Security Management Standard: Physical Asset Protection
Security Management Standard
“Security Management Standard: Physical Asset Protection” is a 2012 ASIS International publication that assists security directors in completing their security planning.
“ASIS International Facilities Physical Security Measures Guideline,” also assists organizations in determining risk levels and the appropriate controls to secure assets in the most effective, efficient, and cost-saving manner.
After thoroughly reviewing these documents, summarize their contents and explain how the standard and the guideline will assist you in completing the vulnerability assessment required not only for this in this course, but also in your current of future security management career.
Also, identify, in your considered opinion, the five most significant physical controls used to protect corporate assets discussed in the document and explain your rationale, citing not only the advantages of the controls you selected, but also the drawbacks.
REMEMBER: Be sure to cite your sources from both the Learning Materials and outside research.
EXERCISE #2- PHYSICAL AND PROCEDURAL CONTROLS FOR PROTECTING ASSETS – SECURITY SCENARIO APPLICATION
In “Security Management Standard: Physical Asset Protection,” the authors discuss the use physical barriers as a physical control designed to protect assets by deterring individuals or delaying entry of those unauthorized to access the building or property. However, fences do not entirely “prevent” entry as we periodically read about with the “fence jumpers” at the White House In Washington, D.C. The authors identify fences and walls as the most common perimeter barriers and proceed to describe the various types: brick and stone walls, chain-link, welded-wire, barbed wire, razor or concertina wire, wooden, electronic, planters, steel barricades, and others.
As a result of the increased frequency of “fence jumpers” at the White House, the United States Secret Service (USSS) is planning to raise the current 6-foot-tall wrought iron fence surrounding the 18 acres to 11 feet. Other fence “anti-climb” features would also be a part of the plan. There has been significant public interest expressed in this matter. It seems the thoughtful consideration being given by the USSS as reported in the media regarding the selection of the new and enhanced design of the fence is a part of the agency’s risk assessment process and the employment of Practice Advisories we discussed in class last week. ASIS Practice Advisory # 6 relating to the “feasibility” of implementing the various security options to mitigate risk is particularly interesting regarding the decision about the fence and other possible security measures in and around the White House.
Identify and discuss the “practical” considerations the USSS must consider about the type and design of the fence to be surrounding the White House. Note: Security costs are not a real concern in this scenario as it might be in a corporate setting. Incorporate into your response whether or not you believe an 11-foot tall fence made from concrete, chain link, razor, or concertina wire would be a better choice from a security perspective and whether or not such fences would survive public and National Capital Planning Commission scrutiny. https://www.ncpc.gov/ncpc/Main(T2)/Planning(Tr2)/Planning.html