CA2599130A1 - Method for modeling and testing a security system - Google Patents
Method for modeling and testing a security system Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2599130A1 CA2599130A1 CA002599130A CA2599130A CA2599130A1 CA 2599130 A1 CA2599130 A1 CA 2599130A1 CA 002599130 A CA002599130 A CA 002599130A CA 2599130 A CA2599130 A CA 2599130A CA 2599130 A1 CA2599130 A1 CA 2599130A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- security
- security system
- computer
- modeled
- breach
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/20—Design optimisation, verification or simulation
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G08—SIGNALLING
- G08B—SIGNALLING OR CALLING SYSTEMS; ORDER TELEGRAPHS; ALARM SYSTEMS
- G08B29/00—Checking or monitoring of signalling or alarm systems; Prevention or correction of operating errors, e.g. preventing unauthorised operation
- G08B29/18—Prevention or correction of operating errors
- G08B29/20—Calibration, including self-calibrating arrangements
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
- G06F30/10—Geometric CAD
- G06F30/13—Architectural design, e.g. computer-aided architectural design [CAAD] related to design of buildings, bridges, landscapes, production plants or roads
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G08—SIGNALLING
- G08B—SIGNALLING OR CALLING SYSTEMS; ORDER TELEGRAPHS; ALARM SYSTEMS
- G08B31/00—Predictive alarm systems characterised by extrapolation or other computation using updated historic data
Abstract
A method of designing, modeling, and testing a security system for protecting a defined security area. The method includes modeling the security area, modeling the security system for the security area, and testing the security system using a computer to run one or more breach scenarios to determine whether there are any weaknesses in the security system. The testing may be in the form of a computer game with one or more players implementing the models and one or more breach scenarios and/or in real-time.
Description
Title: Method for Modeling and Testing a Security System Inventor: Dennis J. Johnson Background of the Invention Field of the invention [0001] This invention generally relates to security systems for a structure and the area surrounding the structure. More particularly, this invention relates to a method of designing a complex security system that 1o enables determining the efficacy of the security system in real-word scenarios prior to implementation of the actual system components and enables efficient personnel training.
Description of the Related Art [0002] A multitude of instances exist wherein it is desirable to implement a security system for a given area. Such an area, or security area, may be of any size and may include structures, facilities supporting the structures, infrastructures, grounds within a defined perimeter, and outer perimeter grounds and structures. The security area may be a single family dwelling, a multiple family dwelling, a business facility, a government or military installation, or a natural area such as a park or preserve. In some cases, a security system is designed along with the security area. In other cases, security systems are implemented in existing structures and areas.
Description of the Related Art [0002] A multitude of instances exist wherein it is desirable to implement a security system for a given area. Such an area, or security area, may be of any size and may include structures, facilities supporting the structures, infrastructures, grounds within a defined perimeter, and outer perimeter grounds and structures. The security area may be a single family dwelling, a multiple family dwelling, a business facility, a government or military installation, or a natural area such as a park or preserve. In some cases, a security system is designed along with the security area. In other cases, security systems are implemented in existing structures and areas.
[0003] Security systems today may include sophisticated sensor technology, monitoring systems, command and control systems, and security personnel. Even smaller systems can become expensive to implement and, once implemented, gaps in the security system can be costly in terms of property loss and/or personal injury and/or loss of life.
[0004] Typically, new or retro-fit systems are designed by receiving customer requirements with specifications of the security area. The security system designer uses the customer requirements, specifications and allocated budget to select system elements and methods to secure the area. Once accepted, the system is physically implemented and tested. The system tests typically consist of physical testing of the system elements, i.e., providing a known input to test for an expected output within element specifications.
[0005] In rare cases, the overall security system is tested using mock drills once the system is installed and operational. In some cases, existing systems are tested by these mock drills, but these drills can be labor intensive, will disrupt normal work hours and schedules of the facility, and may fail to account for certain scenarios of breach. Therefore, there is a need to reduce labor and facility/workforce time required to test security 1o systems and to train personnel on installed security systems.
