Use Cases

Built for the workflows
where authenticity matters.

Ten industries, ten architectures, ten sets of real numbers. From insurance fraud to KYC to journalism, see how teams integrate AI image detection into production. Each example includes the workflow diagram, code in your language, and the metrics that matter.

10M+
images scanned daily across customers
99.1%
detection accuracy on benchmarks
<100ms
p50 latency in production
$43.7B
global deepfake fraud in 2025
Use case 01

News and Media Verification

Catch synthetic source images before they reach print.

Time per image
Minutes to seconds
Annual review cost
60% lower
Editorial confidence
Higher with audit log

The problem

Newsroom verification desks face a flood of user-submitted images, social media tips, and wire photos that may include AI-generated content. A single mistake erodes reader trust and invites legal exposure. Manual review takes 30 to 90 minutes per high-stakes image.

The solution

Drop our detection API into your editorial CMS so every image submitted, embedded, or imported gets scanned automatically. Editors see a verdict, confidence score, and source-model attribution in their existing workflow. C2PA manifests are verified cryptographically when present.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Wire photo or user submission arrives in CMS
  2. 2
    POST to /v1/detect with image URL and metadata
  3. 3
    Detection result attached to image in editorial system
  4. 4
    If high-confidence AI, image is flagged for desk review with model attribution
  5. 5
    If C2PA manifest is present and valid, full provenance chain is displayed
  6. 6
    Editor decision logged with verdict for compliance audit trail

Code example

python
from aiimagedetector import Client
client = Client(api_key=os.environ["AIDET_KEY"])

def verify_for_publication(image_url, story_id):
    result = client.detect(
        image_url=image_url,
        include_attribution=True,
        include_heatmap=True,
        metadata={"story_id": story_id, "context": "editorial"}
    )
    if result.confidence > 0.85 and result.verdict == "ai_generated":
        flag_for_desk_review(story_id, result)
    elif result.c2pa_manifest_present:
        attach_provenance_chain(story_id, result.c2pa_manifest)
    log_verification(story_id, result.request_id, result.verdict)

Customer story

A regional newsroom uses the Free tier to verify around 400 user-submitted images per month. They estimate 90 minutes saved per breaking story by automatically ruling out AI-generated source images, with zero published synthetic photos in the past nine months.

Related reading

C2PA & Content Credentials Explained

Use case 02

Insurance Fraud Prevention

Stop synthetic damage photos before payout.

Fraud caught per quarter
3 to 8 claims
ROI on $49 Pro plan
100x+
False positive rate
Under 1.5%

The problem

P&C and auto insurance carriers report a 3x increase in AI-generated damage photos submitted with claims since 2024. Each fraudulent claim is worth $5,000 to $50,000 on average. Traditional fraud detection misses photos that look composed and well-lit because real damage is messy, but AI damage is too tidy.

The solution

Run every claim photo through the detection API at intake. AI-generated submissions, edited damage areas (inpainting), and historic-photo reuse all get flagged. Forensics endpoint returns region heatmaps showing exactly which parts of an image are suspicious. Routes to special investigation unit (SIU) automatically.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Claim photo uploaded via mobile app or adjuster portal
  2. 2
    Synchronous scan via /v1/detect with forensics enabled
  3. 3
    If verdict is AI-generated or edited with confidence over 0.8, route to SIU queue
  4. 4
    SIU adjuster sees heatmap, model attribution, and EXIF analysis in dashboard
  5. 5
    Cross-reference content hash against industry-shared fraud database
  6. 6
    Decision logged for regulatory audit and feedback loop into model retraining

Code example

typescript
// Node.js , claim-intake middleware
import { Client } from "@aiimagedetector/node";
const ai = new Client({ apiKey: process.env.AIDET_KEY! });

export async function scanClaimPhoto(req, res, next) {
  const result = await ai.detect({
    imageUrl: req.body.photoUrl,
    includeAttribution: true,
    includeHeatmap: true,
    includeForensics: true,
    metadata: { claimId: req.body.claimId, policyholder: req.user.id }
  });

  if (result.confidence > 0.8 && result.verdict !== "authentic") {
    await routeTo SIU(req.body.claimId, result);
    return res.status(202).json({ status: "under_review" });
  }
  next();
}

Customer story

A mid-sized auto insurance carrier processes 5,000 photo claims per month on the Pro plan ($49/mo). In the first quarter after deployment they caught five fraudulent claims totaling $187,000, with the API cost paying for itself many thousands of times over.

