Towards robust audio spoofing detection: a detailed comparison of traditional and learned features
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Automatic speaker verification, like every other biometric system, is vulnerable to spoofing attacks. Using only a few minutes of recorded voice of a genuine client of a speaker verification system, attackers can develop a variety of spoofing attacks that might trick such systems. Detecting these attacks using the audio cues present in the recordings is an important challenge. Most existing spoofing detection systems depend on knowing the used spoofing technique. With this research, we aim at overcoming this limitation, by examining robust audio features, both traditional and those learned through an autoencoder, that are generalizable over different types of replay spoofing. Furthermore, we provide a detailed account of all the steps necessary in setting up state-of-the-art audio feature detection, pre-, and postprocessing, such that the (non-audio expert) machine learning researcher can implement such systems. Finally, we evaluate the performance of our robust replay speaker detection system with a wide variety and different combinations of both extracted and machine learned audio features on the `out in the wild' ASVspoof 2017 dataset. This dataset contains a variety of new spoofing configurations. Since our focus is on examining which features will ensure robustness, we base our system on a traditional Gaussian Mixture Model-Universal Background Model. We then systematically investigate the relative contribution of each feature set. The fused models, based on both the known audio features and the machine learned features respectively, have a comparable performance with an Equal Error Rate (EER) of 12. The final best performing model, which obtains an EER of 10.8, is a hybrid model that contains both known and machine learned features, thus revealing the importance of incorporating both types of features when developing a robust spoofing prediction model.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 28 May 2019.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 2.
6 papers.
- 2021How Deep Are the Fakes? Focusing on Audio Deepfake: A Surveycited by 6
- 2024Is Audio Spoof Detection Robust to Laundering Attacks?cited by 4
- 2021Deep Neural Network Based Respiratory Pathology Classification Using Cough Soundscited by 2
- 2021aiSTROM -- A roadmap for developing a successful AI strategycited by 0
- 2022Deep Fake Detection, Deterrence and Response: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 0
- 2024Augmentation through Laundering Attacks for Audio Spoof Detectioncited by 0
- 2024Augmentation through Laundering Attacks for Audio Spoof Detection1 Oct 2024
- 2024Is Audio Spoof Detection Robust to Laundering Attacks?27 Aug 2024
- 2022Deep Fake Detection, Deterrence and Response: Challenges and Opportunities26 Nov 2022
- 2021How Deep Are the Fakes? Focusing on Audio Deepfake: A Survey28 Nov 2021
- 2021aiSTROM -- A roadmap for developing a successful AI strategy25 Jun 2021
- 2021Deep Neural Network Based Respiratory Pathology Classification Using Cough Sounds23 Jun 2021