[0006] Sometimes rework is required due to specification changes, unforeseen obstacles, or testing results revealing one or more selected elements do not meet customer requirements. These rework operations can become quite costly and cause delay in system completion.
Therefore, there is a need to reduce rework of security system elements by optimizing the security system prior to installation.
Therefore, there is a need to reduce rework of security system elements by optimizing the security system prior to installation.
[0007] Electrical circuit modeling is known as exemplified by U.S.
Patent 6,052,524 to Pauna for "System and method for simulation of integrated hardware and software components." The '524 patent 2o describes a system and method for simulation of integrated hardware and software components. The described system includes a cycle-accurate simulator where X-number of simulator cycles is equivalent to Y-number of cycles on a simulated hardware component. The cycle-accurate simulator models stages of an operation execution pipeline for a desired hardware component (e.g., a central processing unit). The cycle-accurate simulator may indicate how long an operation takes to execute and may indicate the timing and sequence of operations as they occur. The cycle-accurate simulator is preferably event driven, and events are used to determine timing behavior and interactions of hardware and software components in 3o a simulation. The cycle-accurate simulator also may be used in an "instruction timing" mode, where the number of cycles required for a general operation is determined, but the order or timing of individual operations that make up the general operation are not simulated.
Patent 6,052,524 to Pauna for "System and method for simulation of integrated hardware and software components." The '524 patent 2o describes a system and method for simulation of integrated hardware and software components. The described system includes a cycle-accurate simulator where X-number of simulator cycles is equivalent to Y-number of cycles on a simulated hardware component. The cycle-accurate simulator models stages of an operation execution pipeline for a desired hardware component (e.g., a central processing unit). The cycle-accurate simulator may indicate how long an operation takes to execute and may indicate the timing and sequence of operations as they occur. The cycle-accurate simulator is preferably event driven, and events are used to determine timing behavior and interactions of hardware and software components in 3o a simulation. The cycle-accurate simulator also may be used in an "instruction timing" mode, where the number of cycles required for a general operation is determined, but the order or timing of individual operations that make up the general operation are not simulated.
[0008] The system described in the '524 patent further includes a simulator library for modeling and verifying hardware components of a desired electronic device. The simulator library may include built-in models for simulating multiple internal and external hardware components (e.g., central processing units, memory, memory management units, caches, timers, universal asynchronous receiver transmitters, and digital signal processors). The built-in models return a number of cycles on the cycle-accurate simulator executed for a desired simulated operation. The simulator library may also include simulator interface routines for setting a 1o clock for a simulated component to a new clock speed, coordinating between a simulator library clock and a cycle-accurate simulator clock, handling events that occur before or during a current clock cycle, changing interrupt vectors and interrupt priority levels, providing notification of changes in registers during a simulated operation, or for setting one or more individual sub-components (e.g., status bits) of a simulated hardware component. The simulator library with built-in models and routines is used as an interface to the cycle-accurate simulator.
[0009] Modeling techniques such as those described in the '524 patent are only applicable to a circuit-level system. In other words, the method is essentially an automated circuit and software analysis. These modeling techniques do not address real-world implementation and cannot be extended to designing and testing the functionality of a complete security system in real-world situations. There is no recognition of the problem with meeting all technical system requirements and then having an outside force intentionally attempting to defeat or otherwise breach the system.
[0010] There is a need for a system and method for designing a security system and testing the design and proposed system architecture prior to implementing the system. There is a need also for a system and method of testing existing security systems .with reduced labor and enhanced coverage of a wide range of breach scenarios. The typical security system lacks efficient training capability. Therefore, there is a need for more efficient training in real-world scenarios while minimizing labor and work-hour disruptions.
Summary of the Invention [0011] The present invention addresses some or all of the drawbacks discussed above by providing a method of designing and testing a security system using several real-world breach scenarios to test selected sensors and countermeasures prior to installing the sensors and countermeasures.
