This exact situation happened to another manager I work with. Interviewed a candidate remotely (with camera), everything was great, super nice guy, very knowled

This exact situation happened to another manager I work with. Interviewed a candidate remotely (with camera), everything was great, super nice guy, very knowledgeable, extremely technical. He got the job. First day, he refused to turn on his camera during any of the meetings, wouldn't speak up, when he did it was clear the voice wasn't the same, seemed very dodgy. Aside from that, he didn't know how to use Git or setup his dev environment. One of the devs setup a pair-programming session to help get him acclimated. He couldn't write a single line of code. In the interview the candidate was clearly very senior and had significant experience. Manager called him up and said they needed to speak on camera, he kept making excuses but finally turned it on. Not even close to the same guy, interview candidate was clean-shave. This guy had a six-month beard. HR took over from there, he never would admit to it and held firm that he was the same person who interviewed and stopped responding once we let him know he was being terminated. Afterward we did some research and found it's becoming very common these days. You have one guy who basically gets paid to do interviews for others, the person gets hired and basically collects paychecks as long as they can. This is why we now require photoId as part of interviews and first day. I also now have a habit of taking a screenshot during interviews. The author of this article mentions the cost was low to the mishire was low. I think that is fundamentally false. We shipped equipment (we got it back but they could have kept it), we turned down other candidates (which we may not get another chance to hire), we removed postings, we had to get multiple HR members involved, legal had to get involved, he had access to our repos, all of that had to be audited. There is SIGNIFICANT cost to things like this.