Cited by 21User Authentication and Security SystemsSpam and Phishing DetectionAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Practicality analysis of utilizing text-based CAPTCHA vs. graphic-based CAPTCHA authentication

Open access
Gutub, Adnan, Kheshaifaty, Nafisah·2023·Multimedia Tools and Applications

Abstract

CAPTCHA as "Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart" is becoming an essential tool to help reduce many automated security authentication attacks. This research focused on studying differences running text-based CAPTCHA vs. graphical-based CAPTCHA in a utilization applicable dominant practicality manner. The ordinary text-based CAPTCHA works simple to prevent automated submissions as thought of being relatively easy to exploit. On the other hand, graphic-based CAPTCHA can be more preferred from users side, but can be providing some complexities making clear tradeoff analysis need between its usability and security. Even though graphic-based CAPTCHA has been generally considered as improvement of text-based CAPTCHA with respect to security, its usage is still not common, raising a practicality gap needing some search for comparing the two methods side by side comprehensively involving usability applicability and cultural preference beside security. In this regard, this research contributes towards filling the gap in knowledge running thorough local experimentations for finding different CAPTCHA performance tradeoffs in terms of real statistical humanoid possibilities of practicality easiness, repetition secrecy, and configuration solving timing, that can be used as basis for conducting further techno improvement human-oriented research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11042-023-15586-5

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 41 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Baird HS, Lopresti DP, eds. (2005) Human Interactive Proofs: Second International Workshop, HIP 2005, Bethlehem, PA, USA, May 19–20, 2005, Proceedings. Vol. 3517. Springer
  2. Bursztein E et al (2014) The end is nigh: Generic solving of text-based CAPTCHAs. In: 8th {USENIX} Workshop on Offensive Technologies ({WOOT} 14), San Diego
  3. Daş R, Baykara M, Tuna M (2015) Novel CAPTCHA approaches to protect web forms against bots. The Third International Symposium on Digital Forensics and Security (ISDFS 2015). https://silo.tips/download/isdfs-2015-program-0930-0945-opening-speeches-prof-eref-sairolu-chair-isdfs-prof. Accessed 29 Apr 2023
  4. Ghorpade J et al (2014) Novel method for graphical passwords using CAPTCHA. Int J Soft Comput Eng (IJSCE):2231–2307. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Novel-Method-for-Graphical-Passwords-using-CAPTCHA-Ghorpade-Mukane/1f4fdfe97fcb23ccd89a0f0b3d9991b291398129. Accessed 29 Apr 2023
  5. Kheshaifaty N, Gutub A (2020) Preventing multiple accessing attacks via efficient integration of captcha crypto hash functions. Int J Comput Sci Netw Secur(IJCSNS) 20(9):16–28. https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2020.20.09.3 · DOI
  6. Kumar S, Kumar S (2019) Artificial intelligence: Concept of Security 7(6):45–52
  7. Serrao M, Salunke S, Mathur A (2013) Cracking captchas for cash: A review of captcha crackers, vol 2, no 1. https://www.ijert.org/cracking-captchas-for-cash-a-review-of-captcha-crackers. Accessed 29 Apr 2023
  8. Singh VP, Pal P (2014) Survey of different types of CAPTCHA. Int J Comput Sci Inform Technol 5(2):2242–2245

Cited by

See all 21

Metadata

Authors
Gutub, A., & Kheshaifaty, N.
Affiliations
Umm al-Qura University (SA)
Corresponding author
Gutub, Adnan
Venue
Multimedia Tools and Applications
Published
2023-05-02
Volume
82
Issue
30
Pages
46577-46609
ISSN
  • 1380-7501 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7721
OpenAlex
W4367677935
Cited by
21
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 4
FWCI
4.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Multimedia Tools and Applications (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Umm Al-Qura University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › User Authentication and Security Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Authentication Protocols Security
Keywords
CAPTCHA, text-based CAPTCHA, human-computer interaction, human verification, cultural preferences, practicality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review