Summary of the Invention [0011] The present invention addresses some or all of the drawbacks discussed above by providing a method of designing and testing a security system using several real-world breach scenarios to test selected sensors and countermeasures prior to installing the sensors and countermeasures.
[0012] One aspect of the present invention is a method of modeling 1o and testing a security system comprising selecting one or more security elements of a security system for a predetermined security area, modeling the security area using the selected security elements placed in locations in the security area, selecting a breach scenario to test the modeled security system, and executing the breach scenario. Parameters may be added to the security system model and/or to the breach scenario to enhance realism. The parameters may include conditions such as time of day, environmental conditions, weather conditions, and meteorological events. Conditions may include temperature, wind speed, precipitation, high water, vibration, and any other realistic condition to enhance realism for the model.
[0013] The security elements may be -selected sensors having known specifications. The security elements may include any or all of i) an ultra wide-band (UWB) sensor, ii) a closed-circuit TV (CCTV), iii) a microwave sensor, iv) a laser sensor, v) a contact switch, vi) an infrared sensor, vii) a motion sensor, viii) a heat detector, ix) a smoke detector, x) a pressure sensor, xi) an accelerometer, and xii) a vibration sensor. The security elements may include security forces and/or personnel executing defined countermeasures and/or response procedures.
[0014] Another aspect of the present invention is an implementation of the method in the form of a computer game. The method includes modeling a command and control center for the security system. The game includes a computer simulation, wherein a first player protects the security area using the security system model to respond to an attack from a second player implementing a breach scenario..
[0015] In response to a result of the game and/or of the test, the security system and/or the security area may be updated based in part on a determined weakness.
[0016] In one aspect, the testing and/or the game is performed at least in part remotely using at least two computers connected by one of i) a LAN, ii) a WAN, iii) an intranet, and iv) an Internet. In the game, either one of the first player and the second player may be computer generated.
Both players may be computer generated for a fully automated test of the security system. When using human players, each player may be multiple 1o players collaborating to win the game.
Both players may be computer generated for a fully automated test of the security system. When using human players, each player may be multiple 1o players collaborating to win the game.
[0017] In another aspect, a computer-readable medium with instructions recorded thereon for modeling and.testing a security system using a computer is provided, the instructions comprising selecting one or more security elements of a security system for a predetermined security area, modeling the security area using the selected security elements placed in locations in the security area, selecting a breach scenario to test the modeled security system, and executing the breach scenario.
[0018] In another aspect, a method of training personnel using a computer-modeled security system includes selecting a breach scenario for the modeled security system and responding to the breach scenario using a computer.
Brief Description of the Drawings [0019] For detailed understanding of, the present invention, reference should be made to the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like elements have been given like numerals and wherein:
Figure 1 is a wire-frame elevation view of a structure with surrounding perimeter and gated entry;
Figure 2 is a flow chart of a method according to the present invention;
and Figure 3 is another flow chart of a method according to the present invention, wherein the testing according to the method is implemented as a computer game.
Description of the Preferred Embodiments [0020] Figure 1 is a wire-frame elevation view of a structure with surrounding perimeter and gated entry to illustrate a generic security area 100. The security area 100 includes a structure 102 with a defined perimeter 104. The security area 100 includes the internal volume of the structure 102, the grounds within the perimeter 104 and the grounds surrounding the perimeter 104.
Brief Description of the Drawings [0019] For detailed understanding of, the present invention, reference should be made to the following detailed description of the preferred embodiments, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like elements have been given like numerals and wherein:
Figure 1 is a wire-frame elevation view of a structure with surrounding perimeter and gated entry;
Figure 2 is a flow chart of a method according to the present invention;
and Figure 3 is another flow chart of a method according to the present invention, wherein the testing according to the method is implemented as a computer game.
