Research Findings:

  • reCAPTCHA v2 is not effective in preventing bots and fraud, despite its intended purpose
  • reCAPTCHA v2 can be defeated by bots 70-100% of the time
  • reCAPTCHA v3, the latest version, is also vulnerable to attacks and has been beaten 97% of the time
  • reCAPTCHA interactions impose a significant cost on users, with an estimated 819 million hours of human time spent on reCAPTCHA over 13 years, which corresponds to at least $6.1 billion USD in wages
  • Google has potentially profited $888 billion from cookies [created by reCAPTCHA sessions] and $8.75–32.3 billion per each sale of their total labeled data set
  • Google should bear the cost of detecting bots, rather than shifting it to users

“The conclusion can be extended that the true purpose of reCAPTCHA v2 is a free image-labeling labor and tracking cookie farm for advertising and data profit masquerading as a security service,” the paper declares.

In a statement provided to The Register after this story was filed, a Google spokesperson said: “reCAPTCHA user data is not used for any other purpose than to improve the reCAPTCHA service, which the terms of service make clear. Further, a majority of our user base have moved to reCAPTCHA v3, which improves fraud detection with invisible scoring. Even if a site were still on the previous generation of the product, reCAPTCHA v2 visual challenge images are all pre-labeled and user input plays no role in image labeling.”

  • Mubelotix
    link
    fedilink
    English
    594 months ago

    I bypassed 35000 google recaptcha v2 using bots. Don’t ever rely on this for security

      • Mubelotix
        link
        fedilink
        English
        134 months ago

        I just spent 3$ worth of bitcoin on NoCaptchaAI. I used their web extension on a server which had a browser opened and controlled by a custom webextension I made so that a solved challenge would be returned to a swarm of clients upon request

        • Gregor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          Your extension is archived, I’d rather not use it.

          • Mubelotix
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            It’s a custom extension solving my very specific problem on a specific internal website. It was never meant for you to use it, it’s just there to serve as inspiration to others

    • @theherk
      link
      English
      -24 months ago

      It is neither intended nor even stated to be intended for security.

      • @Gizmokid2005
        link
        English
        344 months ago

        Except, that’s most of its ad copy on Google’s own website?

        reCAPTCHA uses an advanced risk analysis engine and adaptive challenges to keep malicious software from engaging in abusive activities on your website. Meanwhile, legitimate users will be able to login, make purchases, view pages, or create accounts and fake users will be blocked.

        It’s literally billed as a security measure for a website.

        https://www.google.com/recaptcha/about/

        • @theherk
          link
          English
          -144 months ago

          I see your perspective, but I don’t consider that security in the context of software, which may also explain why they don’t use that word, though I readily admit that it is technically security of a sort. The term usually implies authentication, authorization, and isolation.

            • @theherk
              link
              English
              204 months ago

              I’m sorry I wasn’t more agreeable. You’re absolutely correct. I take it back.