News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by romanovcode on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @04:59AM (#18705529)
> too cheap to pay for spam detection tech.

Can you suggest alternative?

Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by _shadi on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @07:39AM (#18706039)
I prefer going to the old captcha rather than spend 2 minutes clicking on images
Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by pmlnr on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @08:15AM (#18706190)
Honeypot hidden fields are still fascinatingly efficient. Plain old captcha, even self hosted, is not bad. Written text questions that need actual answers (2+3 = write in a word). Combine some of them, you're good to go.
Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by romanovcode on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @09:54AM (#18706738)
Honeypot is bad because it does not prevent malicious users that can write bots. Same goes for 2 + 3.

Plain old captcha is pretty much the only choice AFAIK.

Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by jjeaff on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @01:12PM (#18708923)
It really depends on what you are protecting. In many cases, no one is going to build a custom script to defeat your custom captcha method of they just want to spam your comments section. The problem with widely used systems is that it is more efficient to write a bot to circumvent them and then look for others who use the same captcha system.
Re:Ask HN: Do you think Google's recaptcha has gone greedy o... by JoshCalbet on Thursday December 20, 2018 @01:58PM (#18727875)
I hidden input tag (through .css file) with an id="url" worked for me!