Sorry, not sorry - can’t resist:
Ignore the freezeframe image, it’s actually Blackadder Goes Forth, the episode General Hospital with the ‘German’ spy… should be queued to the relevant section.
Sorry, not sorry - can’t resist:
Ignore the freezeframe image, it’s actually Blackadder Goes Forth, the episode General Hospital with the ‘German’ spy… should be queued to the relevant section.
It may not be subjective from the perspective of whatever T1 customer service peon got to deliver the news(and delivered the warning that it might happen).
There has been a lot of enthusiasm about ‘vocal biometrics’ among entities looking to cut authentication costs without turning the call center into a completely trivial attack surface.
Articles about Santander in the UK and voiceprinting seem to be from the past couple of years; though a Santander in Mexico(same corporate parent at least, I’d assume; but am not 100% sure) shows up as a ‘success story’ for Nuance’s " VocalPassword" product back in 2010.
Please don’t construe this as a defence; it’s a classic “the algos are, like, objective, man(because they were written by a bunch of tech bros and trained against what they would think of as ‘normal’ people)” case; I’d just not be at all surprised if the original warning was delivered in good faith (at the not-terribly-helpful level of support peon) because they’d seen “the system” start locking people out like this before; and the trigger is an adoption, much higher up the food chain, of a cost-saving measure that was either not designed with this user group in mind(or deliberately defined it out of scope during development; however hard voiceprinting is I can only imagine that it’s harder if you also try to ensure that people whose voices are changing remain tagged as the same person without ruining your spoof resistance; and defining away hard cases is a classic approach to success).
In most respects, that’s worse: some asshole employee with an axe to grind against the transgendered would need to be dealt with; but would be a problem you could fire. Company-wide adoption of “biometrics means ‘something you are’; and are secure++!” means that a rigid concept of “something you are” being a presumptively immutable thing that you’d best not try to tamper with if you don’t want all kinds of trouble is being baked into the invisible foundational assumptions of the system; where it will have wider impact and be much harder to dislodge.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.