In your initial post, you will upload a video (no less than 90 seconds no more than 3 minutes), in which you deliver a speech of tribute. You may pick one of the following options: Option one: You wil

Fouzan Ali Ahmed

University of the Cumberlands

ISOL634-20 Physical Security

Week 7 Individual Project

Professor Richards

23rd June 2019

About

  With increasing concerns at work and organizations, it is crucial for us to design proper barriers and systems using principles of physical security. Physical security is a big topic, cyber crimes and cyber-terrorism, workplace violence, and IT security issues will continue to be the top issues (Fennelly, 2016). Businesses host a lot of sensitive data, equipment, and other valuable assets, which need to be secured from all sorts of outsiders. These assets can be compromised by an act of theft, vandalism, or even terrorism.

The most demanding problem for managers and supervisors within a protection department is the physical security devices under his control (Fennelly, 2016). In most of these cases, the issue is not with the buildings or the vault but due to the lack of attention to detail throughout the rest of the building. Organizations need to consider fixes that can help secure windows, doors, and basements to avoid intruders from breaking in. A solution depends on the needs of the organization or a facility to ensure these premises are more secure.

Overview

We are going to discuss two different scenarios when securities of commercial buildings were compromised even after placing strong security protocols. We are also going to see what other security measures should have been considered to avoid such instances in the first place. Both of these incidents had taken place in the recent past leaving us an opportunity to discuss what all access systems can be installed to help govern these buildings.

Incident 1

A diamond center in Belgium which was considered to be the anti-theft and safest was attacked and diamonds worth millions were stolen.

Diamond-related crimes may be either local or transnational, varying from spectacular robberies from the big museums and exhibitions to smuggling through complex schemes from Sierra Leone to Antwerp (Siegel, 2008). A team of specialists designed a vault for Antwerp’s Diamond Centre which was claimed to be unbreakable with several security layers. These layers were compromised with a lot of hurdles like an infrared heat sensor and a magnetic field. There were also claims that the key is not compatible with getting duplicated, making it one of the most complicated vaults to break in.

The Crime

In the year 2003, a group compromised of five different people managed to bypass all levels of security who speculated to have escaped with $100 million worth of diamonds. Usually. organized crime operates in illegal markets which are regulated by the extortion activities of criminal groups (Siegel, 2008). This may be stunning to learn that they all managed to break into the center through a window. The most important condition for the existence of organized crime is its ability to keep its activities hidden (Siegel, 2008). This event could have easily been avoided using a certain type of window protection measures.

Solution

If I was the security in-charge at Antwerp’s, I would have certainly installed Bradbury’s Spartan high-security bar sets; they are certified and have a Security Rating of 3. They have a thickness of 25mm with an outer frame of 5mm thickness.  A locking arrangement including a key-way enables the bar to be locked in a horizontal position using a removable key to helping to prevent unauthorized opening of the patio door even from the interior of the building having the opening (Evans,1979). They offer the best security to secure any opening from inside or outside within bricks, concrete or steel frames. This solution should have certainly made it impossible for thieves to have gained access to the vault.

Incident 2

A group of two men broke into a museum in Boston, Massachusetts stealing artwork estimated at 500 million dollars.

This is still considered as one of the biggest art theft in the history of the United States. In 1990, The Isabella Stewart Gardener Museum was designed and built a Venetian palazzo in Boston to contain her the world-famous art collection, where she lived and entertained lavishly and which stands today as the ultimate triumph of her remarkable life (Tucci, 1997). It was targeted by two men who disguised themselves as cops pretending to have been reported of some disturbance in the building. They managed to gain access through the main entrance, where a security guard gave them access.

What exactly went wrong?

This event is a true example of a human error where the security personnel didn’t verify the true identity of those men. There is nothing new about tragic accidents caused by human error; but in the past, the injuries consequences were usually confined to the immediate vicinity of the disaster (Reason, 1990). However, this could have easily been skipped by adopting a few access control systems. We should have installed systems with key cards or fingerprints at different grills and doors prohibiting any intruders from entering rooms where valuables were stored. An access control system includes a fingerprint enrolling station for sensing a fingerprint of a person and enrolling the person as an authorized person based upon the sensed fingerprint (Schmitt,(1999).

The fix

Various solutions like constructing barriers with installation of Bradbury’s Extendor Eclipse along with all doorways.  A first door is hinged connected to the door frame and includes a second portion which is capable of latching to the door frame (Colombo, 1996). This could have provided the best security measures and kept the unauthorized impersonators from gaining access to steal the artwork. Access to the interior of the building is through a service door, usually located at the end of the building, this service door must then be locked immediately to prevent any unauthorized persons from entering the building. (Dallman, 1987)

References

Fennelly, L. (2016). Effective physical security. Butterworth-Heinemann.

Siegel, D. (2008). Diamonds and organized crime: The case of Antwerp. In Organized Crime: Culture, Markets and Policies(pp. 85-96). Springer, New York, NY.

Evans, A. A., & Rifkin, M. S. (1979). U.S. Patent No. 4,135,376. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Shand-Tucci, D. (1997). The Art of Scandal: The Life and Times of Isabella Stewart Gardner (p. 87). HarperCollins.

Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambridge university press.

Schmitt, J. C., & Setlak, D. R. (1999). U.S. Patent No. 5,903,225. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Colombo, A. (1996). U.S. Patent No. 5,542,211. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Dallman, E. R. (1987). U.S. Patent No. 4,681,044. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.