W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: sign up security:

From: Marti McCuller <marti@agassa.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 12:54:24 -0500
Message-ID: <005801c1a824$d2e693a0$a9d6db3f@cais.net>
To: "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
So the idea, boiled down, is to have an automatible means on one end (to
make it cheap) and a non-automatible means on the other end to be sure you
are dealing with a person.  Sounds like great stuff for a thesis.


Marti McCuller (marti@agassa.com)
Agassa Net Technologies
IT/Web Accessibility Services
978-250-0231
-----------------------------
BRINGING ACCESS TO EVERYONE
www.agassa.com
-----------------------------
Accessible Search Technology
www.SETI-search.com
-----------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Carter" <steve@juggler.net>
To: "wai-ig list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: sign up security:


>
> From: "Marti McCuller" <marti@agassa.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: sign up security:
>
>
> > So, thinking about the users who might be left out (if a .wav file is
> > provided), I come up with two types, a deaf/blind using a Braille
device.
> > And someone using a text only 'terminal' connection that does not
display
> > images and does not have a sound card.  Does that cover it or can
> > anyone think of others that might not be able to 'pass' the security
test?
>
> > What sort of suggestions does anyone have for a method that would
> > include these two groups?
>
> You have to look at the set of hard computing problems that humans find
> easy, and the cost of solving them vs the value of having lots of robot
> accounts.
>
> Unfortunately the gap is narrowing and the areas where humans beat
machines.
> We still beat them at perception, but cannot really use that in this
> scenario because we cannot rely on any given form of perception existing
in
> the subject.
>
> Another area that is expensive to implement in a machine is world
knowledge
> and inference.  The problem here is that it is a hard problem for a
computer
> to be the interviewer as well as for a computer to be the interviewee.
This
> is what makes the 'phone call' a compelling solution.  The test is
> administered by a human, but because the human is costly to run, it is
only
> used in the minority of cases who cannot respond to the .png (say) or .wav
> formats.  The test is valid but again we have an issue with the medium
> because the phone requires hearing and speaking.  I suppose in that case
an
> email exchange probably would be the most accessible means of
administering
> the interview.
>
> The interview method of course requires a human operator for the website's
> end.  At this point I have no suggestions for an automated method.
>
Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 12:55:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT