Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Customer Service Agents Might Be Able To See What You're Typing In Real Time (gizmodo.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the public-service-announcement dept.

Gizmodo is warning that some customer service agents might be able to see what you're typing in real time. A reader sent them a transcript from a conversation they had with a mattress company after the agent responded to a message he hadn't sent yet. From the report: Something similar recently happened to HmmDaily's Tom Scocca. He got a detailed answer from an agent one second after he hit send. Googling led Scocca to a live chat service that offers a feature it calls "real-time typing view" to allow agents to have their "answers prepared before the customer submits his questions." Another live chat service, which lists McDonalds, Ikea, and Paypal as its customers, calls the same feature "message sneak peek," saying it will allow you to "see what the visitor is typing in before they send it over." Salesforce Live Agent also offers "sneak peak."

This particular magic trick happens thanks to JavaScript operating in your browser and detecting what's happening on a particular site in real time. It's also how companies capture information you've entered into web forms before you've hit submit. Companies could lessen the creepiness by telling people their typing is seen in real time or could eliminate the send button altogether. So if you don't want to be monitored or send secret messages to agents, put your phone on mute while on hold and copy/paste messages from another document to your customer service chatbox. And in general, be nice to customer service agents. It's not their fault.

52 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. The Logical Solution by Barny · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The logical solution would be to insert a false delay of 3-5 seconds whenever the user types something to the CSR's replies so that it is never perceived to be answering too fast.

    As for the creepiness factor—you're typing stuff into a text box on a website, nothing should be considered hidden from them.

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
    1. Re:The Logical Solution by JustOK · · Score: 1

      Those few seconds can really eat into profits when you add it all up.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    2. Re:The Logical Solution by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      ok, but then factor that they're using exactly the same browser calls to update other aspects of the page. How does the browser differentiate?

      Don't participate in conversations about coding by pretending you know shit about coding.

    3. Re:The Logical Solution by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      Those few seconds can really eat into profits when you add it all up.

      The save-a-penny program:

      When they build your home, unless it's a custom build and you know what to ask for, even the contractors who construct the homes of the regionally better off are prone to shave costs that don't seem like much to the fellow who purchases just the one home. For instance, particle board (OSB), rather than incredibly more durable plywood, is used beneath the sinks in your kitchen and bathroom. Since you're always and eventually only one leak away from standing water on the bottom plate of your marble-topped cabinet, the additional tens of dollars for cellulose material that survives a leak or three without swelling up like a Football parent in Texas seems a worthy investment.

      Until you are building thousands of these houses.... then it's tens of thousands of dollars.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:The Logical Solution by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1, Informative

      Those few seconds can really eat into profits when you add it all up.

      CSRs are not doing one chat at a time. They are handling a dozen or so simultaneous chats. While you are typing, they are responding to another customer.

      They also have automatic pattern matchers to scan your text for strings related to common questions, and then pre-fill the reply. The CSR just needs to give it a quick glance, and click "send". But that was a few years ago, so the state-of-the-art today may be to just auto-send. This may have been the cause of the "instant reply" mentioned in the summary.

      It is all very efficient, and there is almost no dead time waiting for the customer to type.

    5. Re:The Logical Solution by glitch! · · Score: 1

      I have mod points, but there is no option for INFORMATIVE, INSIGHTFUL, and THIS SYSTEM SHOULD DIE. Customer service agents should do their job, and if the customers are too stupid, just abandon those customers. Let them get their stuff locally. Or at all.

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    6. Re:The Logical Solution by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

      While I'm certainly as guilty as the next asshole when it comes to making stupid and often rude comments, I can't possibly picture what you hoped to accomplish with this comment?

      And while people saying things like "interweb shooping sperience" causes my spine to stiffen and makes me want to write a 5 page dissertation on how this somewhat popular form of self aggrandizing makes the user sound far less intelligent for simply using it, I can honestly say that the AC's post didn't warrant your response.

      Since he posted as a hit and run AC, it's likely he won't be back to read responses, but let's assume he does come back. He asked a fair question. And if you're correct and he's misinterpreting how the feature works, so be it. Please clarify.

      He also contributed his opinion (though worded like an American who should focus more on lollipops than keyboards and mice) about a genuine aspect of UX.

