At some conferences I attend(ed), plenary speakers are introduced with more than just name an title of the talk, but also a short CV by the session convenor.
While I don't know how these intros are compiled (do organisers run background checks on the speakers? do speakers provide the summary themselves?) it may happen that the presented information (roles the speaker holds / held) are incorrect. (Misunderstandings between the convenor and their sources, not full awareness of subtle seeming terminology differences, …)
I expect mostly nobody cares about the details in such a speaker introduction, but there may be cases where the speaker gets a role attributed which they didn't hold and the award of the role was disputed or a politically delicate topic.
I'm wondering, what is the correct way to deal with such an incorrect introduction (assuming the speaker didn't deliberately provide false information)? Should one embarrass the convenor by correcting them before starting the presentation or let it slide and off-stage apologize to those in the audience who will feel offended because the convenor attributed their reputation to the speaker?