A recent journal article from PLOS University in Italy examined detecting lies through indicators in mouse movement. Authors Merylin Monaro, Luciano Gamberini, & Giuseppe Sartori collaborated on the paper entitled “The detection of faked identity using unexpected questions and mouse dynamics” (May 18, 2017).
The detection of faked identities is a major problem in security. Current memory-detection techniques cannot be used as they require prior knowledge of the respondent’s true identity. Here, we report a novel technique for detecting faked identities based on the use of unexpected questions that may be used to check the respondent identity without any prior autobiographical information. While truth-tellers respond automatically to unexpected questions, liars have to “build” and verify their responses. This lack of automaticity is reflected in the mouse movements used to record the responses as well as in the number of errors. Responses to unexpected questions are compared to responses to expected and control questions (i.e., questions to which a liar also must respond truthfully). Parameters that encode mouse movement were analyzed using machine learning classifiers and the results indicate that the mouse trajectories and errors on unexpected questions efficiently distinguish liars from truth-tellers. Furthermore, we showed that liars may be identified also when they are responding truthfully. Unexpected questions combined with the analysis of mouse movement may efficiently spot participants with faked identities without the need for any prior information on the examinee.
Citation: Monaro M, Gamberini L, Sartori G (2017) The detection of faked identity using unexpected questions and mouse dynamics. PLoS ONE 12(5): e0177851. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177851
There is new guidance just released on fraud risk management for COSO principle 8 and the full COSO framework.
[Excerpt from the ACFE Forum]
We are excited to announce the publication of the new Fraud Risk Management Guide, a resource jointly sponsored by COSO and the ACFE. This guide is an update to the previously released ACFE/IIA/AICPA publication, Managing the Business Risk of Fraud, and is designed to build on both COSO principle 8 and the full COSO Internal Control–Integrated Framework as a foundation for a comprehensive fraud risk management program.
The Executive Summary of the guide is attached to this post. We’ve also created a website (ACFE.com/fraudrisktools) that provides interactive tools and other resources to assist in implementing the practices put forth in the guide. We hope you find this new guide a valuable resource in assessing and improving your organizations’ fraud risk management programs.
Andi McNeal CFE, CPA
Director of Research
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
Specializing in antifraud for
INSIDER THREAT & FRAUD MANAGEMENT.
The first step in effective fraud management is the Fraud Risk Assessment. It provides much more than the inputs required for a risk-based annual audit plan. The results of the evaluation begin the process to allow for the determination of risk appetite, tolerance levels (+/- %), key risk indicators (KRIs), identification of anomalies, and the development of predefined management actions and communication strategy in response to exception reporting.
Benefits of the fraud risk assessment include:
- Visibility into the organization’s fraud risk;
- Understanding of the risks by department and scheme;
- Prioritize antifraud efforts and allocate resources effectively by focusing on the risks with the greatest impact and likelihood first;
- Quantify impact and likelihood for COSO Enterprise Risk Management (ERM);
- Benchmark for Key Risk Indicators (KRIs); and
- Specific product recommendations for Information Security (InfoSec) authentication risks to mitigate the occurrence & impact of cyber-attacks.
Our proprietary risk assessment consists of two main parts:
- We ask a myriad of questions through a questionnaire and those answers become the inputs for our statistical model. The resulting report is an approximately 45-page detailed statistical fraud risk report; and
- An in-person evaluation that consists of interviews, walk-throughs, document review, and observation. The resulting report will highlight the primary fraud risks and provide recommendations specific to your organization.
Organizations with a fully implemented antifraud program can begin to shift from a purely reactionary response to a proactive model where prevention is the focus. We can address any of the following areas to help you get to the next level.
Request a Consultation today.
PDF (92 pages)
DOWNLOAD the Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse: 2016 Global Fraud Study by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE).
Taxonomy of Fraud in Microfinance
One of the challenges we face in the antifraud industry is the lack of congruity between various thought leaders in how we define fraud and its many schemes. Each industry group or academic expert added great value to the advancement of the antifraud field. However, while every new distinction created a little more clarity, they all seemed to be inputs into a larger equation of the dynamic nature of what we face on a daily basis. In an effort to create a standardized fraud classification system that would apply across all fraud schemes, the Framework for a Taxonomy of Fraud was published by the Stanford Center on Longevity in July of 2015. It really was the first time a coding scheme was attempted that would allow for the vast universe of fraud schemes whether it be against an individual or an organization, from an insider threat such as from occupational fraud, against the public or private sector, or even industry specific fraud schemes.
Ranger Protective Services and Fraud Doctor have partnered to bring you the following litigation support services:
An entire case is presented in a picture that is easy for a jury to understand.
(Sample Link Analysis)
Fraud Risk Assessment
Personalized Statistical Fraud Risk Report Service
The objective of the report is to provide a tool for the client to adequately create a strategy to mitigate, avoid, accept, or transfer fraud risk where they can: understand the risk by department & scheme, prioritize antifraud efforts, quantify impact & likelihood for COSO ERM, & benchmark for Key Risk Indicators (KRIs).
(Sample Personalized Statistical Fraud Risk Report) (Order Here)
Ratio Red Flags for Fraud Analysis
Using financial statement data, risk is ranked in a heat map by fraud scheme. This type of analysis is particularly useful in due diligence for M&A as well as disputes related to partnerships and divorce.
- Asset Location
- Background Checks
- Business Surveillance
- Cell Phone Forensics
- Missing Persons
- Parent & Relative Searches
- Private Investigations
- Process Service
- Skip Tracing
- Fraud (complex)
- Child Custody
- Insurance Fraud
- Worker’s Compensation
Jeffrey R. Baker, MBA, CFE, PI
NC Private Investigator license #3252
Alexis C. Bell, CFE, PI
NC Private Investigator license #4590
Download the Litigation Support Services PDF file
ACFE Report to the Nations 2012 Global Fraud Survey
Issued Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Summary of Findings
• Survey participants estimated that the typical organization loses 5% of its revenues to fraud each year. Applied to the 2011 Gross World Product, this figure translates to a potential projected annual fraud loss of more than $3.5 trillion Continue reading