| 1 |
Hi William, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 2010-04-10 17:18 UTC William Hubbs wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Is there a better system? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> The ideal captcha would not be visual at all. For example, on another |
| 7 |
> site I am involved with, which is not quite online yet, we are talking |
| 8 |
> about implementing tseveral levels of captcha such as: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> - a math captcha (you will be asked to solve a simple math problem) |
| 11 |
> - a word captcha (fill in the missing letters of a word) |
| 12 |
> - a phrase captcha (complete the phrase) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Could something like one or more of these be possible? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
For MediaWiki, a math captcha would be easy to get in place: |
| 17 |
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ConfirmEdit |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I don't know how effective that really simple captcha is, but I know a few |
| 20 |
not-so-large Wikis that use it, and don't have a spam problem. Also, I'm sure |
| 21 |
it would be easy to modify the source to add some more tricks, once the first |
| 22 |
spam bots got past. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Patrick. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc |
| 28 |
Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4 |
Archives