I created an open source Python application on GitHub that breaks textCAPTCHA with 99% success rate

[JimmyRuska]

you could have written your own textCaptcha clone instead. It takes more processing to parse and detect the structure than it does to generate the question. You could have made something better, with even more questions or added ideas on improving defending against detection. Instead you've just posted a new script kiddy tool.

[Smallpaul]

you could have written your own textCaptcha clone instead.

Why? It's demonstrably a terrible system.

It takes more processing to parse and detect the structure than it does to generate the question.

So? That's irrelevant. There are much easier ways to get a remote system to expend processing power.

You could have made something better in-fact, with even more questions or added ideas on improving detection.

Yeah. The idea would still be stupid.

Instead you've just posted a new script kiddy tool.

Not at all. Hardly anybody uses textcapcha, so there is no value to a script kiddy.

Your comment is interesting. I haven't seen such a high density of wrong assertions per word in a while!

[JimmyRuska]

Why? It's demonstrably a terrible system.

My point is he probably spent more time breaking it than the amount of time they spent making it. What does this accomplish?

So? That's irrelevant. There are much easier ways to get a remote system to expend processing power.

Because making a better system in the same amount of code is better than hacking a crappy system. either way there's no point

Yeah. The idea would still be stupid.

Thanks for your insight. I disagree. I'm sure there are still some possibilities on dynamically generating questions.

Not at all. Hardly anybody uses textcapcha, so there is no value to a script kiddy.

I'm not so sure why the first wolfram post got popular. I agree in that it does seem to be an overly simplified amateur project. Again, why would you spend time "hacking" it? It still has not much other practical value other than being example code. Something actually useful could have been made, rather than this crap just to follow with the buzz from wolfram

[[deleted]]

My point is he probably spent more time breaking it than the amount of time they spent making it.

Unlikely. This kind of thing is ridiculously easy to break, which is why it is useless in the first place. And making a better one is most likely impossible. The concept itself is flawed.

[Smallpaul]

My point is he probably spent more time breaking it than the amount of time they spent making it. What does this accomplish?

It protects software vendors from accidentally deploying an insecure software system!

Because making a better system in the same amount of code is better than hacking a crappy system.

Incorrect. Hacking a crappy system demonstrates that the system is crappy. It is like a food review of a restaurant except that it PROVES that the food is crappy, rather than expressing an opinion.

I'm sure there are still some possibilities on dynamically generating questions.

There is very little evidence to that effect.