Components of physical security risk
https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2019-16-4-82-93
Abstract
The article considers the existing methods of risk analysis in the design of physical protection systems. It is noted that in the expert method vulnerability assessed integrally, that does not guarantee the principle of equal strength, vulnerability elements of physical protection are considered without regard to the vulnerability of the object itself, and parameters of the model of the intruder, not taking into account such factors as catalysts and inhibitors of the threat. Noted that to improve the adequacy of physical protection required the formation of a databank of security threats and vulnerabilities.
About the Author
D. L. Filippov
Bauman State Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
105005, Russia, Moscow, 2nd Baumanskaya St., 5, bldg 1
References
1. Alberto R. Gonzales, Regina B. Schofi eld, Domingo S. Herraiz. Assessing and Managing the Terrorism Threat U. S. Department of Justice. Offi ce of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2005.
2. Belov V. P., Golyakov A. D. Terminology database of the theory of safety // Standards and Quality. 2004. No. 9. P. 48—51 (Russia).
3. Arnold B. Baker, Robert J. Eagan, and other. A Scalable Systems Approach for Critical Infrastructure Security, SAND REPORT, SAND2002-0877, 2002.
4. The guide to safety when using atomic energy “Recommendations about carrying out analisa of vulnerability of a radiation object” (RB-120-16). It is approved by the order FSETAN No. 535 of 14.12.2016. (Russia).
5. Nancy A. Renfroe, Joseph L. Smith. Threat / Vulnerability Assessments and Risk Analysis. Whole Building’ Design Techniques and Technologies. https://www.wbdg.org/resources/threat-vulnerability-assessments-and-riskanalysis.
6. GOST P 52551-2006 of the Systems of protection and safety. Terms and defi nitions. (Russia).
7. Whitehead D. W., Potter C. S., O’Connor S. L. Nuclear Power Plant Security. Assessment Technical Manual, SANDIA REPORT, SAND2007-5591, 2007.
8. GOST P 22.10.01-2001 Safety in emergency situations. Damage assessment. Terms and defi nitions. (Russia).
9. http://www.s-director.ru/project/physical_security.html
10. Gatsko M. About a ratio of the concepts “threat” and “danger” // Th e Observer. 1997. No. 7.
11. Science Direct/Journals & Books. https://www.sciencedirect. com/topics/computer-science/physical-security.
12. Boyarintsev A. V., Nichikov A. V., Redkin V. B. General approach to development of models of violators // Security systems. 2007. No. 4. P. 50—53 (Russia).
13. Uniform interdepartmental technique of assessment of damage from emergency situations of technogenic, natural and terrorist character and also classifi cation and accounting of emergency situations. M.: All-Russian Research Institute GOChS (FTs) Federal State Institution, 2004.
14. RB 009-99 Methodology of assessment of vulnerability of physical protection of nuclear materials and nuclear facilities (Russia).
15. Guide to safety when using atomic energy of “The recommendation about carrying out the analysis of vulnerability of a radiation object” (RB-120-16) (утв. order of Federal Service for Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Supervision of December 14, 2016. No. 535).]
16. Dudko D. What will be dynamics of growth of internal threats in the nearest future?http://www.securitylab.ru/blog/personal/ddudko/303607.php
17. Databank of threats to security of information http://bdu.fstec.ru/threat
18. The Design and Evaluation of Physical Protection Systems / Garcia M. L. (Boston). ISBN 5-03-003522-2.
19. Garcia M. L. Vulnerability Assessment of Physical Protection Systems, Boston, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006.
20. Darril Gibson. CompTIA Security+: Get Certifi ed Get Ahead: SY0-401 Study Guide, 2014.
21. GOST P 52860-2007 Technical means of physical protection. General technical requirements.
22. Betty Biringer. A Risk Assessment Methodology for Physical Security. Systems Analysis and Development Department, 5845. Sandia National Laboratories, MS 0759.
23. Alberto R. Gonzales, Regina B. Schofi eld, Domingo S. Herraiz. Assessing and Managing the Terrorism Threat U. S. Department of Justice. Offi ce of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Assistance, 2005.
24. Arnold B. Baker, Robert J. Eagan, and other. A Scalable Systems Approach for Critical Infrastructure Security, SAND REPORT, SAND2002-0877, 2002.
25. Nancy A. Renfroe, Joseph L. Smith. Threat / Vulnerability Assessments and Risk Analysis. Whole Building’ Design Techniques and Technologies. https://www.wbdg.org/resources/threat-vulnerability-assessments-and-riskanalysis.
26. Whitehead D. W., Potter C. S., O’Connor S. L. Nuclear Power Plant Security. Assessment Technical Manual, SANDIA REPORT, SAND2007-5591, 2007.
27. http://www.s-director.ru/project/physical_security.html
28. Science Direct/Journals & Books. https://www.sciencedirect. com/topics/computer-science/physical-security.
Review
For citations:
Filippov D.L. Components of physical security risk. Issues of Risk Analysis. 2019;16(4):82-93. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2019-16-4-82-93
Views:
1228
Email this article 