Description of the Preferred Embodiments [0020] Figure 1 is a wire-frame elevation view of a structure with surrounding perimeter and gated entry to illustrate a generic security area 100. The security area 100 includes a structure 102 with a defined perimeter 104. The security area 100 includes the internal volume of the structure 102, the grounds within the perimeter 104 and the grounds surrounding the perimeter 104.
[0021] The structure 102 may include a plurality of structures. The perimeter 104 may be a wall or fence surrounding the structure(s) or the perimeter may be a defined boundary, which cannot be otherwise distinguished by viewing. The perimeter may also include several defined perimeters that may or may not be directly connected to one another. The perimeter may be the boundary of a wildlife refuge, a national or a state park, or the perimeter may be a zone around a military installation.
Furthermore, instead of a man-made structure as shown, the structure 102 may be a natural structure, e.g., park caverns. Suffice it to say that the term "security area" as used herein means any area for which security is desired.
Furthermore, instead of a man-made structure as shown, the structure 102 may be a natural structure, e.g., park caverns. Suffice it to say that the term "security area" as used herein means any area for which security is desired.
[0022] In one aspect of the present invention, the structure 102 is a building as shown. The building may include multiple floors 106 and inner rooms, walls, floors, roofs, concrete parking structures, windows, doors, interior piping, furniture, and the like. An exterior security area 108 around the building may also include various facilities and grounds that support the security area 100. Some examples may include fences 118, roads 120, sidewalks 122, underground pipes and 'sewers 124, topography, water features, trees, landscaping, and the like.
[0023] A security system 101 for the security area 100 as shown in Figure 1 might include any number of security elements 110. Exemplary security elements 110 may line-of-sight sensors, motion detectors, pressure sensors, monitors, ultra-wide band (UWB) sensors, contact sensors, lighting, smoke and heat detectors, biological material sensors, and personnel deployed throughout the security area 100. A command and control center 112 might be used to integrate and monitor all of the security system 101 security elements 110. The security system 101 may also include telephone and/or computer access to the outside world, for alerting officials of a security breach. The command and control center 112 may include a computer 113. The computer 113 may include a processor, a storage system, an output monitor, a printer and/or any other computer output device. The computer 113 may further include input devices such as a keyboard, a mouse, a joy stick, and/or any other desired computer input device suitable for implementing the present invention.
The computer 113 may be portable, stand-alone, or an integral component of a security system command and control console.
The computer 113 may be portable, stand-alone, or an integral component of a security system command and control console.
[0024] Structure(s) 102 in the security area 100 may have several sensors 114 and/or other security elements 110 disposed therein and/or thereon in the event the outer perimeter 104 is breached. The outer perimeter 104 and/or the grounds surrounding the perimeter 104 might also include various buried sensors 116 such as pressure sensors and/or other sensors for detecting vehicle and/or personnel movements.
[0025] A method 200 of modeling and testing a security system, such as the security system 101, is depicted in the flow chart of Figure 2.
The method 200 may include using a computer system programmed to process instructions stored on a computer-readable medium such as a hard drive, a computer disk, tape, an optical disk, a flash memory, a read-only memory (ROM), and/or a random-access memory (RAM).
The method 200 may include using a computer system programmed to process instructions stored on a computer-readable medium such as a hard drive, a computer disk, tape, an optical disk, a flash memory, a read-only memory (ROM), and/or a random-access memory (RAM).
[0026] The method 200 may include generating a model 202 of the security area 100. A designer then may select 204 detection methods and components, i.e., security elements 110. The selected security elements 110 may then be placed 206 in the security area 100 model 202 to define a security system 101 model 201. An optional pre-screen program may be executed 208 to test the selected security elements 110 in the placed locations 206 to determine whether blind-spots exist. Various breach scenarios and assets may be selected 210. Breach countermeasures may be selected and/or added 212 to the security system 101 model 201. The breach scenarios may be executed 214 to test the security system 101 model 201. In this manner, weaknesses, if any, in the design and/or security logic may be detected and corrected. Each element of the modeling and testing will now be described in more detail.
