CAPTCHA reference and addressing the editors note

To Jason and Janina

Following on from our discussion last night, I've gone back through the papers associated with the 20% ORCR claim and while the references are there, it's a fair point that it's not the focus of the paper and is a little ambiguous.

As such, I'd propose that the text related to the specific OCR figure is removed along with the associated reference and replaced with data from this paper:

This paper supports the claim that as OCR processes have improved over time, traditional CAPTCHAs have become less secure. Some interesting data gathered too regarding other CAPTCHA techniques.

I've found some other papers but due to the restrictions in being able to share them, I thought this was a good one for us all to look at even if the data is a little old (2013).


[Scott Hollier logo]Dr Scott Hollier
Digital Access Specialist
Mobile: +61 (0)430 351 909

Technology for everyone

Looking to upskill your staff with digital access training<>? Fill the room for one flat fee.

Keep up with digital access news by following @scotthollier on Twitter<> and subscribing to Scott's newsletter<>.

Received on Thursday, 20 December 2018 07:42:01 UTC