ISOL634 UOTC Potential Vulnerabilities & Physical Security Discussion For this Discussion Board, please share the information you provided in last week’s I

ISOL634 UOTC Potential Vulnerabilities & Physical Security Discussion For this Discussion Board, please share the information you provided in last week’s Individual Project Assignment with your classmates. Additionally, examine yours as well as your classmates’ protocols
and point out the areas where you believe their intended security
protocols might be vulnerable, as well as ways to improve their
strategies. Please discuss potential vulnerabilities in two paragraphs. You
must have a minimum of 3 credible citations to support your claims or
arguments. Effective Physical
Security
Fourth Edition
Lawrence J. Fennelly
AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON
NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO
SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO
Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier
Acquiring Editor: MJ Peluso
Development Editor: Amber Hodge
Project Manager: Jessica Vaughan
Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier
225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, UK
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without
­permission in writing from the publisher. Details on how to seek permission, further information about the
­Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangements with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance
­Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions.
This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other
than as may be noted herein).
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new research and experience broaden our
understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using
any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein. In using such information or methods
they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a
professional responsibility.
To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability
for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or
from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Application submitted
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN: 978-0-12-415892-4
Printed in the United States
For information on all BH publications visit our
website at www.elsevierdirect.com/security
12 13 14 15 16 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
D E D I C AT I O N
I’m dedicating this book to my two lovely
sisters, Christine and Sheila. Two totally
different personalities, but very sweet
and as loving as can be. I’m ­fortunate to
have them as my sisters.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It takes many hands and computers to write a
book and this text is no exception. I’m deeply
grateful to all those who over the years put down
on paper their knowledge so others can benefit. I
hope you realize how dedicated these individuals
are to our profession. They spent countless hours
at the computer creating their respective chapters.
My thanks to Mark Beaudry, PhD, CPP, who
read the previous edition, page after page, noting corrections and deletions. Also, my thanks
to Louis A. Tyska, CPP, and Donald Di Nardo;
thank you for your advice and support. To Marianna Perry, MS, CPP; Randy Atlas PhD, CPP;
Steve McKinnon, CPP; Joseph Nelson, CPP; Inge
S. Black, CPP; Scott Fishman; and Rick Draper,
who updated his paper after an operation in
Australia.
Finally, my thanks to the staff at Elsevier. I’m
privileged to work with such a dedicated group
of individuals. I could not have completed this
book without their professional assistance.
This book is intended for the practitioners
who want to make a difference. Since 1980 when
I compiled my first book, we have been doing
research on what security practitioners need to
know and what is new in the industry. One thing
is very clear—things are changing rapidly. Physical assets protection systems need to be properly
managed and most are not. Effective physical
security is the use of devices to protect people,
property, and information through proper management, inspection, and maintenance.
ix
FOREWORD
When Larry Fennelly started out at the Harvard
University Police Department more than 35 years
ago (now retired), he knew nothing about crime
prevention per se and knew less about physical
security, procedural security, and assets protection until he attended the National Crime
Prevention Institute at the University of Louisville, Kentucky. Plus, he got involved in ASIS
and active with several councils. What were his
goals? First, to be a good university police officer
and to protect its assets (over 500 buildings) to
which he had been assigned.
But he was also a visionary. He was able to
identify the state of the art of loss/crime prevention in the 1980s and edited his first book, which
is now in its fifth edition. He told me, “There was
information that I needed and there wasn’t a text
around that had it, so we proposed and created
the Handbook of Loss Prevention.” To date,
he has written/edited 29 books that are read by
thousands and internationally accepted as wellknown sources in the industry.
In those intervening years of change and development Larry learned and studied a lot about his
profession. He progressed on the job and became
a superior officer and later director of security
for a museum at Harvard. He was a respected
member in and out of his own campus enforcement environment. He obviously loves to write. I
asked him who is/was his favorite security author.
He replied “I have two: John Fay, CPP, and Norman Bottom, PHD, CPP, both trendsetters.” I
asked what he likes to read that is nonsecurity
related, and he replied, “I have three favorites:
W.E.B. Griffith, a genius with a typewriter and
computer, Lee Child, and Michael Connolly; I
can’t get enough of them.”
Much of what Larry has learned and experienced over the years is contained in his books.
This text is not a conventional security book, as
much of his practical personal experiences have
influence over the many sections found within
this effort. Contained in each chapter are the current necessary specifics to ensure that practitioners who have a need can reference this text with
a particular and immediate dilemma and come
up with a practical amount of knowledge to help
solve the moment’s crisis.
Overall this book contains the knowledge
and experiences of about 40 professional security practitioners who have dozens of years of
experience in the security field. This text as well
as others will serve as one of the stages of development for your assets protection program.
Times have changed, and the world has
changed its security level since September 11,
2001. What does that tell you? Simple: You must
also advance with the times, think outside the
box, and become a visionary as well.
Truly one of the hardest projects I have ever
tackled is a recent project with Mark Beaudry,
CPP, in which I edited his book Security in the
Year 2020. I mention this because it’s 2012, a
period when we are into hybrid multichannel
digital video recorders with digital deterrents,
1080p HD CCTV units, miniature color cameras with infrared LEDs, devices working with
Iphones, robots, drones, 4G, and IP, all ecofriendly and low-energy consumption. So, I ask,
are you ready for the future? Plan now!
Louis A. Tyska, CPP
xi
CHAPTER
1
Influence of Physical
Design
Marianna Perry, MS, CPP
INTRODUCTION
The relationship between physical design and
informal social control of crime is a new idea
only in the sense of its systematic application
to the modern urban scene. Prior to the development of the modern city, most societies took
some precautions to relate security in the physical environment to a responsibility for security
actions by the inhabitants themselves.
In the rush of modern urban development,
however, economic and political priorities seem
to far outweigh security priorities, with the result
that many urban settings now seem deliberately
designed to discourage informal social control.
No colonial community would have done so, even
when stockades were no longer needed for defense.
New England towns continued to be constructed
so that homes and stores formed a hollow square
around a central common area where social activities could take place and where livestock could be
kept in relative security. In this kind of environment, everyone knew everyone else’s business.
While this meant less personal privacy than the
modern city-dweller may enjoy, it also meant a
high degree of shared responsibility for controlling undesirable behavior and unwanted intrusion.
Only recently have students of modern urban
society begun again to take serious note of the
relationship between physical design and informal social control. Jane Jacobs first applied the
concept to modern cities in 1961. In her book
The Death and Life of Great American Cities [1],
she theorized that multiple land uses along residential streets provided an interaction between
the physical design and the users (pedestrians and
residents), which promoted natural and informal
surveillance and, therefore, increased the safety
of the streets.
Lee Rainwater, in an evaluation of a public
housing project in St. Louis in 1966, discussed
the effect of physical design on the attitudes of
public housing residents, pointing out that inappropriate architectural design was directly related
to antisocial behavior [2].
Elizabeth Wood, writing in 1961, suggested
that current design patterns in public housing
projects appeared to discourage informal social
relationships and gatherings, thereby preventing
the development of social interactions through
which residents could create informal social controls and self-policing [3].
Schlomo Angel, in 1968, found that variations in the level of pedestrian and vehicular
traffic could either encourage or discourage
crimes [4]. Too few users provided enough
potential victims, but not enough potential
witnesses.
1
2
CHAPTER 1 Influence of Physical Design
Gerald Leudtke and E. Lystad found, as the
result of studies in Detroit, that
many of the features of urban form and structure…could tend to facilitate or decrease
the4 probability of crime. Such physical features include the condition and maintenance
of buildings, streets, and alleys; evidence of
recent construction; mixtures of land use;
rates of pedestrian traffic and pedestrian
accumulation within various land uses;
location of structures on an urban grid pattern; and distance to adjacent structures.
Other examples are types of parking facilities; visibility into structures from roads,
sidewalks and adjoining buildings; concealment by trees, shrubs, parked automobiles,
fences, signs, and advertising; the visibility
of entrance points; building setbacks; and,
the number and arrangement of entrance
points in a building [5].
In 1969, Oscar Newman and George Rand [6]
developed a theory of territoriality (now referred
to as defensible space) that held that proper
physical design of housing encourages residents
to extend their social control from their homes
and apartments out into the surrounding common areas. In this way, they change what previously had been perceived as semi-public or
public territory into private territory. Upgrading
the common areas in this way results in increased
social control and an interaction between physical environment and its users that reduces crime.
As Newman himself defines it,
Defensible space is a surrogate term for the
range of mechanisms—real and symbolic
barriers, strongly defined areas of influence,
improved opportunities for surveillance—
that combine to bring an environment
under the control of its residents. A defensible space is a living residential environment
that can be employed by inhabitants for the
enhancement of their lives, while providing security for their families, neighbors,
and friends. The public areas of a multifamily residential environment devoid of
defensible space can make the act of going
from street to apartment equivalent to running the gauntlet. The fear and uncertainty
generated by living in such an environment
can slowly eat away and eventually destroy
the security and sanctity of the apartment
unit itself. On the other hand, by grouping dwelling units to reinforce association
of mutual benefit, by delineating paths of
movement, by defining areas of activity for
particular users through their juxtaposition
with internal living areas, and by providing
for natural opportunities for visual surveillance, architects can create a clear understanding of the function of a space, who its
users are and ought to be. This, in turn, can
lead residents of all income levels to adopt
extremely potent territorial attitudes and
policing measures, which act as a strong
deterrent to potential criminals [7].
A study by Reppetto [8] in Boston indicated the
need to expand the crime prevention through
environmental design process to include whole
neighborhoods and provide for comprehensive
data collection efforts, which would both define
the nature of crime patterns and suggest appropriate countermeasures.
