Zero Assist vs Fabric
Fabric detects AI cheating by analysing how a candidate behaves and converses. Zero Assist detects it by catching the tool itself, at the OS process layer, in real time. Different evidence, different certainty — here is the breakdown.
Probabilistic signal vs binary proof.
Fabric does respected work — its published research analysing tens of thousands of interviews helped quantify the problem. But behavioral analysis produces a likelihood, not a fact. Zero Assist produces a timestamped record that a specific tool was running.
FabricBehavioral / Conversational
- 01Infers cheating from speech patterns, pacing, and answer characteristics
- 02Strong for surfacing risk signals and category-level research at scale
- 03Produces a probability — a coached candidate can lower the signal
Zero AssistProcess-Level Forensic
- 01Detects the actual tool (Cluely, Parakeet AI, Final Round AI) the moment it launches
- 02Delivers binary evidence: the tool name, process, and exact timestamp
- 03Alerts in under 500ms so interviewers can act during the session
When a decision needs proof.
Behavioral signals are useful context. But rejecting a candidate on "suspicion" invites disputes. Forensic evidence does not.
A timestamped forensic report showing exactly which tool ran and when — admissible for candidate dispute resolution, where a behavioral probability is not.
Interviewers see the alert live and can adapt their questions, instead of learning about risk after the hire decision.
Process name, window title, and network endpoint — so renamed or repackaged variants are still caught.
Behavioral context plus forensic proof is the strongest stack of all.
No webcam, transcript, or screen recording required to fire an alert.
Scores flow back into Greenhouse, Lever, and Workday automatically.
Trade guesswork for evidence.
See how Zero Assist turns "this felt off" into a timestamped record your team can stand behind.
Fabric and Zero Assist take fundamentally different approaches to AI interview-cheating detection. Fabric analyses behavioral and conversational signals to estimate the likelihood that a candidate is cheating. Zero Assist detects the cheating tool itself at the operating-system process level and produces a timestamped forensic record. One produces a probability; the other produces proof.
What Fabric Does Well
Fabric is a credible behavioral-detection company that has published widely cited research on the scale of AI interview cheating, analysing tens of thousands of interviews. Behavioral analysis is valuable for surfacing risk signals and for understanding category-level trends. Its limitation is inherent to the method: behavioral inference yields a likelihood, and a well-coached candidate can reduce the signal.
Where Zero Assist Differs
Zero Assist detects the actual tool — Cluely, Parakeet AI, Final Round AI, Interview Coder, and 20+ others — the moment it launches on the candidate's machine, using three independent signals: process name, window title, and network endpoint. It fires an alert to the interviewer in under 500 milliseconds and produces a forensic report suitable for candidate dispute resolution. This is binary evidence rather than a behavioral probability.
Which One to Choose
Choose Fabric if you want behavioral risk-scoring and category research. Choose Zero Assist if you need defensible, real-time forensic evidence that a specific tool was running. The strongest approach is to use both — behavioral context alongside process-level proof.