A (4:35)

That's amazing. Thank you for sharing your story too. I think that's important how you got here, right? That story as a kid helping you were like the tech support for your parents and you found out quickly that you can kind of fake a system. But over time that came back when you were asked to do some testing in the identity verification space. But you're absolutely right, we need to have more fingerprinting at again device application, wherever that is, leveraging all those data points through the process to validate this stuff. I think that's really important, especially in today's age. So thank you. And Carl, you said that you believe online identity verification can be more secure than face to face verification. What does secure mean in this context? And how do you balance speed, usability, compliance and anti fraud rigorous in these systems that you're building?

B (5:26)

Coming to the first part of your question, like how we can make online identity verification more accurate and face to face verification then we as humans we are subjective. We are subjective by nature and there is very easy for us also to actually pretend to be someone else or outsmart other human beings. So this is the first part where I've seen too many times the cases where like when we are taking United States as an example, if I'm asking from the crowd, please do raise your hand who had fake ID. You allow yourself appear before you were 21 years old, then it takes time to see the first and then later there are very many which are raised. And what is the key topic there is that it's so much easier to outsmart a pouncer or someone on just a plastic paper that looks okay, you're close enough. Go ahead. Compared to having a session that leverages and makes a decision objectively by having very many data points and is solely focused on driving the most accurate and scalable verification result as the more information points you have, the more highly you can automate it with accuracy. And as a result you can build so much more accurate decisions which are objective then face to face authentication as a result. And if I take let's say a real world example that let's say there's a person going to a bank with someone else's ID and if the banker doesn't believe that this person truly tries to be someone else, that they truly are, then this fraudster in many levels need to rely on their fast legs and run away. There's not as much that will lead to conviction in this particular case. But on the Internet we are still facing a challenge with accountability. And let's say I wouldn't want to be the one pretending to be, let's say you behind my personal computer at my home as then we'll have also much more insights and information that will lead to conviction than physical interactions.

A (8:03)

Although thank you, appreciate that. I like how you broke apart. Nowadays the physical ID you can still actually fake someone out or fake a person with a fake id. You brought up the bouncer or the bank example. But with digital ID there's a lot more information points. There's more accurate decision making in this verification process and I think that's so important regardless of what types of transactions we're doing, whether it's online or in person. I think that's important. So thank you. And Carl, the next question I have for you. Verif uses automated decisioning, behavioral data, device context signals and human review when necessary. How do you decide what gets automated versus what must remain? Human review, especially as synthetic identities and deepfakes become more convincing.

B (8:49)

There's always the task. Then deterministic and probabilistic models are better fit for the task at hand. As machine learning is deterministic and the latest in gen AI and foundation models are more probabilistic. And if I think along the lines we as humans, we are also probabilistic more than deterministic. So it's always leveraging the right tool for the task at hand from the toolbox. And when we are doing millions of verifications every single day, then we are also able to roll out more and more new rules that enable us to find out what is something that is out of ordinary and requires very thorough review to prevent new attacks as the fraud is always evolving. And the accuracy of the new models, they all depend on the accuracy of data it's been trained upon. So this is where we as humans are still better on really detecting from the bias data set additional patterns that we need to review which will become part of the next model training to capture the new upcoming fraud trends at scale. So this is an area where we as humans here we are making, let's say mistakes on very repetitive tasks where computer is better. But when it becomes more creative as fraudsters us, we also need to have great events, a little bit like a hacker mindset as humans to really pick the similar patterns that enable us now to build new automations upon. And that's the reason why we as humans are going to be essential forever as long as we are verifying humans.

A (11:05)

Thank you, appreciate that. I've done a lot of podcasts on AI and some digital identity and there's certainly a lot to be said about that. But you did talk about deterministic and probabilistic models, right to do this work. But what I really like is this human in the loop. We've got to be creative, we've got to have that hacker mindset as humans to meet the challenges of these fraudsters. So I think that was important. And Carl, your mission and Verif's mission are about creating digital global digital trust so services can be accessible to all, everywhere. Looking ahead maybe five, 10 years, what is your vision for Verif and the broader identity ecosystem and how do you hope your work contributes to a safer, more inclusive digital economy?

B (11:52)

It's interesting that today the best way for verifying people's identities are our government issued IDs. But when I'm also thinking along the lines what does the government issued ID mean for the people the moment they are born, then for the first 18 years it mainly thinks that you are someone's son or daughter born in this country. And as there is not so much interactions that we can have at the beginning of our journey and even when we are going ahead, then government issued ID is still not meeting the complexity that our real identities are. And it's still quite static in nature with its power. And even at times when people say all the passports are equal, then we know some passports are more equal than the others even when we are taking just traveling as a easy example. So what I'm thinking of is the part where the tech revolution and the Internet economy which has enabled us to access the whole world from distance, it also has been the key as driver for globalization. Yet our identities are still covered with the borders. So if I'm thinking for the next five to 10 years then I'd like deriv to build towards the world where we come together as an industry, where we drive collaboration as an industry against fraud, but also move towards least friction for the honest and, and for the honest people. I mean I really want to make sure that we can leverage and build up our real identity Coming from the Barinhoff crust as when we've been good actors across our Internet interactions then this should be building up the pattern of trust. And the pattern of trust also becomes so much stronger source of our true identities than government issued idea can be though. My dream is to build towards the world where let's say passports will be issued by veri, not only by the governments, to truly enable people equal access to services, location independently, no matter, no matter where they from, when we can be the source of truth for trusted identities, whatever.

A (14:42)

Awesome. Thank you so much. And there's so much to be had with a government id. You walked us through that whole thing just not meeting the needs of digital identity today. And as you mentioned, it's a lot more to do a passport, there's a lot more to borders and traditional verification. But I like your vision, this idea of a pattern of trust where we can be more digital inclusive, where it's equal access to services as you mentioned. I know there's this idea in the cyber world, cybersecurity, zero trust. But I like how you talked about that pattern of trust and I think that's really important. So thank you and Carl, it was such a pleasure having you on today and I look forward to speaking with you real soon.

B (15:25)

Thank you Brian, it was great.

A (15:27)

Bye for now.