Camera Placement
Use a view of the ATM face, approach, and customer space without reading a PIN. Check lighting, scale, and occlusion on site.
ATM Tampering Detection and Customer Threat Review
ATM Tampering Detection brings someone forcing an ATM outer panel or visibly confronting a customer to an operator for review.
The Visible Condition
Describe What the Camera Can Show
The observable condition is someone forcing an ATM outer panel or visibly confronting a customer at an unbranded street-facing ATM vestibule. A frame can bring the scene to an operator. It cannot establish intent, cause, or the right response.
The ATM fascia and the space around a customer need different review questions. A prompt about an outer panel being forced concerns visible contact with the machine. A prompt about someone confronting a customer concerns the people in the vestibule. The Callao illustration shows a visible handgun pointed toward a customer, a separate threat cue that warrants review of the full clip and the site security procedure. Neither illustration establishes a real incident or a detector result.
An authorized operator can enter a plain-language prompt such as “Alert when someone forces the ATM outer panel.” StreamVLM™ evaluates sampled live frames from selected cameras against it. A match enters the IREX event flow.
Each detector has its own confidence threshold and alert cooldown. The team tests wording and settings on its cameras.
StreamVLM™ evaluates sampled frames, so a brief action can fall between samples. Test the actual camera view and response timing before relying on this prompt for an urgent event.
Explore StreamVLM™Operational Fit
Plan the View and Review
Operator Decision
The reviewer should separate suspected machine tampering from a possible customer threat. The prompt does not decide this automatically.
Likely False Matches
Check for authorized maintenance, cash withdrawal, or people standing close together. Tune camera selection and alert settings during a pilot.
Illustrative Camera Frames
Separate the Machine from the Customer
Synthetic frames illustrate possible matches. They are not real incidents, deployments, or accuracy evidence.
Machine tampering
Outer Panel Open
A reviewer compares the visible panel contact with authorized maintenance before deciding whether to act.
Customer threat
Customer Threat at the ATM
An illustrative Callao street view shows a visible handgun near a customer. Staff review the full clip and follow the site security procedure; this is a different condition from machine tampering.
From Prompt to Action
How an Alert Becomes a Decision
- 01
Describe and Select
Use observable wording such as “Alert when someone forces the ATM outer panel.” on cameras that show the complete relevant scene.
- 02
Review the Event
Open the match and surrounding footage. Compare with ordinary scenes such as authorized maintenance, cash withdrawal, or people standing close together.
- 03
Apply the Site Procedure
A reviewer checks the clip and maintenance schedule. Machine tampering and customer threat need separate prompts and decisions.
Pilot Questions
Validate on Your Cameras
- Visibility
- Can the view consistently show someone forcing an ATM outer panel or visibly confronting a customer? Test representative lighting, weather, and occlusion.
- False Alerts
- Sample ordinary scenes, especially authorized maintenance, cash withdrawal, or people standing close together, then tune prompt, threshold, and cooldown.
- Human Review
- Agree who checks a match and how to separate suspected machine tampering from a possible customer threat. No universal accuracy figure is published for this prompt.
FAQ
What does atm tampering detection report?
It reports a match to a described visible condition: someone forcing an ATM outer panel or visibly confronting a customer. An operator reviews footage before deciding what happened.
Can a match establish intent or liability?
No. A sampled frame cannot establish intent, authorization, responsibility, or cause. Staff check context and follow local procedure.
Can one prompt prove both tampering and a customer threat?
No. Use separate visible descriptions. A person near an ATM may be a customer or technician; a close interaction does not itself prove a threat.
How should we evaluate it?
Test representative cameras and ordinary scenes, including authorized maintenance, cash withdrawal, or people standing close together. Agree on useful alerts and missed events. IREX does not publish a universal accuracy figure for this prompt.
Test ATM Tampering Detection on Your Cameras
Choose representative views of an unbranded street-facing ATM vestibule. We can scope the prompt, alert settings, and review procedure for a pilot.