Why casino protection remains reactive in modern gaming
Despite continuing investment by casino operators in monitoring, identity verification, and compliance systems, fraud and organised cheating continue to be major difficulties in land-based gambling. Even though facial recognition and digital cameras have improved monitoring, losses are frequently discovered only after an incident has happened, indicating that the industry is still mostly reactive. At the same time, stricter regulations and data protection rules have changed how operators collect, share and use information about suspected offenders, creating tension between compliance obligations and day-to-day security needs.
To explore these challenges, SiGMA News spoke with John Connolly, casino protection and fraud prevention specialist and owner of Finger, a casino surveillance intelligence and advisory firm. He shared a perspective grounded in land-based operations, where physical presence, behavioural observation and trained surveillance teams remain central to protecting game integrity, and discussed organised cheating, training gaps, identity verification and the regulatory pressures shaping casino security today.
A land-based focus in a hybrid era
As the industry increasingly discusses hybrid gaming environments, Connolly notes that his expertise remains rooted in physical casino operations. He said, “There is no obvious connection between land-based and online security, one requires a physical presence, and I don’t care to comment about online because it doesn’t enter into my field of interest.”
Technology helps, but cheats stay ahead
Connolly says traditional surveillance methods remain relevant, particularly as technology improves. “The traditional surveillance methods are more effective through the use of better technology, facial recognition and digital cameras, however when it comes to technology, the cheats are more advanced and always one step ahead.”
Despite major investments in surveillance, he believes operational gaps remain. “Knowledge of the latest scams is an obvious gap, and the lack of use of a common database of known cheats is another. I have always believed that it is better to know who the cheats are than to know ever-changing methods of cheating.”
He adds that fraud is often discovered too late: “This can save on time and resources, and man-hours lost to investigations after the fact. It is true that most cheating is detected on review after it is known that large losses have occurred.”
Organised teams and confidence tricks
According to Connolly, casino cheating has long been organised. He said, “The cheats have always been more organised and inventive and often work in small teams using distraction methods and confidence tricks.” This reinforces the need for continuous training and human expertise.
Human judgment remains essential
Speaking on the role of human expertise, Connolly stressed that technology alone cannot replace trained staff. “Again, it comes down to teaching and training and having enough manpower to deal with evolving cheating methods. Body language is still an essential skill that needs to be taught unless the operator has a natural ability to detect unusual circumstances and behaviour.”
He also highlighted the importance of workforce capacity and attention management. “Concentration, knowledge and observation skills, concentration wanes after approximately two hours and therefore manpower is a necessary ingredient,” said Connolly.
He believes knowledge sharing across the industry should improve. He stated, “Groups such as ‘Casino Surveillance and Security Society’ on LinkedIn are helpful, but there needs to be more input from members and more sharing of information.”
Tension between regulation and security
One of Connolly’s strongest criticisms is directed at regulatory and compliance barriers. On being asked about friction points between operational realities on casino floors and the expectations placed on operators, he said, “Regulations such as data protection and compliance departments who prefer to say no to any new ideas are points of conflict between departments and security and surveillance departments.”
He added: “In my opinion, data protection is mostly or only protecting cheats and criminals, celebrities and known politicians and Royalty are fair game for media speculation, but criminals and cheats cannot be named or their facial images are pixilated out or masks are placed over their heads, how does this help facial recognition of unlawful perpetrators.”
Forged documents and evolving identity risks
Connolly says identity fraud also remains a key security vulnerability. He said, “Forged documentation is still able to bypass security systems in land-based operations; online verification is more stringent and successful.”
He believes KYC is improving, particularly online. “In the main, KYC ‘Know Your Cheats’, particularly online, is succeeding. In land-based casinos, facial recognition comparing identification documents with the physical subject present is effective.”
However, gaps remain. “Changing the image only in the document can evade detection where only the name of the subject is known and not the facial image.”
Remote access, VPNs and verification challenges
He also warned about the use of remote access tools and VPNs by online fraudsters to bypass verification. He said, “These methods of evading verification are useful for online cheats and still need to be overcome. Verification applications such as SumSub are necessary for greater control.”
Global approaches to casino security
Speaking of different regulatory approaches, Connolly highlighted Switzerland as a strong example of casino security practice. “Switzerland has a very stringent method of protecting their operations with a national list of voluntary excluded persons and involuntary and this has been shared with neighbouring countries to great effect.”
Adding that even strong systems face challenges, he said, “However, this can be overcome and is being overcome by forged documents. Facial recognition tools need to be allowed in order to combat this.”
He also emphasised the value of physical interaction and said, “The physical presence to the guest can never be replicated, lessons are being used from both sides.”
The risks of open-access casinos
Looking ahead to the next five years, Connolly pointed to visitor access and registration as a key security challenge. He said, “The European and Singaporean systems of registering visitors on site have to be adapted worldwide; this has been proven to reduce risk.”
He contrasted this with open-access models in other markets, adding, “The American system of free access and open access has been seen to be dangerous and continues to be dangerous, the thinking behind this is warped and needs to be abolished, instead the expansion of open access is worrying especially in the UK.”
An industry still playing catch-up
Connolly believes the sector remains reactive. “Certainly, we are always behind in this and playing catch-up continues to be the case.”
He stresses the need for better access to data and technology. “As an industry, we can only combat criminality if we are given the tools of collecting data and facial recognition systems. In fact, we don’t need to collect data but have access to data through an online application such as ‘Finger’.”
What operators should prioritise
Closing the discussion, Connolly emphasised the importance of access control and technology adoption. His final message is clear: “Open access for visitors needs to be removed and access to the latest technology for preventing crime should be permitted by gaming and governmental authorities.”
Step inside the world’s biggest iGaming community. Join HERE for weekly updates from the world’s iGaming authority and unlock subscriber-only offers.
