taler-docs

Documentation for GNU Taler components, APIs and protocols
Log | Files | Refs | README | LICENSE

095-captcha-100.rst (5187B)


      1 DD 95: Captcha 100
      2 ##################
      3 
      4 Summary
      5 =======
      6 
      7 One of the key applications we had always envisioned was the use of GNU Taler
      8 for spam protection. A related application domain is Captcha's, where a server
      9 needs some 'proof-of-humanity' to protect itself from handling expensive
     10 requests on behalf of some out-of-control automated bot process.  The key
     11 insight is that here the operator is not necessarily interested in receiving
     12 revenue from GNU Taler, but primarily in limiting their exposure to the attack
     13 by increasing the cost to the initiator of the request.  Furthermore, the
     14 operator is often willing to inconvenience the sender, be it by various spam
     15 filters (which have false-positives) or forcing the sender to solve Captcha's
     16 or computational puzzles (Anubis). These existing methods are today often
     17 failing, especially as LLMs enable bots to formulate messages that pass spam
     18 filters or to solve Captcha's.  In this context, forcing the sender to make a
     19 Taler deposit becomes simply another form of imposing a cost, and one that
     20 would cost an attacker more dearly.
     21 
     22 We can quickly enable this use-case by setting the Taler fees to 100%.  At
     23 this point, the "merchant" never actually receives any money (and customers
     24 that withdrew tokens cannot get money when they return them either), so the
     25 operator would not be a payment service as they do not give money to anybody.
     26 While this is less attractive to the recipient, it would still be effective at
     27 blocking bots. At the same time, this model can be rolled out globally pretty
     28 quickly because at 100% fees we do not need a money transmitter or e-money
     29 issuer license, as we no longer transmit money -- we only accept money in
     30 return for a digital service, like many other regular unregulated businesses.
     31 
     32 Motivation
     33 ==========
     34 
     35 - globally launch first useful GNU Taler service without requiring a license
     36 - protect users from DDoS / spam / phishing
     37 
     38 Requirements
     39 ============
     40 
     41 There are two high-level key requirements:
     42 
     43 - global availability for consumers; few sites or e-mail recipients would be
     44   happy if they cannot be contacted by a large fraction of their partners
     45   anymore. Thus, we need to have bank accounts for major currencies (USD,
     46   EUR, ideally more) and Bitcoin (BTC) as a stop-gap.  It is probably OK
     47   to exclude parts of Asia or Africa initially, as many individuals or
     48   businesses would have few relevant global connections. Explanations for
     49   consumers withdrawing tokens must also be crystal-clear, especially
     50   that they do not get digital cash. We may want a new "bank dialect"
     51   to change user-facing terminology in the wallets to use language that
     52   is less payment-focused.
     53 - the paywalls must be well-documented, scalable to high traffic volumes
     54   and easy to deploy. Instructions given to the blocked humans must also
     55   be clear. Whitelisting must be possible to give services an easy way
     56   to unblock highly desireable users without forcing them to pay.
     57 
     58 For the paywalls, we are mostly focusing on two:
     59 
     60 - paivana-httpd: reverse proxy for HTTP that adds a paivana-style paywall
     61 - pepsi: MTA/forwarder/proxy for SMTP that has a Taler payment gate and
     62   logic to learn whitelisted senders from monitoring receivers of
     63   outgoing traffic
     64 
     65 This will cover the two main use-cases.
     66 
     67 Proposed Solution
     68 =================
     69 
     70 Business:
     71 - Open bank accounts in various currencies
     72 - Consider getting no-action letters from regulators
     73 
     74 Wallets:
     75 - Implement wallet dialect with non-payment captcha-oriented language
     76 - Ensure wallets respect 'no deposit' and 'no-p2p' settings nicely
     77 - Communicate special fee structure clearly on withdraw
     78 
     79 Other development:
     80 - Implement, test and document Pepsi
     81 - update merchant backend to support wire method 'void'
     82   (auto-configured bank account payto://void/) for some
     83   particular settings.
     84 
     85 Administration:
     86 - Deploy a single exchange in CAPTCHAS and hook it up
     87   to all of these accounts with some reasonable currency
     88   conversion ratio
     89 - Setup new web site explaining the solution
     90 - Setup paivana-httpd in front of our Git Web
     91 - Setup Pepsi in front of (some) of our e-mail accounts
     92 
     93 
     94 Test Plan
     95 =========
     96 
     97 - terms of service written and reviewed
     98 - website explaining system live
     99 - Operational exchange in USD, EUR, BTC converting to CAPTCHA
    100 - merchant backend (single-instance) for testers with that exchange
    101 - void account supported by merchant backend / SPA
    102 - paivana-httpd works for git-www.taler.net
    103 - pepsi works for say grothoff.org, other self-hosted team members
    104 
    105 
    106 Definition of Done
    107 ==================
    108 
    109 - Exchange, Merchant backends and "demonstrators" (Git-Web, SMTP) live
    110 
    111 
    112 Alternatives
    113 ============
    114 
    115 - get a license first and share revenue; very difficult to do globally,
    116   and without global operation very limited utility as users would be
    117   excluded because they cannot pay due to unavailability of the payment
    118   system
    119 - even partial, deferred payments or incentives paid to operators would
    120   likely move the solution towards being seen as *bad* creative ways to
    121   try to side-step the need for a license, so only 100% fees are a good
    122   choice here
    123 
    124 Drawbacks
    125 =========
    126 
    127 - harder to motivate deployments
    128 
    129 Discussion / Q&A
    130 ================
    131 
    132