      Your response suggests you know something about coding or are acting as a social justice warrior on behalf of coders. If you're an SJW, please don't bother, feedback like his, no matter how poorly worded is somewhat interesting. He is right, UX would suggest that delays would be uncomfortable. Though, a good counter point would be that the delay doesn't need to be consistent, but instead injected in a means that would vary the delays to improve the experience.

      If you're not an SJW, and consider yourself a coder... that's like considering yourself a janitor. Before self aggrandizing, please look into computer science. Coding is basically trial and error data entry.

    7. Re:The Logical Solution by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2

      As for the creepiness factor—you're typing stuff into a text box on a website, nothing should be considered hidden from them.

      Thanks for the tip you smug prick Thanks for the wonderful support!

    8. Re:The Logical Solution by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      No, he is right and you are a Russian troll trying to dissuade intellectual discussion on western web sites.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  2. And this surprises anyone? by uncqual · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I always assumed that the CSRs could see every keystroke I type in the chatbox.

    If I have a long question (often the first question is long for example), I usually type the text into emacs (and, if I'm being picky, spell check it as well) and then cut and paste into the chatbox just to avoid confusion (such as me leaving out a "not" and later correcting it and the CSR never noticing my correction).

    --
    Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
    1. Re: And this surprises anyone? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Emacs Anywhere?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:And this surprises anyone? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 3, Funny

      I always assumed that the CSRs could see every keystroke I type in the chatbox.

      If I have a long question (often the first question is long for example), I usually type the text into emacs...

      Hmm. I do the same thing with vi - tends to be a little faster and easier.

      --
      Do you have ESP?
  3. I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 3, Funny

    I just chatted with Amazon support yesterday. I'm gonna type, "Fuck you," and wait for a ten count and then back over it.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:I gotta try this by silverkniveshotmail. · · Score: 1

      I just chatted with Amazon support yesterday. I'm gonna type, "Fuck you," and wait for a ten count and then back over it.

      How brave and mature of you.

    2. Re: I gotta try this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Try a little harder, I usually type something like: "I put poo into the toaster and it toasted nicely but now all my toast smells like poo, can you help? " then delete and submit my real question.

    3. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Without backing over, "Fuck you."

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    4. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Thank you so much. As for the bravery, I just did what anybody else would have done in that situation.

      I don't expect an award or stuff.

      As for mature, I don't see that from you. Do you?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re: I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      No, they did not say, "Inquiring minds want to know." What an odd question.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    6. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Really? You know what chat software Amazon uses? You know in advance what a random person's care factor is?

      You're totally awesome and stuff.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    7. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I told Momma what you said and and she said when Daddy gets home, you're gonna get a whupping.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    8. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I did think of that. And, if whomever I'm chatting with doesn't have real time peek-a-boo, they'll think, "Wow, that guy can type fast!"

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    9. Re:I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      OK, that's a winner.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    10. Re: I gotta try this by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I'm not a pussy grabber, so no.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  4. Easier "solution" by Solandri · · Score: 2

    If this really bugs you, just type your response into some other text editor. Notepad, or even a comment submission window on slashdot. Then cut and paste it into the CSR window.

    1. Re:Easier "solution" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can also use this to your advantage by telegraphing your true feelings while maintaining the an unimpeachable polite and calm veneer.

      CSR: We have engineers looking into it now.
      You: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
      You: Okay, thanks. Do you know when it will be fixed?
      CSR: We hope to have the issue resolved by tomorrow.
      You: You told me that yesterday you lyin^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
      You: Are you sure? I really need to get this resolved quickly.
      CSR: I'm sure sir, don't worry.
      You: OK Google take a screenshot^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
      You: OK Google post it to Twitter^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H
      You: Thanks, I hope you are right.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  5. Cold Reading by davesays · · Score: 1

    This is probably happening. Just as likely is the person has a million calls about your issue and knows what you are going to say. They likely have some canned answers. I'm on the other end and I have canned information; I tech support chat so often I have a txt file with everything in it - explanations of troubleshooting processes, error codes, contact information - I know what they are going to ask me. Like I tell my kids, I'm not smart, I'm just old...

  6. What's new? by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Old news. Very old news

  7. about time by viperidaenz · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "live chat" has caught up to ICQ in the 90's.

