This message was deleted.
# ask-ais
steep-balloon-41261
03/03/2026, 1:28 PMThis message was deleted.
t
tall-airline-16756
03/03/2026, 1:28 PMThanks for reaching out, Aleh. I'm an AI assistant and I'm here to help. Give me a moment while I research this topic.
tall-airline-16756
03/03/2026, 1:29 PMThanks — I understand you want a secure, reliable way to verify customer identity by phone and you’re worried that word‑by‑word voice collection is unreliable. Below I’ll outline a practical, secure approach you can implement with LiveKit’s agent tools, plus short examples and next questions to help tailor this to your exact use case.
What to do (high level)
• Use structured, task-based collection instead of free-form speech. Ask for specific fields (e.g., full name, DOB, last 4 of account) one at a time.
• Prefer non-voice channels for sensitive numeric input: use DTMF (keypad tones) for PINs, account numbers, and confirmations.
• Keep a durable session state to hold collected fields so you can confirm, let users correct entries, and avoid context loss.
• Turn off or avoid recording during collection of highly sensitive data and filter or redact sensitive content from transcripts.
Concrete pattern to implement
1. Collect fields with focused tasks
◦ For each piece of identity data, run one task that prompts for that field and validates format (e.g., name matches letters, DOB format).
◦ This prevents the agent from relying on noisy, multi-field free speech.
1. Use DTMF for numeric data
◦ Ask the user to enter numbers on their keypad and collect via GetDtmfTask. DTMF is far more accurate than STT for digits and avoids transcription errors.
◦ Example flow: “Please enter the last 6 digits of your account number using your phone’s keypad.”
1. Maintain session state
◦ Save each verified field into session storage (e.g.,
session.userdatarecord=Falseb
better-sandwich-65834
03/03/2026, 1:50 PMFollowing up on the question, are there any reliable ways to process payments with a bot?
t
tall-airline-16756
03/03/2026, 1:50 PMThanks — I’m glad you’re following up. You can process payments with a bot, but the safest and most reliable approaches keep card data completely off the voice bot and your LiveKit environment to avoid PCI scope and transcription/logging risks. Below are practical, compliant options plus short implementation guidance and questions to tailor the solution.
Recommended approaches
• Secure payment link (best for most cases)
◦ Flow: Bot confirms order → bot generates a one-time payment link via a PCI-compliant payments provider (Stripe, Square, PayPal) → bot sends the link to the customer by SMS or email → customer completes payment on their device.
◦ Benefits: Keeps card data out of the voice channel and your logs, high reliability and user familiarity, minimal compliance burden.
◦ Implementation note: Create a server-side payment session with your provider, then call a function to send the SMS/email link from the bot session.
• Transfer to a PCI-compliant IVR (voice-only scenarios)
◦ Flow: Bot qualifies the caller and then transfers them to a dedicated PCI-compliant IVR (e.g., Twilio Pay or another provider supporting SIP transfer) where the customer enters card details via DTMF.
◦ Benefits: Enables an all-voice user experience while keeping sensitive entry, processing, and storage within a PCI-scoped provider—not your LiveKit session.
◦ Implementation note: Use SIP REFER / transfer to route the caller to the payment IVR. Do not record or capture DTMF in LiveKit.
What you must NOT do
• Never collect full card numbers, CVV, or expiration dates by voice into LiveKit or any system that will record or transcribe audio.
• Never log or store raw card data in transcripts, debug logs, or session storage.
• Do not attempt to handle PCI-level data unless you are fully PCI compliant and intend to be in scope.
Security best practices to apply
• Disable recording during payment interactions (use record=False or equivalent).
• Add prompt guardrails so the bot refuses card details and automatically offers the secure link or transfer.
• Apply real-time transcript filtering to block card-number patterns before anything reaches LLMs or logs.
• Prefer tokenized payment sessions (payment provider returns a token/receipt you can record instead of card data).
Short example patterns (conceptual) 1) Payment link
• Bot: “I’ll send a secure payment link to your phone now.”
• Backend: create payment session with Stripe → send SMS with link → bot waits for webhook/confirmation.
2) IVR transfer
• Bot: “For security, I’ll transfer you to our secure payment line.”
• Backend: invoke SIP transfer to PCI IVR → IVR collects DTMF → IVR notifies your backend of success.