Related reading

Deepfake Fraud Is a $40B Problem

Use case 03

KYC and Identity Verification

Block deepfake injection attacks at sign-up.

Attacks blocked
85 to 95% of injection attempts
User friction
Lower with step-up routing
Compliance audit
Full trail with request_id

The problem

Banks, fintechs, and crypto exchanges use liveness checks during KYC, but deepfake injection attacks defeat 90 percent of consumer-grade liveness providers. Attackers replace the camera feed with pre-recorded or real-time face-swapped video. Account takeover and synthetic identity fraud cost $18B globally in 2025.

The solution

Add detection as a second layer behind your liveness provider. Every KYC video frame is scanned for AI generation, face-swap artifacts, and deepfake fingerprints. Suspect captures route to manual review or step-up authentication. Combine with device fingerprinting and behavioral signals for full defense in depth.

Workflow

  1. 1
    User completes liveness capture in your app or web flow
  2. 2
    Capture video and ID photo are POSTed to /v1/detect
  3. 3
    Detection runs face-swap and deepfake-specific models
  4. 4
    Result combined with device fingerprint and IP reputation in your risk engine
  5. 5
    Low-risk: automatic approval. Medium: step-up SMS or email. High: human review.
  6. 6
    Decision logged with audit trail for regulatory compliance

Code example

python
# Python , KYC verification step
def verify_kyc(user_id, liveness_video_url, id_photo_url):
    video_check = client.detect(
        image_url=liveness_video_url,
        include_attribution=True,
        metadata={"user_id": user_id, "step": "kyc_liveness"}
    )
    id_check = client.detect(
        image_url=id_photo_url,
        include_attribution=True,
        metadata={"user_id": user_id, "step": "kyc_id"}
    )
    if video_check.verdict == "ai_generated" or id_check.verdict == "ai_generated":
        return KYCResult.STEP_UP_REQUIRED
    if video_check.confidence < 0.6:
        return KYCResult.MANUAL_REVIEW
    return KYCResult.APPROVED

Customer story

A neobank serving 2 million customers integrated detection into their KYC flow alongside their existing liveness vendor. Synthetic identity fraud dropped 78 percent in the first six months, while legitimate-customer friction increased by less than 0.4 percentage points.

Related reading

How to Detect Deepfakes

Use case 04

E-Commerce Marketplaces

Block fake product listings before they go live.

Listings scanned daily
200K+
Chargeback reduction
12% lower
Buyer trust score
0.4pt lift NPS

The problem

Peer-to-peer marketplaces, classifieds, and auction sites face listings with AI-generated product photos that misrepresent the actual item. Buyer trust erodes, chargebacks rise, and brand-name counterfeits proliferate. Manual moderation does not scale past a few thousand listings per day.

The solution

Scan every product photo at upload via the batch endpoint. AI-generated images get auto-rejected or labeled depending on category policy. Sellers get clear feedback explaining the rejection, with appeal flow for false positives. Brand-logo detection (via partner integration) adds counterfeit protection on top.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Seller uploads listing photos in batch (up to 100 per request)
  2. 2
    POST batch to /v1/detect/batch returning array of verdicts
  3. 3
    AI-generated photos auto-rejected with explanation to seller
  4. 4
    Listings with low-confidence verdicts queued for human review
  5. 5
    Approved listings publish with provenance metadata stored
  6. 6
    Seller reputation score updated based on submission patterns over time

Code example

typescript
# Batch scanning at ingest
const batch = await ai.detectBatch({
  images: listing.photos.map(p => ({ url: p.url, ref: p.id })),
  includeAttribution: true,
  metadata: { listingId: listing.id, sellerId: listing.sellerId }
});

const flagged = batch.results.filter(r =>
  r.verdict === "ai_generated" && r.confidence > 0.7
);

if (flagged.length > 0) {
  await rejectListing(listing.id, flagged);
} else if (batch.results.some(r => r.confidence < 0.6)) {
  await queueForReview(listing.id, batch);
} else {
  await publishListing(listing.id);
}

Customer story

A peer-to-peer marketplace with 200,000 listings per month deployed batch detection on the Pro plan and saw a 12 percent reduction in chargeback rate within 90 days. Total API cost: under $200 per month. Net fraud savings: estimated $40,000 per month.

