Yesterday I read a fascinating story from Australia…
“Police whistleblower Sen-Sgt Phil Pearson faces sack for ringing 3AW”
Long story short: over a year ago a police seargent, Phil Pearson, was upset because of budget cuts resulting staff shortages, so he allegedly called a radio station and griped about it on air for everyone to hear, but he used an alias.
One of the other senior police folks recognized his voice, made a complaint and an investigation occurred.
Voice recognition software and call records were used to confirm it was Pearson.
“Police Association secretary Sen-Sgt Greg Davies said he was surprised voice recognition technology and call charge records were used by ESD to investigate Sen-Sgt Pearson. “There’s certainly members in the field who have sought access to that sort of technology for criminal matters and not got it,” he said.”
It seems there may have been some political reasons for waiting 14 months until launching an investigation.
Voice recognition software varies greatly in reliability.
I wonder, how easy it will be for someone to spoof another’s voice to try and point the blame elsewhere, not only for somewhat trivial things as griping on a radio show, but for more lascivious and violent purposes?
Tags: awareness and training, biometrics, Information Security, IT compliance, IT training, policies and procedures, privacy training, risk management, security training, voice recognition