[0027] The security area 100 model 202 may be generated to any desired precision depending upon the security level desired in view of an available budget. For example, the model of a residential structure might be much less sophisticated than the model of a military installation. The 1o security area 100 model 202 may include the structure 102, grounds, perimeter 104, and areas outside the perimeter 104. The security area 100 model 202 may include actual size and distance information relating to the structure 102, the grounds, and/or the perimeter 104, because many sensors and camera lenses include specifications relating to distance.
[0028] The security area 100 model 202 may further include materials information, e.g., structure materials such as concrete, wood, metal, and the like. This information may be helpful in determining a proper sensor technology. For example, some sensors can penetrate through some materials and not through other materials. If the structure 102 is all metal, for example, one would typically not use a UWB sensor, since the UWB sensor will likely not penetrate the metal structure 102.
However, a concrete, wood, or metal frame structure 102 might be more appropriate for a UWB sensor.
However, a concrete, wood, or metal frame structure 102 might be more appropriate for a UWB sensor.
[0029] The security area 100 model 202 may also include floors 106 and inner rooms, walls, roofs, concrete parking structures, windows, doors, interior piping, and furniture for each structure 102 in the security area 100. The security area 100 model 202 may also include various facilities and grounds such as fences 118, roads 120, sidewalks 122, trees, landscaping, underground pipes and sewers 124, topography, water features, and the like. In one embodiment, a database of materials, structures 102, plants, pipes, and the like, may be used to build the model 202. Properties of these elements may be updates as modeling of similar areas 100 provides additional information.
[0030] In one implementation of the method, the modeling program may provide a modeling tool box for drawing buildings, structures, walls, floors, roofs, concrete structures (e.g., a parking garage), windows, doors, interior piping, furniture, and anything else desired for representing the structure 102.
[0031] Selecting 204 security elements 110 for the model 202 may be from a database of known elements 110 or the selected 204 security element 110 may be developed for a particular model 202. The security element 110 may be any number of sensors. Exemplary sensor technology may include ultra wide-band (UWB) sensors, a closed-circuit TV (CCTV), microwave sensors, laser sensors, contact switches for doors, gates, and windows, infrared sensors, motion sensors, heat and smoke detectors, pressure sensors, accelerometers, and vibration sensors. In one aspect of the present invention, the database supports a tool box identifying all available sensors in the database. New sensors developed or selected outside of the database may be added to the database and tool box for future modeling projects.
[0032] Sensor parameters and specifications are input to a database either before or during modeling. Sensors are selected based in part on the ability of the sensor to accommodate a specified portion of the security area 100 as modeled 202. The selected sensors are placed 206 in the model 202 to define a security system 101 model 201. A pre-screen program may optionally be run 208 to identify blind-spots in the security system 101 model 201. A blind-spot is an area of low or no coverage when all of the selected sensors are on-line and operating according to the specifications. The security system 101 model 201 may then be updated by selection of additional sensors, changing sensors, and/or adjusting sensor sensitivity where such adjustments are within the selected sensor specifications. The pre-screen program may utilize the security element 110 specifications from the database and the defined security area 100 parameters and/or materials to calculate coverage for each security element 100. A blind-spot may exist where a wall of a given material obscures the range of a particular selected security element 110. In some cases, security elements 110 are simply placed too far apart such that the specified ranges do not overlap.
[0033] One or more breach scenarios are selected 210. A breach scenario is any potential risk to the security area 100. A breach scenario may be a physical breach by one or more intruders. An intruder may be on foot or in a vehicle, which may be a ground, water, and/or flight vehicle.
