The Gist
Deepfakes and other AI-powered social engineering attacks are getting so realistic, they’re not just fooling targets—they’re creating confusion about who to blame.
While this disruption is especially dangerous today with AI, similar problems existed before. For example, ten years ago, Xoom Corporation lost $30.8 million in a business email compromise scam. The message looked legitimate, and the process appeared normal. But after the funds were gone, the real damage began: the CFO resigned, and the company’s stock dropped 17%. It wasn’t just a breach—it was a trust crisis.
But with AI supercharging attacks like these, the stakes are only getting harder to trace.
According to Security Magazine, deepfake-enabled scams are now blurring the line between outsider threat and insider risk. In many cases, companies don’t know whether they’ve been socially engineered—or if someone internally was complicit.
This insider threat confusion is another dangerous outcome of modern fraud. It damages not only financials, but employee morale, executive trust, and shareholder confidence.
And in the absence of clear digital evidence, even victims face scrutiny.
What Is Insider Threat Confusion?
Insider threat confusion occurs when a sophisticated external fraud attack—often powered by AI-generated messages, audio, or video—leaves teams unsure whether the breach came from an outsider or someone on the inside.
These attacks mimic legitimate business communications, unlike traditional phishing or malware, making them especially deceptive. Fraudsters impersonate real executives, vendors, or partners with such precision that internal teams are left wondering:
- Did someone override our controls?
- Was a staff member manipulated—or involved?
- How did this happen without anyone noticing?
Even when no one internally is at fault, the lack of forensic evidence creates suspicion, tension, and in some cases, personnel fallout.
How They Do It
Here’s how attackers manufacture confusion and why these scams are so hard to detect and recover from:
The breach happens outside your organization. Attackers gain access to a trusted party’s account or identity—often a vendor, executive, or shared platform—via phishing or credential theft.
They impersonate someone with authority. Using AI tools, they generate synthetic emails, fake voice messages, or even deepfake videos that appear to come from a known internal figure.
In one real case reported by Trend Micro, fraudsters used deepfake audio to impersonate a CEO, convincing an employee at a UK-based company to wire $243,000 to a fraudulent account. The voice was fake—but the authority it carried was real.
The fraud is executed with context and timing. The message references real vendors, real projects, or real invoices—making the request feel authentic. It may even align with your payment schedule.
There’s no obvious red flag. Since the communication isn’t spoofed or visibly fake, standard email security tools don’t flag it. Internal procedures—like callbacks or dual approval—may be followed but still fail.
After the fact, there’s no clean forensic trail. No malware. No breach of your systems. Just a legitimate-looking transaction that went very wrong.
That’s what happened to French film company Pathé in 2018. After falling victim to a CEO impersonation scam and transferring $21 million to fraudsters, the company fired two senior executives from its Amsterdam office—despite the fact they were tricked. The damage extended beyond the financial loss to trust, morale, and leadership stability.
Trustmi’s Take
Insider threat confusion isn’t just a technical problem—it’s a trust problem. When fraud happens and no one can say for certain who triggered it, the fallout can be worse than the breach itself.
These attacks exploit uncertainty: across teams, between departments, and within systems that don’t talk to each other. Even when no one internally is at fault, the lack of visibility creates tension—and often, blame.
The path forward isn’t just tighter controls. It’s better coordination. Organizations need:
- Shared visibility across business systems
- More context around vendor and executive activity
- Smarter ways to spot fraud attempts before trust is broken
Stopping deepfake-enabled fraud requires more than stopping a message. It means restoring confidence—between people, teams, and systems—before the damage spreads.
