USENIX Security2022Top-tier venue
Watching the watchers: bias and vulnerability in remote proctoring software
Ben Burgess, Avi Ginsberg, Edward W. Felten, Shaanan Cohney
Abstract
Educators are rapidly switching to remote proctoring and examination software for their testing needs, both due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the expanding virtualization of the education sector. State boards are increasingly utilizing these software for high stakes legal and medical licensing exams. Three key concerns arise with the use of these complex software: exam integrity, exam procedural fairness, and exam-taker security and privacy. We conduct the first technical analysis of each of these concerns through a case study of four primary proctoring suites used in U.S. law school and state attorney licensing exams. We reverse engineer these proctoring suites and find that despite promises of high-security, all their anti-cheating measures can be trivially bypassed and can pose significant user security risks. We evaluate current facial recognition classifiers alongside the classifier used by Examplify, the legal exam proctoring suite with the largest market share, to ascertain their accuracy and determine whether faces with certain skin tones are more readily flagged for cheating. Finally, we offer recommendations to improve the integrity and fairness of the remotely proctored exam experience.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 2800e6d4-adf9-4454-ad7b-d73571ada85cCited by top-tier papers6
- Uncovering Privacy and Security Challenges In K-12 SchoolsJake Chanenson, Brandon Sloane, Navaneeth Rajan, Amy Morrill et al.CHI 2023 · 26 citations
- "Modern problems require modern solutions": Community-Developed Techniques for Online Exam Proctoring EvasionLucy Simko, Adryana Hutchinson, Alvin Isaac, Evan Fries et al.CCS 2024 · 4 citations
- Papers, Please: A First Look at Age Verification on the WebShreyas Minocha, Isaac Sheridan, Harry Oppenheimer, Paul Pearce et al.S&P 2026 · 1 citation
- Educators' Perspectives of Using (or Not Using) Online Exam ProctoringDavid G. Balash, Elena Korkes, Miles Grant, Adam J. Aviv et al.USENIX Security 2023
- "It's been Lovely Watching you": Institutional Decision-Making on Online Proctoring SoftwareElisa Shioji, Ani Meliksetyan, Lucy Simko, Ryan Watkins et al.S&P 2025
Related papers
- Re-Examining the Examiners: Changes in Privacy and Security Perceptions of Exam ProctoringAdryana Hutchinson, Elaine Ly, Collins W. Munyendo, Adam J. AvivCHI 2026 · 2 citations
- Online Proctoring: Privacy Invasion or Study Alleviation?: Discovering Acceptability Using Contextual IntegrityArnout Terpstra, Alwin de Rooij, Alexander P. SchoutenCHI 2023 · 26 citations
- A Visual Analytics Approach to Facilitate the Proctoring of Online ExamsHaotian Li, Min Xu, Yong Wang, Huan Wei et al.CHI 2021 · 71 citations
- (Beyond) Reasonable Doubt: Challenges that Public Defenders Face in Scrutinizing AI in CourtAngela Jin, Niloufar SalehiCHI 2024 · 10 citations
- "I'm going to trust this until it burns me" Parents' Privacy Concerns and Delegation of Trust in K-8 Educational TechnologyVictoria Zhong, Susan E. McGregor, Rachel GreenstadtUSENIX Security 2023
