Covert Munkey
Administrator
View attachment 39View attachment 40
SURVEILLANCE DETECTION
The Problem
Defence against concerted attacks by terrorists and criminals on a fixed facility, or key personnel in transit, is often problematic for a number of reasons.
Even well trained and equipped guards, a state-of-the-art CCTV system and a good relationship with local Police Force will only provide a reactive capability.
While physical security measures are essential as the ‘inner ring’ of protective security around facilities, terrorist groups and criminals have shown great resourcefulness in overcoming these.
History has shown that terrorists and criminals frequently change tactics. However, certain modes of attack preparation and criminality remain unchanged.
Investigations of past successful attacks reveal that attackers consistently engage in prior detailed planning necessary to identify, circumvent and neutralize security; identify the best attack sites; develop the attack methodology; and determine escape routes.
At times this may even include ‘dry runs’, or attack rehearsals disguised in seemingly harmless activity near the target.
The most popular method for attackers to obtain the information necessary to formulate and carry out an attack is to conduct detailed surveillance of their target over an extended period of time.
Conventional security measures generally focus on physical barriers and denial procedures. These measures do not reveal seemingly innocuous planning activity that may be taking place outside the security perimeter.
Detection of ‘pre-operational’ surveillance, in addition to physical and procedural methods, provides maximum effectiveness in disrupting, or mitigating, the effects of a terrorist attack, or other criminal acts.
CSSG trained specialist’s view the potential ‘target’ through the eyes of would-be attackers, in order to reveal prime surveillance positions that can be used by terrorists and or criminals.
View attachment 39
SURVEILLANCE DETECTION
The Problem
Defence against concerted attacks by terrorists and criminals on a fixed facility, or key personnel in transit, is often problematic for a number of reasons.
Even well trained and equipped guards, a state-of-the-art CCTV system and a good relationship with local Police Force will only provide a reactive capability.
While physical security measures are essential as the ‘inner ring’ of protective security around facilities, terrorist groups and criminals have shown great resourcefulness in overcoming these.
History has shown that terrorists and criminals frequently change tactics. However, certain modes of attack preparation and criminality remain unchanged.
Investigations of past successful attacks reveal that attackers consistently engage in prior detailed planning necessary to identify, circumvent and neutralize security; identify the best attack sites; develop the attack methodology; and determine escape routes.
At times this may even include ‘dry runs’, or attack rehearsals disguised in seemingly harmless activity near the target.
The most popular method for attackers to obtain the information necessary to formulate and carry out an attack is to conduct detailed surveillance of their target over an extended period of time.
Conventional security measures generally focus on physical barriers and denial procedures. These measures do not reveal seemingly innocuous planning activity that may be taking place outside the security perimeter.
Detection of ‘pre-operational’ surveillance, in addition to physical and procedural methods, provides maximum effectiveness in disrupting, or mitigating, the effects of a terrorist attack, or other criminal acts.
CSSG trained specialist’s view the potential ‘target’ through the eyes of would-be attackers, in order to reveal prime surveillance positions that can be used by terrorists and or criminals.
View attachment 39
Last edited: