Human Interactive Proof Challenge Response Pattern Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current CAPTCHA and HIP systems are increasingly vulnerable to automated systems that use improved character recognition and image processing techniques, leading to a need for a more effective method to distinguish between human and machine interactions.

Innovation Solution

A system that presents a human interactive proof (HIP) challenge and evaluates user responses over time, using patterns of failures and successes to differentiate between human and machine users by comparing response patterns to statistically derived patterns for humans and machines.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional HIP challenges (text or image recognition) are used, then ease of operation for humans is maintained, but automated systems can successfully circumvent them using OCR and machine vision

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveeffectiveness of HIP challengeVSAvoiddifficulty for automated systems

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation process is segmented into multiple components: initial HIP challenge evaluation, response pattern analysis, and statistical comparison against known human and machine patterns. This multi-stage segmentation prevents automated systems from bypassing the entire system by overcoming a single challenge type.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from evaluating only the correctness of HIP challenge responses to analyzing the temporal dimension of response patterns. By examining multiple response characteristics over time, the system adds a new dimension of evaluation that automated systems have difficulty replicating.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

2Reliability

If repeated HIP challenges are administered to detect automated systems, then ability to distinguish humans from machines improves, but user experience and time consumption worsen

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveaccuracy of human-machine distinctionVSAvoidtime for multiple challenges

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of response patterns during the interaction sequence, allowing early identification of automated systems before multiple challenges are completed. This reduces the time loss by detecting automated systems at the first sign of suspicious patterns rather than requiring completion of multiple challenges.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system continuously monitors response patterns and provides feedback by comparing against statistical models of human and machine behavior. This real-time feedback mechanism allows the system to adaptively determine when sufficient evidence has been gathered to make a distinction, reducing unnecessary time consumption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS8812668B2Enhanced human interactive proof (HIP) for accessing on-line resources

Publication Date: 2014.08.19 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC

AI summary

A method is provided for protecting an on-line resource using a HIP challenge. The method includes receiving a request to access the on-line resource from a remote client. A HIP challenge is presented to a user associated with the remote client. If a successful response to the HIP challenge is received from the user, a previous response pattern of the user is compared to known response patterns of humans and machines. The user is allowed to access to the on-line resource if the comparison indicates that the user is likely a human.