Thieves Use Vacuum To Siphon Cash From Safes 173
Tootech writes "A gang of thieves armed with a powerful vacuum cleaner that sucks cash from supermarket safes has struck for the fifteenth time in France. The burglars broke into their latest store near Paris and drilled a hole in the pneumatic tube that siphons money from the checkout to the strong-room. They then sucked rolls of cash totaling £60,000 from the safe without even having to break its lock. Police said the gang — dubbed the Vacuum Burglars — always raid Monoprix supermarkets and have hit 15 of the stores branches around Paris in the past four years. A spokesman added: 'They spotted a weakness in the company's security system and have been exploiting it ever since.'"
You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Informative)
Sounds like someone has been watching "How To Beat The High Co$t Of Living". Anyone remember that movie? Similar plot, only it was a big bubble holding $1 million in cash in the middle of a shopping mall.
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Funny)
That's it. We should ban vacuums.
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
What does that mean?
That people designing security systems should read more (cartoons) and be more creative?
No! It means that cartoons should be censored. People who read this stuff as a kid could end up as criminals later. Most people committing these crimes were probably exposed to Disney during their childhood. It's not ego shooters, it's Disney cartoons.
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I think my neighbor has a sound-suppressed vacuum. the BATFVC should kick in his door.
Re: (Score:2)
and there's really no need for hand vacuums. too easy to conceal.
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:5, Funny)
That's it. We should ban vacuums.
That idea sucks.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That idea sucks.
Watch the language...let's keep it clean.
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Funny)
No..
declare only terrorists own vacuums..
Then point out to the moron senators that space is full of vacuum and we should declare war on it.
Suddenly NASA has all the money it needs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Informative)
Search google news for robbers paris vacuum and the only story you will find is from this The Sun tabloid.
I smell hoax
Re:You can make this stuff up. (Score:4, Insightful)
try searching cambrioleurs aspirateur monoprix.
Re: (Score:2)
Two (2) sources. Not very convincing.
The same about reporting it in Register and other one(1) source in UK.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Two? There are over 4000 results for that search string, and the first page is all French news sites (apart from Slashdot, of course) covering this story..
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apparently, we are looking at different searches:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cambrioleurs+aspirateur+monoprix&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=cambrioleurs+aspirateur+monoprix&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=gdU&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=iv&source=lnms&tbs=nws:1&ei=ZbWcTJKPLITGlQeY2PGXCg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAoQ_AU&prmdo=1&fp=4e781b66e30e329a [google.com]
Gives at my screen:
Re: (Score:2)
It does look like it: http://www.google.co.uk/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=cambrioleurs+aspirateur+monoprix&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= [google.co.uk]
Perhaps Americans get offended when they see French websites?
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Click on "News" tab on the left:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cambrioleurs+aspirateur+monoprix&hl=en&source=lnms&tbs=nws:1&ei=H7icTI6wG8KBlAe0-ISnCg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CA0Q_AU&prmdo=1 [google.co.uk]
Same 24 results. I guess the number of news outlets that bought this reached the saturation level. :-)
I still do not know if it is true or not. My initial reporting was to raise doubt and concern, not to reject the story.
I do "smell the hoax", but I still did not taste it
Re: (Score:2)
Merde Pute!
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I missed where you were using Google News rather than just Google. Still, 24 news articles is not 2.. it does sound like a bad joke, but I wouldn't be that shocked if it were true.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
6 results, 24 news articles - same number (I check it probably 6 times already today - one per each comment like yours). Not very impressive and below my personal threshold of belief at Google News.
I am starting to think that French sources are underrepresnted at Google in US (they do this foggy localization stuff).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"42" is no doubt a great answer to everything, obviously including this.
I think dozens is below the threshold, lower hundreds is a grey zone and after that it becomes a well manufactured fact :-)
BTW, somebody posted a reply to one of my comments with the story from 2009 about the same thing (same style of robbery, same bank chain). I suspect now that it is either an old hoax or at least old news.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
From Le Parisien, 27/12/2009.
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/un-gang-de-cambrioleurs-devalise-les-monoprix-27-12-2009-757296.php [leparisien.fr]
"Le dernier fait en date remonte à la nuit du 23 au 24 novembre, avenue d'Italie dans le XIII e arrondissement de Paris."
It's my local Monoprix!
(It's in Paris, not "near Paris").
Re: (Score:2)
Aha, they struck again!
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/le-gang-a-l-aspirateur-devalise-les-monoprix-22-09-2010-1078047.php [leparisien.fr]
"Le dernier fait en date remonte à lundi. Vers 6 h 30, deux hommes pénètrent par une issue de secours dans les locaux du magasin Monoprix de la rue Garibaldi, à Saint-Ouen."
This one is "near Paris".
Re: (Score:2)
Finally, an explanation emerges: if it is old news, then no wonder that only 24 news outlets reporting it now:
here is Google Translate:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leparisien.fr%2Ffaits-divers%2Fun-gang-de-cambrioleurs-devalise-les-monoprix-27-12-2009-757296.php [google.com]
Looks like Sun and others bought old news as new news.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It goes back even more, to the 1960s or 1970s, in the "Casino" episode of Mission: Impossible (the real one, the good one, not that crap with the self-aggrandizing Tom Cruise). They drilled into a vault and ran a vacuum to suck out all the money.
Noise (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Noise (Score:4, Insightful)
With proper baffling you can quiet down just about anything. Also depends on the area. In many cities there's pretty much constant road-work being done. If they could possibly park it beside the street I'd bet almost everyone would just assume it was construction equipment and wouldn't even question it.
Re:Noise (Score:4, Insightful)
Plus, you really can't underestimate the ability of people to ignore things that don't immediately concern them.
Re:Noise (Score:4, Funny)
The famous "Somebody else's problem" field
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh shit, I can't believe I missed the opportunity to break out that reference... *sigh* I am shamed.
Re:Noise (Score:4, Informative)
Or the ability of people to assume that weird activity is normal because the guy was wearing overalls and a cap and looked like a maintenance worker.
Re: (Score:2)
loud? do you mean as compared to cracking open the safe?
or as compared to the cleaning crew? or the air conditioner?
I bet no one notices it.
It would be different if it was in your bed room, but in a empty supermarket I don't see it as a problem
Re:Noise (Score:4, Insightful)
Duckburg (Score:5, Funny)
Did anyone else picture the Beagle Boys doing this when you read the article?
Read the article? (Score:2)
Wow. (Score:4, Funny)
That sucks.
Similar to Mission Impossible (Score:2, Redundant)
Sounds like an episode from the old Mission Impossible TV series. They drilled a big hole in the bottom of a safe and then vacuumed all the money out. I've always wondered if this would really work (Sounds like a request to Myth Busters) But now I know.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazing. I was just going to post a comment "movie is pending".
I wonder what type of vacuum cleaner they used. I would suggest a bagged one with filters removed.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, nothing sucks like a VAX...
Re: (Score:2)
Can you imagine the commercials if its a Dyson? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
You can start the countdown, my friend. Besides obvious reenactment of the robberies, I can foresee juxtaposition "Make money at home by vacuuming" and "feel like Bonnie the Housewife".
beautifully done :) (Score:2)
good stuff, excellent hack.
Of-course there should have been a one way flap valve probably with an electrical/timer lock there as well.
Security, it's a process, there is no one single thing that is a magic silver bullet that provides it...
Re:beautifully done :) (Score:5, Insightful)
The thieves have taken 4 years to suck up 500000 euros. That's 125000 per year.
Monoprix have more than 300 stores. If it costs more than 500 euros per store per year to install, maintain and support the extra security measures, it'll cost them more than the thieves are taking.
Monoprix might just be hoping that the police would eventually catch the thieves, and nobody else will copy them.
Will be a different thing if they shot or hurt people (since customers might stop going to their stores).
Lastly if the team has 3 members, assuming equal shares, each is only getting an average of about 40K per year. Not peanuts but definitely not a good way to get rich
In contrast, those infamous investment bankers and friends have certainly taken more than 40k/year each...
Re: (Score:2)
"
Lastly if the team has 3 members, assuming equal shares, each is only getting an average of about 40K per year. Not peanuts but definitely not a good way to get rich"
For some reason this brought to me a vivid image of a day trading soccer mom from Ramona.
Re: (Score:2)
15 stores in 4 years... That's about 4 jobs per year. 10,000 euros per job. I'm assuming it only takes a few hours, max, to do this, so 10,000 euros in only a few hours.
Yeah, you won't be a millionaire at that pace, but you have a LOT of free time in-between jobs.
Re:beautifully done :) (Score:5, Informative)
I have worked for a large retail chain, and I can whole-heartedly confirm this logic. They have a chain of over 1000 stores, and some of the costing that was done blew your mind.
Want to put a lock on the IT cabinet in each store? $100 per cabinet (buy the lock, pay the service guy to go in, train the store people to use the key/make duplicates). *1000 stores, and you're suddenly looking at a non-trivial amount of money for something that should be a simple, no brainer.
We saw similar things when we wanted to put a shelf in each cabinet to help organize the various little device that went in the cabinet. $200 per store ... forget it. Print labels to put on each piece of equipment to help the store identify it? $50 per store. Forget it.
It was a good experience ... we learned how to think in massive scale for every project, every little idea we had, but we also found it incredibly stifling. And thats why I *used* to work there.
Re:beautifully done :) (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd always imagined the trick there is to present your case in a, "It's $350 per store, one time, but it'll cost you $1000/yr, per store, in lost/broken equipment and wasted man hours if we don't".
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How do you cost out not having a lock on a cabinet or not having a extra shelf?
Re:beautifully done :) (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't doubt your experience at all. I can see things going down that way, corporate culture and all being what it is.
But I still don't get it.
If a guy with a small store would have to expense similar tasks, (locks on cabinets, a labeling system, etc).. at his level of the economy. Why is the same a problem for a huge 1000+ store chain? I mean, they are that big because they are making money - right? And you'd think that the economy of scale would mae the installation of some of these things even cheaper proportionally than it would be for the small shop guy.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The scaling is not linear. As a company gets bigger they do make more money but not as much more as it costs to run things.
That's a problem in general with all sorts of designs that need to scale. Once you get past a certain point you run into all sorts of organizational and operational issues that are difficult to solve.
In other words, it's much harder to maintain a huge successful business than a small successful one. Think of it as a King of the Hill game.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Because at that scale, it's enough money to notice.
When I worked at a small 10-employee company, the owner would always get really good coffee for the break room. Cost a few $ more, but wasn't a big deal.
When I moved to a 20,000-employee company, the good coffee didn't last long, because $(peanuts * 20,000) is enough savings to be noticed (and increase the bonus of some executive, so he's not going to leave it on the table for the next guy).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
40k per year (Score:2)
It may not be a lot to the investment banker, but I'm sure that most of the people committing these crimes have the option of becoming an investment banker.
Re: (Score:2)
but I'm sure that most of the people committing these crimes have the option of becoming an investment banker.
Yeah but their conscience might bother them even more.
BTW, I wonder where that 9.7 trillion actually went: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aGq2B3XeGKok [bloomberg.com]
9.7 trillion is a lot of money to take from taxpayers. USD30K per person?
They don't want to tell though. Did it go to investment bankers or petty thieves?
Re: (Score:2)
time ot sue vacuum makers (Score:3, Funny)
after all like software that does p2p its the cause of them being able to steal cash....we need to regulate and make sure you have controls for the vacuums
Re: (Score:2)
hold on your horses (Score:2)
Look at the google news results for "robbers paris vacuum"
http://www.google.com/search?q=robbers+vacuum+paris&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=robbers+vacuum+paris&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Kpo&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnb&source=lnms&tbs=nws:1&ei=Nq6cTLiHO8T7lwfn77XaCg&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAwQ_AU&fp=4e781b66e30e329a [google.com]
Are you sure this is not faux news?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Other than that: Nice try, It's good to check for faux news, but be sure not to make a faux pas youself.
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes whistleblower just blows :-)
Also, your link (while narrowed down to News only search) comes up with 24 articles (which is still lower than my fact threshold). Hardly "stuff that matters" anyway (well, I guess, hence "Idle" section).
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like it is old news:
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/un-gang-de-cambrioleurs-devalise-les-monoprix-27-12-2009-757296.php [leparisien.fr]
That is why so few sources in News section
Thanks to one of the commenters in this thread (should be modded up, but I cannot locate it anymore)
Re: (Score:2)
Fool me once... (Score:2)
They've been doing this for four years?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
you would think after the second time (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And if it occasionally (even very occasionally) screws up, which backs up the deposit-money-into-the-safe part of it? At 40K per year, it doesn't take many screw-ups for the solution (including design, testing, installation, annual testing, repairs, etc) to cost more than the problem.
15 branches of the same store in Paris? (Score:2, Funny)
Are they living in a vacuum? How many times do you have to get suckered before you change your system? Their business must really be going down the tubes. It blows me away.
(I'm just cleaning up today... :)
Re:15 branches of the same store in Paris? (Score:4, Funny)
HADOPI (Score:5, Insightful)
Valve (Score:2)
Couldn't this be solved by putting a simple valve into the pneumatic tubes just above the safe?
Blame the idiots at the wheel (Score:2)
This isn't new (Score:5, Informative)
It seems that for whatever reason this chain of stores hadn't implemented the basic security measures, or they were ineffective, probably due to human error (i.e. forgetting to set the alarm in the roofspace).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"It seems that for whatever reason this chain of stores hadn't implemented the basic security measures, or they were ineffective, probably due to human error (i.e. forgetting to set the alarm in the roofspace)."
Forgetting to set the alarm on 15 different "Monoprix" (whatever that is) stores? No, there was a fundamental design flaw in the system. They didn't implement a basic security measure, ie; installing a simple, one-way baffle or hatch that would allow the money to enter the strong room but not leave it, at least through the pneumatic tube system, was all that would have been required. Good allegory on security in the digital age; your only as strong as your weakest point. Usually its the system architect. I
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they've been doing it this long, I wonder if they're getting inside help. Monoprix doesn't seem very determined to stop them.
At least they have a lead... (Score:2)
They were caught on CCTV but were all wearing balaclavas and could not be identified, the spokesman said.
So I guess they are concentrating on skiers, motocross riders and ninjas. It will be very tough to apprehend them though if they are ninjas...
On another note, who would design a safe with a hole??? Wouldn't that by definition disqualify it from being called a "safe"??? At least they could make the hole one-way (very simple mechanisms for that)...
Re: (Score:2)
Many safes have holes. You can then have employees put money in the safe while not having the ability to get the money back out if someone holds the place up.
Well someone's got to say it: (Score:2)
A gang of thieves armed with a powerful vacuum cleaner that sucks cash from supermarket safes has struck for the fifteenth time in France.
That sucks!
Lewinskied Again (Score:2)
"...the gang - dubbed the Vacuum Burglars - always raid Monoprix supermarkets...
Something that sucks for money and a store called "Monoprix"? The jokes pretty much write themselves.
Like a bad movie (Score:2)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091314/ [imdb.com]
It will suck if they get caught.... (Score:2)
... just a little vaccuum humor. /sorry
Domestic thievery (Score:2)
Sure you can vacuum up the money, but how do you launder it afterward?
overestimate (Score:2)
Because the alarm systems are clearly worthless the cost of the damage to them must be $0.00 at most.
Sounds familiar (Score:2)
One word: Check Valve! (Score:2)
Simple solution? (Score:2)
keep ink in glass pellets or something in the safe too, so any kind of violent movement marks all the bills?
Bull Poo! (Score:2)
I have never seen a safe with a deposit tube that you could attack in this way.You can't even fish for the capsules with wire or string.
Shenanigans!!
Transporters (Score:2)
Just wait until someone invents a transporter system. And same becomes inexpensive enough for the average Federation Citizen to have one.
4 years? Why not fix the problem? (Score:2)
Just a thought. If you have not about this security problem for four years, why not fix the problem?
Damn those suckers! (Score:2)
damn!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What sucks enough must blow.
Re: (Score:2)
What good is a safe that only lets you put money in? You might as well use the bills to light cigars...
Re: (Score:2)
What good is a safe that only lets you put money in? You might as well use the bills to light cigars...
One would assume that they use the door of the safe to remove the money and only use the vacuum to deposit the money.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and one could assume a number of other false premises as well.