This Technical Report aims at providing information to be used for the design of the future activities for making a ‘perimeter protection standard’.<\/p>\n
This CEN Technical Report describes a performance classification methodology for the identification of the desired systems performance for perimeter protection systems. It also gives a conceptual framework for matching the desired performance and the capabilities of a possible solution.<\/p>\n
Furthermore this CEN Technical Report presents the results of inventories that have been made on current systems and (generic type) products, relevant member states regulations, relevant documents from CEN, CEN\/TC 325, ISO and other sources. It should be noted that these inventories cannot be considered complete and any values given should be considered indicative values.<\/p>\n
The following subjects are not covered by this Technical Report:<\/p>\n
threats approaching from the sea side;<\/p>\n<\/li>\n
threats approaching through the air.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
It is recognized that with regard to vital infrastructure and very high risk objects the generic system approach indicated in this Technical Report may not suffice and additional checklists and risk assessment tools may be required.<\/p>\n
| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7<\/td>\n | Foreword <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 8<\/td>\n | 0 Introduction 0.1 Purpose 0.2 Approach 0.3 Vital infrastructure <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 9<\/td>\n | 1 Scope 2 Normative references 3 Terms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 17<\/td>\n | 4 Performance classification methodology 4.1 Outline of the approach <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | 4.2 Determining the required the level of protection \u2013 picture of the methodology <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 19<\/td>\n | Figure 1 \u2014Subsequent steps in the assessment model <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 20<\/td>\n | 4.3 Assumptions and starting point making the calculation model <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 21<\/td>\n | Figure 2 \u2014 Different perspectives of CEN\/TC 388 and CEN\/TC 325 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 22<\/td>\n | 4.4 The questionnaire of the calculation the model 4.4.1 Introduction to the questionnaire Figure 3 \u2014 Data entry sheet calculation model (partial) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | 4.4.2 Text of the questionnaire annex data entry sheet <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 26<\/td>\n | 5 Modus operandi 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Aggressor types <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 27<\/td>\n | 5.3 Scenarios 5.4 Toolsets 6 Risk assessment methodology 6.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | 6.2 Risk \u2013 Target identification 6.3 Threats 6.4 Site characterization 6.4.1 General 6.4.2 Site and physical environment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 29<\/td>\n | 6.4.3 Human and social factors of the environment 6.4.4 Use of the site 6.4.5 Type of access 7 Level of protection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | Table 1 \u2014 Nature of the problem and Level of protection 8 Determining functional requirements 8.1 Introduction Table 2 \u2014 Level op protection and indicative solution 8.2 Questions for establishing the functional requirement <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | 9 Elements of possible solutions 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Elements of delay 9.2.1 Overview of elements of delay <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | 9.2.2 Fences <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 33<\/td>\n | Table 3 \u2014 Tentative classes for fences 9.2.3 Walls <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | 9.2.4 Barriers 9.2.5 Gates 9.2.6 Roadblockers, Bollards 9.3 Elements of detection 9.3.1 Introduction 9.3.2 Overview of elements of detection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | 9.3.3 Detection 9.3.4 Exterior sensors PIDS 9.3.5 Lighting 9.3.6 Entry\/exit control <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 36<\/td>\n | 9.4 External elements 9.5 Local law and regulations 10 Inventories <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 37<\/td>\n | 11 On testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 38<\/td>\n | Annex A Security system operational requirements \u2013 Q and A <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 41<\/td>\n | Annex B Framework for perimeter protection systems evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 42<\/td>\n | Figure B.1 \u2014 Framework for perimeter protection systems evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 43<\/td>\n | Annex C An environmental and organizational checklist for perimeter protection C.1 Introduction C.2 Environmental checklist for perimeter protection Table C.1 \u2014 Environmental checklist for perimeter protection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 47<\/td>\n | C.3 Organizational checklist for perimeter protection Table C.2 \u2014 Organizational checklist for perimeter protection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 51<\/td>\n | Annex D A perimeter security technologies classification D.1 Introduction D.2 Four families for intrusion detection D.2.1 Structure of the annex <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 52<\/td>\n | D.2.2 Structure of the four main Tables D.3 to D.6 Table D.1 \u2014 List of technical features and their subdivision <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 54<\/td>\n | Table D.2 \u2014 Definition of the technologies considered in Tables D.3 to D.6 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 56<\/td>\n | D.3 Stand-alone equipment Table D.3 \u2014 Stand-alone equipment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 60<\/td>\n | D.4 Fence-mounted sensors Table D.4 \u2014 Fence-mounted equipment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 61<\/td>\n | D.5 Active Physical security Table D.5 \u2014 Comparative of perimetric detection technologies <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 64<\/td>\n | D.6 Underground sensors Table D.6 \u2014 Buried Sensors <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 66<\/td>\n | Annex E Inventory of perimeter intruder detection systems (PIDs) E.1 Introduction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 67<\/td>\n | E.2 Combination of two sensors <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 68<\/td>\n | Table E.1 \u2014 Information on perimeter intruder detection systems (PIDs) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 73<\/td>\n | Annex F Matrix of current systems and (generic type) products <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 74<\/td>\n | Table F.1 \u2014 Information on systems and products for perimeter protection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 88<\/td>\n | Annex G On Perimeter surveillance and burglary resistance G.1 Introduction G.2 Use of detection systems for perimeter protection G.2.1 Basic requirements for perimeter surveillance systems <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 89<\/td>\n | Figure G.1 \u2014 Elements of a security analysis <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 90<\/td>\n | G.2.2 Basic principles of the detection systems Table G.1 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 91<\/td>\n | G.2.3 Comparison of detection systems Figure G.2 \u2014 Comparison of detection systems G.2.4 Summary <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 92<\/td>\n | G.3 Classification for burglary resistance G.3.1 Recommendations for the assessment of the resistance class Table G.3 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 93<\/td>\n | Table G.4 G.3.2 DIN-Standards for burglar resistance Table G.5 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 94<\/td>\n | Annex H Pictures of fences, gates and entrance barriers H.1 Introduction H.2 Different sorts of fences H.2.1 Vegetable fences Figure H.1 \u2014 Vegetable fences <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 95<\/td>\n | H.2.2 Wood palisade Figure H.2 \u2014 Wood palisade <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 96<\/td>\n | H.2.3 Walls Figure H.3 \u2014 Concrete reinforced Figure H.4 \u2014 Stone <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 97<\/td>\n | Figure H.5 \u2014 Breezeblock <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 98<\/td>\n | H.2.4 Metallic fences Figure H.6 \u2014 Chainlink fences <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 99<\/td>\n | Figure H.7 \u2014 Welded mesh fences <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 100<\/td>\n | Figure H.8 \u2014 Palisades <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 101<\/td>\n | H.2.5 Combinations of systems Figure H.9 \u2014 Combinations of systems that include a vegetable fence <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 102<\/td>\n | H.3 Supplementary accessories H.3.1 Razor wire Figure H.10 \u2014 Razor wire H.3.2 Sharp pins Figure H.11 \u2014 Sharp pins <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 103<\/td>\n | H.4 Gates and entrance barriers H.4.1 Gates Figure H.12 \u2014 Swing Gates Figure H.13 \u2014 Sliding Gate Figure H.14 \u2014 Cantilever Gate <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 104<\/td>\n | H.4.2 Road obstacles Figure H.15 \u2014 Bollard Figure H.16 \u2014 Road Block Figure H.17 \u2014 Wedge barrier <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 105<\/td>\n | Figure H.18 \u2014 Crash gate Figure H.19 \u2014 Barriers lift system Figure H.20 \u2014 Defence barrier Figure H.21 \u2014 Tyre killer <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 106<\/td>\n | Annex I CEN Workshop Agreement CWA 16221 I.1 Introduction I.2 Scope of CWA 16221:2010 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 107<\/td>\n | I.3 Table of Content of CWA 16221:2010 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 111<\/td>\n | Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Perimeter protection. Performance classification methodology<\/b><\/p>\n |