Related reading

AI Image Moderation Guide

Use case 05

Social Platform Moderation

Label or remove synthetic content at platform scale.

Daily uploads scanned
10M+
p99 latency
Under 200ms
Regulatory compliance
Full audit trail

The problem

Social platforms must comply with EU DSA, US state laws, and emerging AI transparency regulations that require labeling or removal of synthetic content. Manual moderation scales to thousands of decisions per day; platforms need automation that scales to millions. Detection accuracy must work on the long tail of content types.

The solution

Webhook-driven async batch detection on every uploaded image and video. Confidence scores feed into a tiered policy engine: high confidence triggers labels or removal, medium confidence routes to human review, low confidence publishes normally. Comprehensive audit logging meets regulatory reporting requirements.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Image uploaded to platform CDN
  2. 2
    Async detection job created via /v1/detect/async with webhook URL
  3. 3
    Detection completes and webhook fires to your moderation pipeline
  4. 4
    Policy engine combines detection score with account history and signal data
  5. 5
    Action taken: label, restrict, remove, or escalate to human review
  6. 6
    All decisions logged for DSA and regulatory transparency reporting

Code example

python
# Webhook receiver
@app.post("/webhooks/detection")
def receive_verdict(req):
    if not verify_signature(req.body, req.headers["X-Signature"], SECRET):
        return 403
    
    event = req.json()
    if event["type"] != "detection.completed":
        return 200
    
    policy_decision = policy_engine.decide(
        detection=event["data"],
        user_history=user_signals(event["data"]["metadata"]["user_id"]),
        content_type=event["data"]["metadata"]["surface"]
    )
    apply_action(event["data"]["metadata"]["upload_id"], policy_decision)
    log_for_dsa(event, policy_decision)
    return 200

Customer story

A social platform processing 10 million image uploads per day uses the Enterprise tier with dedicated GPU clusters. They report 99.94 percent detection-pipeline uptime, full EU DSA reporting compliance, and a 95 percent reduction in unlabeled synthetic content reaching their feeds.

Related reading

AI Image Moderation Guide

Use case 06

Dating App Trust and Safety

Block AI-generated profile photos at scale.

AI profile photos blocked
Tens of thousands monthly
Romance scam reports
60% reduction
Photo verification rate
Higher with auto-badge

The problem

Dating apps see AI-generated profile photos used for romance scams, catfishing, and harassment. Synthetic identities cost users billions per year and damage platform trust. Photo verification flows that rely on user effort have low completion rates and frustrate legitimate users.

The solution

Detection runs invisibly during profile creation and on every uploaded photo. AI-generated photos are blocked with a clear explanation and prompt to upload a real photo. Photo verification badge auto-awards to users whose photos pass detection plus optional liveness check. Romance-scam patterns flagged with cross-photo behavioral signals.

Workflow

  1. 1
    User uploads profile photo during signup or photo update
  2. 2
    Detection runs synchronously, returns in under 100ms
  3. 3
    AI-generated photos blocked with friendly UX explaining the policy
  4. 4
    Real photos earn verification badge after passing detection
  5. 5
    Cross-photo analysis flags accounts with multiple AI photos as likely scams
  6. 6
    Trust and safety team has dashboard showing flagged accounts with detection evidence

Code example

typescript
// Profile photo upload handler
app.post('/api/profile/photo', async (req, res) => {
  const upload = await uploadToCDN(req.file);
  const verdict = await ai.detect({
    imageUrl: upload.url,
    includeAttribution: true,
    metadata: { userId: req.user.id, photoSlot: req.body.slot }
  });

  if (verdict.confidence > 0.75 && verdict.verdict === 'ai_generated') {
    await deleteFromCDN(upload.url);
    return res.status(400).json({
      error: 'AI-generated photos are not permitted in profiles. Please upload a real photo of yourself.',
      learn_more: '/help/photo-policy'
    });
  }

  await saveProfilePhoto(req.user.id, upload.url, verdict);
  if (verdict.confidence < 0.3) await awardVerificationBadge(req.user.id);
  return res.json({ url: upload.url, verified: verdict.confidence < 0.3 });
});

Customer story

A major dating platform integrated detection into their photo upload flow and reduced romance-scam reports by 60 percent in the first six months. The auto-awarded photo verification badge increased successful matches by 18 percent for users who earned it.

Related reading

Is This Image AI-Generated?

Use case 07

Stock Photo and Asset Marketplaces

Maintain editorial integrity by labeling AI submissions.

Mislabeled submissions caught
Around 8% per month
Buyer trust score
Significantly higher
Contributor compliance
Improves with feedback

The problem

Stock photo and asset marketplaces serve buyers who need authentic photography for editorial, journalism, and commercial use. Allowing unlabeled AI submissions damages trust and creates legal liability. But outright banning AI content excludes a growing creator segment.

The solution

Every contributor upload goes through detection. Photos correctly labeled by the contributor as AI-generated bypass detection. Photos labeled as authentic but flagged by detection get queued for review. Buyer search filters allow buyers to include or exclude AI content based on their use case.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Contributor uploads asset and self-declares as photo, illustration, or AI-generated
  2. 2
    Detection runs on photographic submissions to verify the label
  3. 3
    Mismatch between contributor label and detection routes to compliance review
  4. 4
    Approved assets indexed with provenance metadata for buyer search
  5. 5
    Buyer-side filters expose 'authentic photo only' or 'include AI content' toggles
  6. 6
    Contributor reputation tracked over time with label-accuracy score

Code example

python
# Pre-publication asset check
async def review_submission(asset):
    if asset.contributor_label == "ai_generated":
        return PublishWithLabel("ai_generated")
    
    verdict = await ai.detect_async(
        image_url=asset.url,
        webhook_url="https://api.example.com/webhooks/asset",
        metadata={"asset_id": asset.id, "contributor": asset.contributor_id}
    )
    return PendingDetection(verdict.job_id)

# In webhook handler
def handle_verdict(event):
    asset_id = event["metadata"]["asset_id"]
    if event["confidence"] > 0.85 and event["verdict"] == "ai_generated":
        flag_label_mismatch(asset_id, event)
        notify_contributor(asset_id, "Please confirm AI-generated label")
    else:
        publish_asset(asset_id)

Customer story

A mid-tier stock photo marketplace deployed detection across their contributor pipeline and identified that around 8 percent of monthly submissions self-labeled as photos were actually AI-generated. After implementing label-accuracy feedback to contributors, that number dropped to under 2 percent in three months.

Related reading

C2PA & Content Credentials Explained

Use case 08

Education and Academic Integrity

Detect AI-generated figures in submissions.

Figures scanned per term
Hundreds of thousands
Academic integrity cases
Up 4x with detection
Faculty time saved
Hours per course

The problem

Universities, journals, and online learning platforms face AI-generated figures, charts, lab images, and homework submissions. Existing plagiarism tools cover text but not visual content. Faculty cannot review every image submission and need automated assistance.

The solution

Integration with learning management systems and journal submission platforms scans every uploaded image. Suspect submissions get flagged for instructor review with detection evidence. Detection of figure manipulation (inpainting, splicing) handles edge cases beyond pure AI generation.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Student or author uploads assignment or paper with figures
  2. 2
    Each image batched to /v1/detect for analysis
  3. 3
    AI-generated or heavily edited figures flagged for academic review
  4. 4
    Faculty dashboard shows flagged submissions with detection heatmap
  5. 5
    Cases that warrant honor code review escalated to academic integrity office
  6. 6
    Aggregate trends shared with department leadership for policy decisions

Code example

typescript
// LMS integration , scan assignment submission
async function scanSubmission(submissionId, files) {
  const images = files.filter(f => f.type.startsWith('image/'));
  if (images.length === 0) return { ok: true };
  
  const batch = await ai.detectBatch({
    images: images.map(i => ({ url: i.url, ref: i.id })),
    metadata: { submissionId, courseId: files[0].courseId }
  });
  
  const flagged = batch.results.filter(r => 
    r.confidence > 0.8 && r.verdict === 'ai_generated'
  );
  
  if (flagged.length > 0) {
    await flagForFacultyReview(submissionId, flagged);
  }
  
  return { ok: true, scanned: batch.results.length, flagged: flagged.length };
}

Customer story

A research university integrated detection into their journal submission system and found that 12 percent of figures in submitted papers showed signs of AI generation or editing. After implementing the system, the policy team developed clear guidelines for legitimate AI-assisted work versus integrity violations.

Related reading

How to Detect AI-Generated Images

Use case 10

Banking and Fintech Fraud

Stop deepfake-driven account takeover.

Wire fraud blocked per quarter
$200K to $5M
False positive rate
Under 0.5%
Compliance reporting
Full SAR trail

The problem

Business email compromise and CEO fraud now routinely involve real-time deepfakes in video calls. Wire-transfer authorization workflows that depend on visual confirmation have failed in multi-million-dollar incidents. Customer-facing fraud (cloned-voice scams, deepfake romance fraud) is also rising fast.

The solution

Detection integrated into video call platforms, customer service flows, and high-value transaction approvals. Real-time scanning of video frames flags suspicious participants. Voice cloning detection (via partner integration) covers audio-only fraud. Combined with procedural controls (callback verification, multi-party approval) for defense in depth.

Workflow

  1. 1
    Video call or customer interaction triggers detection scan
  2. 2
    Real-time analysis of frames at 1 to 5 fps for live calls
  3. 3
    Suspicious patterns alert to call participants and security team
  4. 4
    High-value transactions require step-up authentication if detection flags
  5. 5
    All flagged events logged for SAR (Suspicious Activity Report) compliance
  6. 6
    Pattern analysis across accounts identifies fraud rings and shared deepfake assets

Code example

python
# High-value wire transfer approval middleware
def authorize_wire(transfer_request, video_session):
    if transfer_request.amount < HIGH_VALUE_THRESHOLD:
        return standard_approval(transfer_request)
    
    # Sample frames from the authorization video call
    frames = sample_frames(video_session, count=10)
    detection = client.detect_batch(
        images=[{"url": f.url, "ref": f.timestamp} for f in frames],
        metadata={
            "transfer_id": transfer_request.id,
            "amount": transfer_request.amount,
            "approver_user_id": transfer_request.approver_id
        }
    )
    
    deepfake_frames = [r for r in detection.results 
                       if r.confidence > 0.7 and "deepfake" in r.tags]
    
    if deepfake_frames:
        return require_callback_verification(transfer_request, detection)
    return approve_wire(transfer_request)

Customer story

A multinational bank deployed detection across their high-value wire-transfer approval flow after a competitor lost $25M to a deepfake CEO fraud incident. In the first year, detection flagged three suspected deepfake authorization attempts that were subsequently confirmed as fraud, totaling $4.2M in prevented losses.

Related reading

How to Detect Deepfakes

Common integration patterns

Three architectures that fit most use cases. Pick the one that matches your latency and volume needs.

Synchronous (blocking)

Best for

Real-time moderation, KYC, dating apps

Pros

  • Immediate user feedback
  • Simple to implement
  • Bad content never goes live

Tradeoffs

  • Detection latency adds to upload time
  • Not suitable for video
Latency: Sub-100ms typical

Asynchronous (webhook)

Best for

Marketplaces, social platforms, batch processing

Pros

  • Zero added latency for users
  • Scales to millions of items
  • Lower cost per scan

Tradeoffs

  • Content briefly live before flag
  • Webhook reliability requirements
Latency: Seconds to minutes

Hybrid (severity-based)

Best for

Insurance, banking, regulated industries

Pros

  • Best of both worlds
  • Risk-tiered approach
  • Flexible policy engine

Tradeoffs

  • More complex implementation
  • Requires good policy framework
Latency: Mixed

Find your fit. Build it in a week.

Whatever your use case, the integration usually ships in days. 500 free scans per month while you evaluate.