Reppetto was also able to show that closely
knit communities do tend to protect their members through informal social controls. This finding was further emphasized by John Conklin in
The Impact of Crime:
A tightly knit community can minimize the
problem of street crime. However, informal social control also poses a threat to the
diversity of behavior that exists in a pluralistic society, even though it may curb violent crime. Still, street crime would decline
if interaction among the residents of a community were more frequent, and if social
bonds were stronger. A sense of responsibility for other citizens and for the community as a whole would increase individuals’
willingness to report crime to the police
and the likelihood of their intervention in
a crime in progress. Greater willingness
CHAPTER 1 Influence of Physical Design
of community residents to report crime to
the police might also obviate the need for
civilian police patrols. More interaction in
public places and human traffic on the sidewalks would increase surveillance of the
places where people now fear to go. More
intense social ties would reinforce surveillance with a willingness to take action
against offenders [9].
C. Ray Jeffrey, in his classic theoretical work
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(1971) [10], written before Jeffrey became aware
of the works of Newman and others, proposed
a three-fold strategy involving not only physical
design, but also increased citizen participation and
the more effective use of police forces. He contended that the way to prevent crime is to design
the total environment in such a manner that the
opportunity for crime is reduced or eliminated.
Jeffrey contends that both the physical and
social characteristics of an urban area affect
crime patterns. Better physical planning is a key
to unlocking the potential for improved physical security and the potential for development of
informal social control. He also argues for high
levels of precision in the analytical stages that
precede physical planning for crime reduction:
One of the major methodological defects in
ecological studies of crime rates has been the
use of large units and census tract data as a
basis for analysis. The usual units are rural–
urban, intricacy, intercity, regional, and
national differences.…Such an approach
is much too gross for finding the physical
features associated with different types of
crimes.
We must look at the physical environment
in terms of each building, or each room of
the building, or each floor of the building.
Fine-grain resolution is required in place of
the usual large-scale photographs.…Whenever crime rates are surveyed at a micro
level of analysis, it is revealed that a small
area of the city is responsible for a major-
3
ity of the crimes. This fact is glossed over
by gross statistical correlation analysis of
census tract data, which ignore house-byhouse or block-by-block variations in crime
rates. For purposes of crime prevention we
need data that will tell us what aspects of
the urban environment are responsible for
crime, such as the concentration of homicide or robbery in a very small section of
the city [11].
DEFENSIBLE SPACE
Oscar Newman and others have explored and
further defined the defensible space concept in
recent years through design studies and experiments involving existing and new public housing
projects. The following summary of defensible
space techniques will give the practitioner an
initial understanding of this important application of physical design to the urban residential
environment.
Design for defensible space involves attempts
to strengthen two basic kinds of social behavior
called territoriality and natural surveillance.
Territoriality
The classic example of territoriality is the “a
man’s home is his castle” tradition of the American single-family home and its surroundings. In
this tradition, the family lays claim to its own
territory and acts to protect it. This image of the
home as a castle reinforces itself “by the very
act of its position on an integral piece of land
buffered from neighbors and the public street by
intervening grounds” [12].
As the urban setting has grown, the singlefamily home has become, to developers, an economic liability. Family housing has moved into
the row house (townhouse), apartment complex, high-rise apartment structure, and massive
public housing project. Whatever the benefits
of this transition, the idea of territoriality has
been largely lost in the process. The result is that
“most families living in an apartment building
4
CHAPTER 1 Influence of Physical Design
experience the space outside their apartment
unit as distinctly public; in effect, they relegate
responsibility for all activity outside the immediate confines of their apartment to the public
authorities” [13].
As residents are forced by the physical design
of their surroundings to abandon claim to any
part of the outside world, the hallways, stairways, lobbies, grounds, parking lots, and streets
become a kind of no-man’s land in which criminals can operate almost at will. Public and private law enforcement agencies (formal controls)
attempt to take up the slack, but without the
essential informal social control that a welldeveloped social sense of territoriality brings,
law enforcement can do little to reduce crime.
Natural Surveillance
The increased presence of human observers,
which territoriality brings, can lead to higher
levels of natural surveillance in all areas of residential space. However, the simple presence of
increased numbers of potential observers is not
enough, because natural surveillance, to be effective, must include an action component. The
probability that an observer will act to report an
observed crime or intervene in it depends on:
??
• The degree to which the observer feels that his
or her personal or property rights are violated
by the observed act.
• The extent to which the observer is able to
identify with the victim or property under
attack.
• The level of the observer’s belief that his or
her action can help, on the one hand, and not
subject him or her to reprisals on the other.
??
Obviously, the probability for both observation and action is greatly improved by physical
conditions, which create the highest possible
levels of visibility.
Design Guidelines
Defensible space offers a series of architectural
guidelines that can be used in the design of new
urban residential complexes to promote both the
residential group’s territorial claim to its surroundings and its ability to conduct natural surveillance [14].
??
• Site design can stress the clustering of small
numbers of residential units …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment