I'm Bhuvan, the founder. We built InterviewWatch because hiring teams kept telling us the same story: a candidate aces the interview, you send the offer, and three weeks in it's clear the person who showed up to work isn't the person who showed up to the interview. The tooling that beats remote interviews has gone mainstream — AI answer generators, hidden overlay windows, remote-control sessions where someone else is driving the keyboard, virtual cameras, voice synthesis. Most are engineered to stay invisible to screen sharing and the video call. By the time a mis-hire surfaces, it's already cost the team months and tens of thousands of dollars. Existing tools split into two camps we didn't like: Record everything — audio, video, screen — and hope HR and legal don't mind. Block specific named apps — useless within weeks as new tools ship. InterviewWatch takes a different angle. We watch behaviour and environment — twelve weak signals correlated into one verdict — without recording the candidate. Every session becomes a signed, tamper-evident integrity report your team can defend in a dispute. It's consent-first. The candidate is told what's running and why. We never look at the content of what they type or say. We'd love honest feedback, especially from anyone who runs remote interviews: What's the worst integrity story you've hit? What would have to be true for you to put something like this in your pipeline? Where does this approach feel wrong or invasive? We want to hear it. Try the live demo at https://app.interviewwatch.com/t... — no signup, runs in your browser. — Bhuvan

InterviewWatch

Real-time integrity for every remote interview

Real-time integrity for every remote interview