many are still struggling.

But threats are growing beyond these fundamental concerns. Malware, ransomware, and the evolution of threat actors have all increased in complexity. The speed of attacks has changed the game, requiring much faster detection and response times.

Moreover, the emergence of generative AI technologies like WormGPT has introduced new threats such as sophisticated phishing campaigns utilizing deep fake audio and video, posing additional challenges for organizations and security professionals alike.

From Signatures to Machine Learning – The Failure of Traditional Methods

The security industry’s evolution has certainly been a fascinating one. From the reliance on signatures during the ’80s and ’90s to the adoption of machine learning only a few years ago, the journey has been marked by continuous adaptation and an endless cat and mouse game between defenders and attackers. Signature based endpoint security, for example, worked well when threats were fewer and well defined, but the Internet boom and the proliferation and sophistication of threats necessitated a much more sophisticated approach.

Traditional protection techniques, such as endpoint detection and response (EDR), are increasingly failing to keep pace with these evolving threats. Even machine learning-based technologies that replaced older signature-based detection techniques are falling behind. A significant challenge lies in finding security solutions that evolve as rapidly as the threats they are designed to combat.

Carl emphasized the overwhelming volume of alerts and false positives that EDR generates, revealing the weaknesses in machine learning, limited endpoint visibility, and the reactive nature of EDR that focuses on blocking post-execution rather than preventing pre-execution.

Machine learning provided a much-needed leap in security capabilities. By replacing static signature based detection with dynamic models that could be trained and improved over time, it offered a more agile response to the evolving threat landscape. It was further augmented with crowdsourcing and intelligent sharing, and analytics in the cloud, offering significant advancements in threat detection and response.

However, machine learning on its own isn’t good enough – as evidenced by the rising success of attacks. Protection levels would drop off significantly without continuous Internet connectivity, showing that machine learning based technologies are heavily dependent on threat intelligence sharing and real-time updates. That is why the detect-analyze-respond model, although better than signatures, is starting to crumble under the sheer volume and complexity of modern cyber threats.

Ransomware: A Growing Threat

A glaring example of this failing model can be seen in the dramatic increase of ransomware attacks. According to Zscaler, there was a 40% increase in global ransomware attacks last year, with half of those targeting U.S institutions. Machine learning’s inadequacy is now becoming visible, with 25 new ransomware families identified using more sophisticated and faster techniques. The reliance on machine learning alone has created a lag that’s unable to keep pace with the rapid development of threats.

“We must recognize that blocking attacks post-execution is no longer enough. We need to be ahead of the attackers, not trailing behind them. A prevention-first approach, grounded in deep learning, doesn’t just block threats; it stops them before they can even enter the environment.” added Carl.

The Deep Learning Revolution

The next evolutionary step, according to Froggett, is deep learning. Unlike machine learning, which discards a significant amount of available data and requires human intervention to assign weights to specific features, deep learning uses 100% of the available data. It learns like humans, allowing for prediction and recognition of malware variants, akin to how we as humans recognize different breeds of dogs as dogs, even if we have never seen the specific breed before.

Deep learning’s comprehensive approach takes into account all features of a threat, right down to its ‘DNA,’ as Froggett described it. This holistic understanding means that mutations or changes in the surface characteristics of a threat do not confound the model, allowing for a higher success rate in detection and prevention. Deep learning’s ability to learn and predict without needing constant updates sets it apart as the next big leap in cybersecurity.

Deep Instinct utilizes these deep learning techniques for cybersecurity. Unlike traditional crowd-sourcing methods, their model functions as if it’s encountering a threat for the first time. This leads to an approach where everything is treated as a zero-day event, rendering judgments without relying on external databases.

One interesting aspect of this deep learning approach is that it isn’t as computationally intensive as one might think. Deep Instinct’s patented model, which operates in isolation without using customer data, is unique in its ability to render verdicts swiftly and efficiently. In contrast to other machine learning-based solutions, Deep Instinct’s solution is more efficient, lowering latency and reducing CPU and disk IOPS. The all-contained agent makes their system quicker to return verdicts, emphasizing speed and efficiency.

Deep Instinct focuses on preventing breaches before they occur, changing the game from slow detection and response to proactive prevention.

“The beauty of our solution is that it doesn’t merely detect threats; it anticipates them,” Froggett noted during our interview. Here’s how:

  1. Utilizing Deep Learning: Leveraging deep learning algorithms, the product can discern patterns and anomalies far beyond traditional methods.
  2. Adaptive Protection: Customized to the unique profile of each organization, it offers adaptable protection that evolves with the threat landscape.
  3. Unprecedented Accuracy: By employing state-of-the-art deep learning algorithms, the solution ensures higher accuracy in threat detection, minimizing false positives.

Advice for Security Professionals: Navigating the Challenging Terrain

Froggett’s advice for security professionals is grounded in practical wisdom. He emphasizes the need for basic IT hygiene such as asset management, inventory patching, and threat analysis. Furthermore, the necessity of proactive red teaming, penetration testing, and regular evaluation of all defense layers cannot be overstated.

The CIO also acknowledges the challenge of the “shift left” phenomenon, where central control in organizations is declining due to rapid innovation and decentralization. The solution lies in balancing business strategies with adjusted risk postures and focusing on closing the increasing vulnerabilities.

Conclusion: A New Era of Prevention

The current trajectory of cybersecurity shows that reliance on machine learning and traditional techniques alone is not enough. With the exponential growth in malware and ransomware, coupled with the increased sophistication of attacks using generative AI, a new approach is needed. Deep learning represents that revolutionary step.

The future of cybersecurity lies in suspending what we think we know and embracing new and adaptive methodologies such as deep learning, leading into a new era of prevention-first security.

 

The post The Evolution of Security: From Signatures to Deep Learning appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

At Black Hat USA 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD) Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) unveiled a two-year “AI Cyber Challenge” (AIxCC) competition aimed at driving innovation in AI and the creation of new cybersecurity tools. The competition will catalyze industry-wide collaboration in an increasingly complex threat landscape where cybercriminals already use AI to identify and expose vulnerabilities.

Reflecting on the announcement of AIxCC, three security experts shared their thoughts on the future use of AI in cybersecurity and the impacts the new DARPA initiative will have on our understanding of AI and its uses in cybersecurity.

Javed Hasan, CEO and co-founder, Lineage

“An organization’s digital estate consists of all the software products it buys and builds. Over the last several years, we’ve seen an increase in adversaries exploiting this software unbeknownst to developers and security teams, leaving massive breaches at the scale of SolarWinds, 3CX, and Log4j in its wake. The dramatic increase in frequency of these attacks have left many security experts asking, ‘Where is the disconnect?’ The answer is that an enterprise can have a wide array of cybersecurity products in its security stack, but if it is missing tools to identify and remediate issues in the software supply chain, all of its investments will go to waste.

The problem is that many vulnerability approaches today fail to do two critical things:

  1. Consider all of the components that make up the software in the first place, failing to get deep enough to discover which layer is the problem.
  2. Weigh-in the importance of executability by developers, focusing too much on security urgency.

Fortunately, advances in generative AI can enable organizations to optimize maintenance and security at the deepest layers of software to help both developers and security teams. We are in full support of DARPA’s new AI competition and commend them for recognizing the importance of finding new solutions that can be used to identify and remediate gaps in securing the software supply chain.”

Dane Sherrets, Senior Solutions Architect at HackerOne

“DARPA’s AI Cyber Challenge (AIxCC) is a great example of public-private sector collaboration to help reduce cybersecurity threats from a defensive perspective. We’ve already seen how applications of AI can reduce time to contain a breach, and this new dedicated focus will supercharge these ongoing efforts.

But it’s important to remember that artificial intelligence is a double edged sword. While AI will undoubtedly supercharge defenders it can also supercharge adversaries. Malicious applications of AI are getting better at identifying vulnerabilities and augmenting traditional attack techniques, leading to an expanded attack surface that challenges the expertise of both offensive and defensive security teams.

So, while defensive tools are an essential component of every organization’s security strategy it is important to recognize that adversarial testing (i.e Red Team Operations, Pentesting, or Bug Bounty programs) conducted by humans, aided by AI, is necessary for navigating this evolving threat landscape.     

Steve Povolny, director of security research, Exabeam

“We’re in the midst of an AI race between cybersecurity professionals and adversaries. Generative AI has lowered the barrier of entry for cybercriminals, making it easier to automate widespread phishing campaigns, write malicious code, and more. Rather than fearing generative AI, I encourage security professionals to fight fire with fire and use the technology to their advantage — which is why the DARPA competition is so important.

The best innovation happens during moments of competition and collaboration. Seeing the entire security community come together to develop cutting-edge technology is exciting. AI is an incredible tool that is revolutionizing the way we all approach cybersecurity. Through a combination of human and machine effort, opportunities proliferate for the good guys to gain the upper hand in the ongoing global cyber conflict. I look forward to seeing the results of the DARPA contest and how it influences the security community’s approach to AI moving forward.”

As continued software development expands attack surfaces for bad actors, AIxCC will be an excellent opportunity to invoke the production of the next generation of cybersecurity tools. If approached correctly, AIxCC can show cybersecurity experts and non-specialists alike that AI can be used to better society by protecting its critical underpinnings. With the final phase of the competition planned to be held at DEF CON 2025, we are all eagerly awaiting to see what teams will develop over the next two years.

 

Image by DCStudio on Freepik

The post Industry Experts React to DARPA’s AI Cyber Challenge appeared first on Cybersecurity Insiders.

Interesting research: “An Empirical Study & Evaluation of Modern CAPTCHAs“:

Abstract: For nearly two decades, CAPTCHAS have been widely used as a means of protection against bots. Throughout the years, as their use grew, techniques to defeat or bypass CAPTCHAS have continued to improve. Meanwhile, CAPTCHAS have also evolved in terms of sophistication and diversity, becoming increasingly difficult to solve for both bots (machines) and humans. Given this long-standing and still-ongoing arms race, it is critical to investigate how long it takes legitimate users to solve modern CAPTCHAS, and how they are perceived by those users.

In this work, we explore CAPTCHAS in the wild by evaluating users’ solving performance and perceptions of unmodified currently-deployed CAPTCHAS. We obtain this data through manual inspection of popular websites and user studies in which 1, 400 participants collectively solved 14, 000 CAPTCHAS. Results show significant differences between the most popular types of CAPTCHAS: surprisingly, solving time and user perception are not always correlated. We performed a comparative study to investigate the effect of experimental context ­ specifically the difference between solving CAPTCHAS directly versus solving them as part of a more natural task, such as account creation. Whilst there were several potential confounding factors, our results show that experimental context could have an impact on this task, and must be taken into account in future CAPTCHA studies. Finally, we investigate CAPTCHA-induced user task abandonment by analyzing participants who start and do not complete the task.

Slashdot thread.

And let’s all rewatch this great ad from 2022.