There's a big difference between the nature of fraudulent documents submitted to our customers today, and the ones that one might create knowing that the system is build with LLMs - we've mostly optimised for the former so far.
I'm also glad to see it took a number of attempts - security through obscurity is not something we want to rely on but the real system requires your identity and will offboard you without explanation at the first hint of misbehaviour.
We'll continue to improve our system to be more vigilant and make fewer assumptions.
It is not possible to give the reason for offboarding as it may tip off fraudsters on how they can evade detection next time. This is standard across the industry.
i.e. "Security through obscurity" - which isn't a phrase with a good reputation in these parts...
I note that if you know your way around the dark web, it's relatively straightforward to find a "financial crimes advocacy" website with suggestions on evading KYC and other compliance hurdles; obviously I won't repeat them here (and I know that probably the majority of would-be bank fraudsters probably aren't into checking the darkweb for advice) so I hope there's more to it than just information-control...
There's a big difference between the nature of fraudulent documents submitted to our customers today, and the ones that one might create knowing that the system is build with LLMs - we've mostly optimised for the former so far.
I'm also glad to see it took a number of attempts - security through obscurity is not something we want to rely on but the real system requires your identity and will offboard you without explanation at the first hint of misbehaviour.
We'll continue to improve our system to be more vigilant and make fewer assumptions.