The breach scenario should be a realistic scenario. For example, using a human running on foot at an unrealistic speed may not be a valid test of the security system 101 model 201. Furthermore, while any realistic lo breach scenario may be selected, one might not expect a civilian single family residence security area 100 to be breached by an armored vehicle even if such a vehicle is available in the database for other models 201, 202. As will be discussed later, the breach scenario may be developed by test personnel during testing, and/or the breach scenario may be developed by a collaborative effort of experts in the various sensor technologies selected for the security area 100 model 202. Breach scenarios as used herein may include the optional pre-screen program.
Thus, running a pre-screen program is a type of breach scenario.
The breach scenario should be a realistic scenario. For example, using a human running on foot at an unrealistic speed may not be a valid test of the security system 101 model 201. Furthermore, while any realistic lo breach scenario may be selected, one might not expect a civilian single family residence security area 100 to be breached by an armored vehicle even if such a vehicle is available in the database for other models 201, 202. As will be discussed later, the breach scenario may be developed by test personnel during testing, and/or the breach scenario may be developed by a collaborative effort of experts in the various sensor technologies selected for the security area 100 model 202. Breach scenarios as used herein may include the optional pre-screen program.
Thus, running a pre-screen program is a type of breach scenario.
[0034] Other parameters may be used in either the breach scenario 2o and/or in the security system 101 model 201 to promote realism in the testing. These parameters may be various environmental conditions internal to the structures 102 and/or of the outside conditions of the security area 100. These conditions may include any number of conditions to promote realism. Without limitation, such conditions may be temperature, wind, precipitation, fog, vibration, high water, ice, vibration (natural or machine-generated) or any other realistic condition useful in determining the effectiveness of the security system 101 or in the training of personnel in the use of a security system 101.
[0035] In one embodiment, at least a portion of a breach scenario may be computer-generated based in part on the selection of security elements 110. In one aspect of the method, the breach scenario may be selected using a tool box associated with the database including people, soldiers, vehicles, and/or any object that may be moved within the facility and/or the security area 100 to create a security threat.
[0036] Countermeasures may be developed or selected 212 from a database either in anticipation of possible breach scenarios or after breach scenarios are selected 210. Countermeasures may include personnel response, alarms, and/or alerts to outside entities (e.g., fire, police, or security staff, and the like).
[0037] In one embodiment, at least a portion of the countermeasures may be computer-generated and/or provided to the designer in the form of a computer output. The computer output may include mandatory procedures where certain breaches require certain responses. The computer output may provide suggested countermeasures where selected breach scenarios have been successfully countered in past models 201, 202 or in past real-world cases. These countermeasures, mandatory and/or suggested, may be stored in a countermeasure database for ready access when desired. The database of countermeasures may be implemented as a tool box for easy selection. Newly developed countermeasures and/or procedures for specified breach scenarios may be added to the database and tool box for future modeling projects.
[0038] The breach scenarios may be executed 214 either before or after the selection of countermeasures 212. The breach scenarios may be executed 214 without previously running 208 the optional pre-screen program, because the result of running the breach scenario may include a determination of blind-spots. A result of executing 214 the breach scenario may be in the form a computer output provided to the designer.
The computer output may point out any weaknesses, if any, in the sensor selection 204, the architecture of the security system 101 and/or even of the security area 100 itself. The designer may use the computer output to determine if the overall security system 101 design and/or implementation plan will meet customer requirements and/or goals. If not, then a change in the selection 204 of security elements 110, and/or element parameters may be made and the method may be executed again to optimize the security system 101 model 201. This optimization may be implemented as an iterative process.
The computer output may point out any weaknesses, if any, in the sensor selection 204, the architecture of the security system 101 and/or even of the security area 100 itself. The designer may use the computer output to determine if the overall security system 101 design and/or implementation plan will meet customer requirements and/or goals. If not, then a change in the selection 204 of security elements 110, and/or element parameters may be made and the method may be executed again to optimize the security system 101 model 201. This optimization may be implemented as an iterative process.