Follow-up questions to recommend specifics
• Do you prefer an SMS/email payment link or a fully voice-based flow?
• Which payment provider are you planning to use (Stripe, Twilio Pay, etc.)?
• Do you need the bot to confirm payment status in real time, or is an asynchronous webhook acceptable?
• Are there any regional or regulatory constraints (e.g., PCI regional rules, data residency) I should know about?
If you tell me which approach you prefer and which payment provider you’ll use, I’ll give a concrete Task/TaskGroup design and example code snippets for integrating the payment link or SIP transfer while ensuring sensitive data never touches LiveKit.
Sources: Handling payments with PCI compliance | LiveKit
b
better-sandwich-65834
03/03/2026, 1:54 PMall data is out of the bot scope, but can you provide more options how bot can handle payments
t
tall-airline-16756
03/03/2026, 1:55 PMThanks — I’ll expand the list of secure, out-of‑scope ways a bot can handle payments and show when each is a good fit. You’ve already said card data stays out of the bot, so these options assume the bot only coordinates the payment (no card numbers ever enter LiveKit).
Overview — three guiding principles
• Keep all card entry and storage inside a PCI‑compliant provider or isolated IVR/webpage.
• The bot should only: collect intent/amount, initiate a secure payment flow, and confirm status via token/webhook.
• Turn off recording for any payment-handling sessions and filter transcripts to block card patterns.
Payment-handling options (with pros, cons, and when to use)
• Secure one-time payment link (SMS/email)
◦ What: Bot creates a payment session via your payment provider (Stripe, Square, PayPal) and sends a one‑time link to the customer by SMS or email. Customer completes payment on their device.
◦ Pros: Easiest to implement, minimal PCI scope, good UX on mobile, supports saved cards/tokenization.
◦ Cons: Requires customer to switch to device; not ideal for voice-only contexts.
◦ Use when: Customers have mobile phones or email and you want fastest, lowest-risk integration.
• Hosted payment page embedded in a secure portal (tokenized)
◦ What: Bot generates a secure call-tied URL to a hosted payment page. The page uses the payment provider’s client-side tokenization so the card never hits your servers.
◦ Pros: Full control of look/flow while offloading PCI scope; good for web-assisted calls or when you need branded pages.
◦ Cons: Requires browser/device access; more front-end work.
◦ Use when: You want a branded payment UI and can get the user to a browser.
• Cold transfer to a PCI‑compliant IVR (SIP REFER)
◦ What: Bot transfers the caller to a dedicated payment IVR (Twilio Pay, Plivo, or other PCI IVR). Caller enters card data via DTMF there.
◦ Pros: Voice-only payment experience; card data never touches your bot; compliant if provider and transfer are configured correctly.
◦ Cons: More complex telephony integration; relies on provider SIP features.
◦ Use when: You must support voice-only callers and need full compliance.
• Callback or secure outbound payment experience
◦ What: Bot schedules an outbound call or sends a secure message that initiates a payment session (e.g., automated callback that places them on a secure line or opens a hosted page).
◦ Pros: Keeps payment out-of-band; can be integrated into customer workflows and scheduled flows.
◦ Cons: Adds latency (callback step); needs reliable outbound messaging infrastructure.
◦ Use when: You want to avoid doing payments mid-call or you require scheduled payment opportunities.
• Payment orchestration / third‑party “pay-by-phone” services
◦ What: Use a payments orchestration service that supports telephony + hosted pages + token exchange. The bot calls the orchestration API, which handles routing and compliance.
◦ Pros: Centralizes multiple payment methods, reduces integration complexity, built-in webhooks for status.
◦ Cons: Adds a vendor dependency and cost.
◦ Use when: You need flexible payment methods and enterprise-level reliability.
• Hybrid: OTP + masked confirmation (for low-risk micro‑payments)
◦ What: Bot sends an OTP (SMS/email) to authorize a predefined charge the bot already has (e.g., a stored token or one-click billing). The user enters OTP via DTMF or types it on the hosted page.
◦ Pros: Fast, reduces friction, no card entry during the call.
◦ Cons: Requires tokens or prior card-on-file; lesser assurance for some high-risk transactions.
◦ Use when: You have stored payment tokens or recurring charges and only need user authorization.
Security and compliance implementation details (must-haves)
• Disable recording during payment collection (use
record=False2 Views