    1. Re:about time by eriks · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or talk from the '80s...

  8. Opportunity for malware attack? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Back in the days of "smart" (and "dumb") terminals, live chat enabled some attacks.

    For instance: sending a control sequence that reprogrammed a "soft key" and then "pressed" it, allowing the attacker to execute commands as if the victim had typed them. (This could include suppressing the visibility on his screen so he didn't know it had been done.)

    I wonder if these systems have an analogous vulnerability?

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  9. Game the system by jaa101 · · Score: 1

    This feature could be used to game the system. Slowly type in some question and leave it for a few seconds for them to digest. Then make a minor change that changes the sense of your question and quickly hit send. If they don’t notice the change, there’s now a chat log in your favour. Profit.

  10. Re: Inb4 by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    The fact that you think most needs should know about this or care says more about your understanding of nerds than it does about nerds understanding.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  11. It happened to me too by smugfunt · · Score: 1

    I was chatting to my phone company about my modem. They lulled me into a false sense of security by asking for info I'd already given. But a bit later I thought better of a somewhat tetchy paragraph and replaced it with a calmer one. Then they referred to something in the paragraph I had not sent.
    Then they offered to call me and I had a friendly conversation with a nice young lady who fixed my problem. I was left wondering: good customer service, or psychological warfare?

  12. BBSes! by antdude · · Score: 1

    Bah! Old bulletin board systems (BBSes)'s had real-time chats too. Now, get off my lawn! :P

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:BBSes! by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Bah! Old bulletin board systems (BBSes)'s had real-time chats too. Now, get off my lawn! :P

      The issue isn't the capability it's going out of your way to hide it from the user.

    2. Re:BBSes! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Telephones? Back in my day we didn't have no stinking telephones! All we had was telegraphs, and the receiver could live chat read each letter as it was typed!

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  13. My Job Used Software That Provided This Featu by nichogenius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work in a technical support role. We used a chat service provider called comm100 which does show the agent what you type in real time. At first, I felt dirty like I was invading their privacy, but it does help efficiency considerably. It's invaluable when it comes to de-escalating clients that start to type out a giant rant, then slowly edit it to be more civil... eventually they just chicken out and delete their entire whiny post when they decide it's not worth it. It feels bad and dirty, but also consider that the support agent is usually multi-tasking between clients, so being able to know what you are typing as you are typing it is a real time saver. The worst is when the client has typed out part of a question which you know the answer to and have a full response typed out, then you have to wait for them to hit the 'send' button before you can continue answering the question or solving the problem. Sometimes you have to wait a LONG time.

    1. Re:My Job Used Software That Provided This Featu by WaffleMonster · · Score: 2

      I used to work in a technical support role. We used a chat service provider called comm100 which does show the agent what you type in real time. At first, I felt dirty like I was invading their privacy

      Everyone that designs and installs shit like this knows damn well what they are doing is wrong. They persist only because they get away with it.

      but it does help efficiency considerably.

      Ends justify means?

      but also consider that the support agent is usually multi-tasking between clients, so being able to know what you are typing as you are typing it is a real time saver.

      If knowing is a timesaver and that's truly the justification then the solution is both obvious and trivial. Provide proper feedback in UI design such that end user knows what's happening. This is a trivial and obvious solution. The fact it's not being done speaks volumes to the true intent which is entirely to deceive the customer.

      If Microsoft can be sued for intentionally deceptive interfaces ... why should these chat vendors and the companies who deploy them get a pass?

      If spy speakers like echo started recording everything all the time and uploading it to Amazon/Google mothership while intentionally disabling the activation indicators to hide that fact from the end user would that be ok? Do you think they could manage to do that and successfully repel resulting lawsuits? Personally I very much doubt it.

    2. Re:My Job Used Software That Provided This Featu by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

      Why is it wrong? The only thing I see that's wrong is trying to pretend it doesn't happen

      You answered your own question. It's wrong because it is intentionally deceptive.

  14. Re:Is this a secret? by WaffleMonster · · Score: 1

    Is this a big deal? I worked on a CSR chat system for a major clothing retailer back in the early 00's that had that feature. If I remember right, there was an ActiveX version for IE and a javascript version for anyone else and you configure it to see as the user typed or wait until they hit "Send". The idea was that if you watched the person type, the CSR could start to compose their answer so that there was a small delay as possible.

