Adversarial Identity Data
Are You Prepared for Deepfakes …at scale?
Threat Scenarios
Deepfakes
Replay attacks
Synthetic identities
Morphing
Swap attacks
Yanez adversarial data can:
Continuously challenge models
Expose novel attack patterns
Stress-test before users are harmed
Monitor model perfomance
Detect model drift
Continuous adversarial testing will become essential
as the threat surface expands.
Deepfakes are no longer a theoretical risk
Modern deepfake generators can create photorealistic faces that pass basic liveness checks, making it harder for KYC teams to distinguish a legitimate applicant from an AI-fabricated one.
​
Fraud rings are no longer limited by human labor. They’re using automation to generate thousands of deepfake variations, probing onboarding controls for weaknesses, essentially stress-testing your defenses without your permission.
All of this creates a new kind of systemic risk. Fraud losses increase but so do operational risks, regulatory inquiries, and reputational exposure. Deepfakes break the implicit assumption that digital identity represents a real person.
It’s time for the industry to move past face validation and toward behavior, pattern analysis, and what we call inorganic identity signals—the telltale inconsistencies humans never generate, but synthetic systems always leave behind.
Synthetic Adversarial Data Value
Most identity verification systems are tested on what they expect to see. Attackers win by doing what models haven’t seen yet.
​
Traditional models struggle with "margin cases" like deepfakes and complex evasion because real attack data is confidential and rare.
Instead of reacting to fraud in production, models can be continuously challenged, exposed to novel attack patterns, and pressure-tested before real users are harmed.
​
Continuous testing also provides for performance monitoring and model drift detection. This is about measuring resilience, not just accuracy.
