TL;DR
CodeSignal assigns every submission a Suspicion Score based on code similarity, typing speed versus solution complexity, paste events, and webcam behavior. When AI Proctoring is enabled, it records video, audio, and your display, plus requires government ID verification. CodeSignal monitors the browser and recording but cannot scan processes running outside the browser at the system level. Browser extensions and visible AI tools get caught in the recording before the Suspicion Score even matters. InterviewMan at $12 per month on annual billing runs as a desktop app that never touches the browser. It includes over 20 stealth features and is invisible in screen recordings, the dock, Activity Monitor, and WebRTC scans. The tool has 57,000 users with zero confirmed detections on any proctored platform. The key to a clean Suspicion Score is writing code yourself with natural editing patterns, deletions, and corrections. Record your own screen during a practice session and verify your tool is invisible before the real assessment.
Jake from my old study group lost a $160k offer over a Chrome extension last October. I know this because he texted me the recruiter email at like 11 PM and it was one sentence, "Your assessment results have been invalidated." I called him and he was just sitting in his car outside the gym not even mad, just confused. He had used the extension through the entire test and thought it went great. His first two problems took fifteen minutes each and the third one, which was supposed to be harder, he did in three minutes. He did not realize that gap is exactly what gets you caught.
I had my own CodeSignal in two weeks so i spent that Saturday at my coworker's apartment, this guy runs CodeSignal hiring at his company, and i basically made him walk me through everything while we ate pizza. He showed me the hiring dashboard. Every submission gets a Suspicion Score that sits right next to your code and he said most managers check the flag before they even look at what you wrote. I asked him what actually feeds that number and he listed it off, code similarity to what other candidates submit, your typing speed compared to solution complexity, any paste events, and whether you keep looking away from the webcam. That last one is apparently huge, he said 35 percent of flagged tests in 2025 were people looking off screen repeatedly, CodeSignal published those numbers. When AI Proctoring is on it records video and audio and your entire display. Government ID check before you start. Questions rotate so studying leaked answers from past candidates barely helps anymore.
The part that actually calmed me down was when my buddy explained what the Suspicion Score watches versus what it cannot reach. He said they care way more about how code appears in the editor than what the code does. Humans write messy. They try something, delete half of it, start over, build up to a solution through visible mess. Clean optimized code appearing out of nowhere without that buildup is what spikes the score. But he also said this, CodeSignal records your screen and webcam and thats the boundary. No process scanning, no system level audits, nothing outside the browser and the recording. If something is running on your machine but never appears in the screen recording and never touches the browser, CodeSignal doesnt know about it. He was pretty matter of fact about it which surprised me.
Jake's Chrome extension injected into the page and the recording caught it before the Suspicion Score even mattered. Just visible right there in a frame. I looked into what other people were using and found reddit threads about Cluely at ninety five with the stealth addon and Interview Coder at two ninety nine both having overlay windows show up in screen recordings. If your tool is visible in the recording you are already done before any algorithm even runs.
Two weeks after Jake got his results thrown out i ran InterviewMan on my own CodeSignal. Twelve bucks a month annual. Desktop app that never touches the browser. After the test i pulled up my own screen recording and went through it frame by frame. Not in a single one. My Suspicion Score was clean because i typed every line myself, read the overlay hints and wrote code my way. Let the edit history look like a real person working through something with deletions and partial attempts and corrections and backtracking. The normal mess that the score expects to see from a human.
57,000 users, 4.8 stars from 257 reviews. I searched reddit and discord specifically for anyone who got caught using InterviewMan on CodeSignal and found nothing. Stealth features included at twelve bucks, no seventy five dollar upgrade like Cluely charges, no ninety minute session cap like LockedIn at fifty five.
before you sit down for a CodeSignal do what i did after Jakes disaster. record your own screen during a practice session and actually watch the footage back. if you can see your tool the hiring team can see it too. and type your own code, let the edit history show the messy process of a human solving a problem under pressure. the Suspicion Score watches the process just as much as the final answer and thats what Jake did not understand until it was too late.
For a full ranking of tools by stealth, see our top 4 undetectable interview assistants for 2026.
Our stealth interview AI guide explains the three detection vectors in detail.
For details on how other assessment platforms work, see does HackerRank detect AI tools and does Codility track tab switching or detect AI.
Ready to Ace Your Next Interview?
Join 57,000+ professionals using InterviewMan to get real-time AI assistance during their interviews.
