That’s not hyperbole—it’s where the industry is heading.
As cities and states move toward AVS-01 and verified response requirements, the pressure to “prove” an alarm before dispatch is increasing. On the surface, that’s a necessary evolution.
But many are solving verification the wrong way.
Remote Video Verification has become the default approach—sending clips or live feeds off-site so someone can visually confirm an event.
What’s often overlooked:
• Video leaves the protected premises
• Third parties are now observing people and behavior
• That footage becomes discoverable, regulated, and breach-exposed
This doesn’t just impact one party—it creates shared exposure across:
- Municipalities writing the policies
- Central monitoring stations handling the data
- Integrators deploying the systems
- Enterprise alarm providers scaling them
- And ultimately, the end user who owns the property
Verification is necessary. Surveillance is optional.
IntrusionIQ was built on that distinction.
Instead of exporting video, IntrusionIQ verifies events at the edge using AI and reports confirmed alarm data—not footage— through traditional alarm pathways.
No clips.
No live streams.
No third-party observation.
Just verified alarms—without the liability that comes with moving video around.
As verified response becomes law, the industry needs to decide:
Are we building better alarms…
or building bigger problems?
#AVS01 #AlarmIndustry #PublicSafety #Privacy #SmartSecurity #IntrusionIQ