Remote session
Review evidence that a remote session was in use.
Device-level proctoring
A session run from somewhere else, or by someone else, shows up in the evidence.
A browser can show an exam in progress without explaining who is controlling the device or whether the exam is running inside a virtual machine. ScreenComply adds timestamped session evidence so your team can investigate these patterns fairly, without substituting a software flag for a person’s judgment.
Timestamped evidence gives your team a reviewable session record.
A person applies the policy and makes the decision.
What does the reviewer receive?
Assessment timeline
Understand when the observation occurred during the exam.
Policy context
Consider approved arrangements before deciding.
What are the remote-session patterns?
Remote-desktop control allows activity on the student’s machine to be directed from elsewhere. The exam may still appear to be running on the expected computer. A separate pattern is an exam taken inside a virtual machine, where the assessment environment differs from the device environment a reviewer may assume is in use.
These patterns require context. Remote desktop and virtual machines also have legitimate uses outside an exam, and an institution may approve particular arrangements for accessibility or administration. The assessment policy should explain what is allowed and how students can disclose an approved setup before being assessed.
Why are they invisible to a browser?
The browser presents the exam but does not provide a complete account of the surrounding session. A normal-looking tab cannot establish who is controlling the computer, and it does not give a reviewer the whole context of an exam running within a virtual environment. A webcam view may leave the same questions unresolved.
ScreenComply complements the delivery environment with device-level evidence. Keep the exam platform and the controls that already serve the program, while giving the review team a record it can use to investigate an unexplained session. No observation should be interpreted without the permitted-tool policy.
What does ScreenComply record?
The report records that a remote session or virtual machine was in use and when. Timestamped entries make the observation reviewable within the assessment timeline. They do not, by themselves, identify a substitute test-taker or prove that assistance affected a particular answer.
The reviewer considers the session record, any approved arrangement and the student’s explanation together. Where clarification is needed, the organization follows its own assessment or employment review process. ScreenComply supplies evidence for that process rather than issuing an automatic accusation or final decision.
Should you Prevent or Detect?
Detect records relevant activity while allowing the session to continue for later review. Prevent closes restricted tools before they can be used. The organization chooses a mode for the assessment and communicates the rules in advance, including how a required remote arrangement will be handled.
Detect can be appropriate while a program evaluates its review workflow or accommodates an approved setup. Prevention requires a clear restricted-tool policy and a support route if a legitimate tool is affected. Both approaches preserve the requirement for a human to interpret the resulting evidence.
What does the student see?
The student receives a plain notice before the assessment about checks and permitted applications. A Prevent warning explains when a restricted tool needs to close, while Detect records activity for review without blocking it. Neither experience should suggest that a setup warning is an automatic finding of misconduct.
Students should raise accessibility needs and approved remote arrangements with the assessment organizer before the exam window. Instructors and employers should provide a contact who can resolve those questions rather than asking a candidate to guess which configuration is permitted. Prepare the device using the instructions for that particular session.
Who uses the evidence?
For universities, the evidence supports instructors and integrity offices applying their academic review process. For employers, it supports a hiring team considering a live interview or assessment in context. In either setting, keep the reviewer accountable for the decision and give the assessed person a way to explain a legitimate arrangement.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a webcam tell if someone else is controlling the computer?
A webcam shows the camera view, not a complete explanation of computer control. ScreenComply supplies session evidence for a person to review, but that evidence still needs interpretation rather than an assumption about who supplied an answer.
What about virtual machines?
ScreenComply records that a virtual machine was in use and when during the session. Your team evaluates that observation against the assessment policy and any approved arrangement; it is not an automatic failure.
Does this flag students who use remote desktop for accessibility?
An observation can arise in a legitimate setup as well as a prohibited one. Agree accommodations before the exam, use the appropriate mode and ensure the reviewer considers the approved arrangement instead of treating remote desktop as proof of misconduct.
What does the reviewer see?
The reviewer receives timestamped entries about the remote session or virtual-machine use within the evidence report. That record supports follow-up under the organization’s policy and a consideration of the student’s or candidate’s explanation.
Is anything decided automatically?
No student failure or candidate rejection is decided automatically. The assessment owner reviews the evidence and determines the outcome through its own process, including any required accommodation or appeal review.
Bring your assessment and review process.
Discuss the evidence your reviewers need, the candidate experience and the policy that guides a human decision.