Behind the Hall of Mirrors: Using AI without getting used by AI

Insurance leaders understand risk better than leaders in most industries. We analyze it, price it and build entire product lines around it. But AI-driven impersonation scams introduce a different kind of risk. One that does not always show up immediately on a balance sheet. Instead, it erodes trust, the foundation of every insurer and policyholder relationship.

AI impersonation fraud creates interactions that feel familiar, but something feels off. Service teams hear voices that sound exactly like customers. Policyholders receive messages written in the right tone, using the right details. Billing systems process requests that look routine. Everything appears correct on the surface, yet appearance alone no longer guarantees authenticity.

Over the past three years, this threat matured faster than many expected. Fraud attempts involving deepfakes have surged by more than 2100% during that period, transforming what once felt experimental into a scalable criminal tactic. A recent Gartner survey found that 62% of organizations experienced at least one deepfake-driven attack in the past twelve months. What once felt theoretical is now an operational reality.

The shift weighs heavily in the insurance payment environment. Payments sit at the intersection of trust, identity and financial movement. When impersonation succeeds here, the impact spreads quickly.

When confidence replaces verification

AI impersonation fraud does not rely on breaking systems. It depends on sounding right. Criminals use synthetic voices that match familiar patterns. They present information that passes basic checks. They use verification models that verify identity once and assume everything that follows is legitimate.

Checking accounts are frequent targets because they offer fast access to funds. Insurers face added exposure when billing systems rely on static authentication and legacy workflows.

This confidence-based approach works because credentials are already compromised at scale. More than 60% of breaches that do not involve user error or physical access rely on stolen credentials, brute force attacks or phishing, according to industry breach analysis. Once credentials are compromised, impersonation becomes a matter of timing and persuasion.

Insurers experience this through fraudulent refund requests, payment redirections and changes to recurring drafts. Support teams want to resolve issues quickly. Fraudsters take advantage of that instinct, especially when requests sound reasonable and urgent.

Digital channels present similar challenges. Fraudsters mimic normal navigation and pass basic knowledge checks. Systems that rely on passwords and a single-step verification will struggle to detect deeper signs of risk. On the surface, the activity looks correct. Without context, behavior and device awareness, the system can't tell who is really behind the screen.

Why legacy billing systems are no longer enough

Legacy billing platforms still handle core functions reliably. They manage schedules, track balances and process payments efficiently. But reliability isn't the same as protection. The payment environment today requires continuous judgment based on context, behavior and change over time. Many older systems were never designed for that.

Static verification assumes the person who logs in is the same person who later requests sensitive changes. Authentication often relies on data that fraudsters already know how to obtain. Continuous identity validation, session monitoring and behavioral analysis are frequently missing.

Criminals take advantage of these cracks. They test call centers. They test portals. They test agent channels. Nearly 80% of companies experienced an attempted or successful payment fraud incident in 2024, showing how aggressively attackers probe for weak seams.

The result is a financial loss, operational disruption and reputational damage. Policyholders experience it as a failure of protection. This is not a surface-level issue. It is a structural one.

Modern billing systems create solid ground in an unstable landscape

Insurers can regain control by shifting from static checks to continuous identity evaluation. Modern billing platforms assess users throughout an interaction, not just login. They monitor behavior, device signals and environmental changes. They compare activity against historical patterns. When something doesn't align, systems respond.

This closes the gap between authentication and authorization. Criminals cannot rely on a single successful login or a convincing voice. They must consistently match the real policyholder behavior across multiple dimensions. That is difficult to fake.

Payment-related actions deserve higher scrutiny. Changes to bank accounts, refund destinations, payout methods or recurring payment sources should trigger adaptive verification. Low risk actions can remain. High risk actions should not. When done well, this balance protects security without sacrificing experience.

Modern systems also connect fraud signals across channels. Risks identified in one interaction inform others. Support teams, billing systems, and fraud tools share context. Weak seams close quickly. Policyholders see a system that treats their money and identity with appropriate care.

Transparency matters as well. Customers are more accepting of additional verification when they understand why it exists. Clear communication strengthens trust and reduces frustration.

Strategy that keeps insurers ahead of the next wave

Fraud tied to AI-driven impersonation continues to climb. Business Email Compromise alone drove $2.77 billion in reported losses in 2024, illustrating how effective impersonation remains even without advanced tooling.

Analysts expect those losses to grow at a faster pace as generative tools become more accessible. Deloitte projects that fraud losses enabled by generative AI in the United States could grow from $12.3 billion in 2023 to $40 billion by 2027.

Insurers cannot wait for a high-profile incident before reinforcing their infrastructure. Protecting the payment environment requires intention.

Start by mapping every channel where customers can change payment information. Identify which systems have authority and how verification occurs at each step. This exposes gaps and shows where to deploy continuous identity tools.

Next, raise the standard for payment-related actions. Treat them as critical financial events. Every change should require a clear signal that the correct individual initiated it.

Finally, bring technology and operational teams together. Fraud prevention breaks down when these groups operate in isolation. Operations teams understand frontline risk. Technology teams understand system capability. When aligned, they build safeguards that protect customers without creating friction that drives them away.

Trust holds when systems see clearly

Insurers cannot stop AI from advancing. They cannot prevent fraudsters from cloning voices or generating synthetic identities. But they can strengthen the systems that move money. They can apply continuous identity tools that detect anomalies in real time. They can explain clearly why stronger verification protects policyholders.

Trust comes from certainty. Policyholders want confidence that their insurer can recognize when something doesn't belong. They want assurance that payment changes won't slip through unnoticed. Strong billing and payment systems provide that certainty.

The environment will keep evolving. Deception will become more convincing. Insurers that reinforce their payment infrastructure with modern identity and verification practices will remain steady, even as payment systems face signals designed to look legitimate while hiding something else.