    Yes of course this behavior is unacceptable. You are being dishonest with the customer. If you want to do this legitimately all you need to do is configure the interface such that what customer types appears in sent area of message box as CSR sees it so there is no confusion or assumptions about what is happening.

    When you design a UI like this it's not materially different than creating an interface where dismissing an upgrade prompt causes Windows 10 to be installed. You know damn well what a particular UX design almost always with an explicit 'Send' button conveys to a normal person. This sort of shady behavior sure as heck is not that.

    Would love to see some nuisance lawsuits over this shit.

  15. This seems like a good thing by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

    Normally I am paranoid about privacy, but this seems like a good thing. Why wouldn't you want them to respond faster?

    --
    By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
    1. Re:This seems like a good thing by c120plus · · Score: 1

      Normally I am paranoid about privacy, but this seems like a good thing. Why wouldn't you want them to respond faster?

      Because in real life, you wouldn't say "F*ck you - Wait, let me rephrase that - I am sorry I don't agree..."

  16. What's old is new again by SixArmedJesus · · Score: 1

    The chat client ICQ was doing this back in 1998. Why is it surprising that this would still be possible 20 years later?

    --

    *slight crashing sound*
  17. Already seen in it practice by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    I've already had a couple of conversations with support agents when their replied to the messages I hadn't yet sent which made me feel extremely awkward but now I know that I should never ever paste anything in such chat windows without first verifying that my clipboard contents are the one I really intend to share.

  18. Re:Cut and Paste saves you a lot of time too by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

    Dude, the 2A isn't 'assholes wanting to threaten your life because their 10 mb/s broadband is only testing at 5 mb/s, despite the fact that somebody else in the house is streaming HD Netflix, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  19. And that's bad because...? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    At any rate, it is so easy to get around it, if necessary, that it hardly deserves any discussion.

  20. Re:Common sense by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    What does doing that buy you?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  21. It's not their fault? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Sometimes it is their fault, like when they're trying to do something unethical or illegal with the excuse being that it's part of their job. Fuck them. Fuck them sideways. They're part of the problem. Getting paid for your bad behavior doesn't make it less bad.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  22. Like a phone? by Merk42 · · Score: 1

    Evil technology!

    Why, back in my day we called people, and of course the person on the other end of the telephone doesn't hear anything until I finish a sentence... oh wait.

  23. Always assume... by zarmanto · · Score: 1

    There's obviously no reasonable expectation of "privacy" in this scenario -- but frankly, if you're using a computing device of any flavor, and if that device is attached to the internet, then you should probably just automatically assume that anything you do on that device could potentially be tracked. It obviously won't always be the case... but it might be the case, on occasion. This thought process kind'a falls under the "plan for the worst, hope for the best," kind of thing.

    As an obvious direct example: I was attempting to negotiate with Verizon just recently, to try to circumvent an obvious "bait-and-switch" tactic that they had used during the Cyber-Monday promotional. At one point, I think I made the mistake of typing a comment into my "open mic" chat session, that essentially admitted that I was on the verge of just taking the deal, regardless of whether or not they agreed to give me what they had originally promised -- but of course, I backspaced over that before submitting. I realized a few minutes later what had probably happened, as my leverage completely evaporated in very short order. That mistake effectively cost me $200. (I left an absolutely scathing review of the CSR after the fact, describing what had happened... which, in retrospect, probably prompted some enthusiastic high-fives and kudos from the CSR's manager. So yeah... fuck you, Verizon.)

    Lesson learned, though: just always assume that the mic is open.

  24. Re:Dumb as fuck by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

    If you are in a live support chat the agent already knows you are frustrated and angry because if everything was great you wouldn't be talking to them at all. Anyone that has worked in IT knows you sometimes just have to let people vent before you can help them. It's not a big deal.

  25. Re:Always been the case by eneville · · Score: 1

    Yes. Similar story here. How did this become news though, it's not new, it's not even that special, or interesting. A large number of /. readers would know this already, those that don't will not need to think much about it, it is pretty simple and is there as a feature for the operators to be able to read or get some more insight into what the customer is thinking about when they're raising a live chat ticket.

    --
    Why UNIX?