[0039] The computer output may be used in effecting a design change to the security area 100 structure 102, facilities, and/or perimeter 104 system when the method is being implemented in the design and construction phase of an installation. If this is the case, then the security area 100 model 202 may be updated prior to implementing the design change and the method executed again to test the design change and the updated security system 101.
[0040] Figure 3 is another aspect of the present invention wherein the security system 101 modeling and testing may be performed by one or 1o more users in the form of a computer role-playing game. The implementation is shown as a flow chart 300. A security area modeling flow chart 302 is substantially similar to that described above and shown in Figure 2. A flow chart may also be generated 304 for an actual or existing building/facility having a security system 100 and command and control center 112. Outputs from the security area flow chart 302 and/or from the building/facility flow chart 304 may be provided to a computer 306 implementing a program flow for a computer challenge 308.
[0041] A model 202 of the security area 100 may be generated 302.
Buildings and structures 102 may be modeled 310 using a tool box for 2o depicting such elements. A facilities and grounds model may be generated 312 using a tool box for depicting fences 118, roads 120, sidewalks 122, trees, landscaping, underground pipes and sewers 124, topography, water features and anything else desired for representing the grounds around the buildings. Security elements 110 are generated 314 using a tool box that includes actual sensor specifications. As described above, any known or developed sensor may be selected such as an ultra wide-band (UWB) sensor, a closed-circuit TV (CCTV), microwave sensors, laser sensors, contact switches for doors gates and windows, infrared sensors, motion sensors, heat and smoke detectors, pressure sensors, accelerometers and vibration sensors. The modeling 302 of the security area 100 flow chart may then be provided to the command and control flow chart 304.
Buildings and structures 102 may be modeled 310 using a tool box for 2o depicting such elements. A facilities and grounds model may be generated 312 using a tool box for depicting fences 118, roads 120, sidewalks 122, trees, landscaping, underground pipes and sewers 124, topography, water features and anything else desired for representing the grounds around the buildings. Security elements 110 are generated 314 using a tool box that includes actual sensor specifications. As described above, any known or developed sensor may be selected such as an ultra wide-band (UWB) sensor, a closed-circuit TV (CCTV), microwave sensors, laser sensors, contact switches for doors gates and windows, infrared sensors, motion sensors, heat and smoke detectors, pressure sensors, accelerometers and vibration sensors. The modeling 302 of the security area 100 flow chart may then be provided to the command and control flow chart 304.
[0042] Actual building integration may be developed in the command and control flow chart 304. A structure 102 and surrounding environs with security elements 110 placed in probable desired locations may be modeled 318 as described above in Figure 2 for defining the security system 101.
[0043] A model of a command and control (C&C) center information and displays may be generated 316 using a tool box including the various components, interface requirements, and/or parameters. The C&C model may be based on the prior selection of sensors and their placement in the facility and/or the security area 100 from the model 318.
[0046] Intruder forces may be modeled 324 using a tool box including people, soldiers, vehicles, and/or any object that may be moved within the facility to create a security threat.
[0047] The C&C models 316 and the breach scenario models 324 may then be used on a computer 306 with one or more users in a role-playing style game 308 for determining whether an intruder can breach or otherwise defeat the security system 101 model 201.
[0049] Facility Defender 320 - This Player may see the command and control center 112, alarms, and/or viewers 316. The Facility Defender 320 must respond to any and all alarms with designated counter measures (such as a Security Force).
[0051] Facility Attacker 322 - This Player may attempt to enter the facility and/or the security area 100 with any available asset from the breach scenario model 324 and/or may generate a breach scenario in real-time.
[0053] In one aspect, the Facility Defender 320 may use a computer-generated Facility Attacker 322. A computer-generated Facility Attacker 322 may be an algorithm utilizing the security breach scenario models 324 to present a security threat to the facility and/or the security area 100. The program may be implemented as an iterative process to test each aspect of the security system 101. In one aspect, substantially simultaneous breach scenarios may be executed to determine whether the security system 101 model 201 can respond adequately to substantially simultaneous attacks.
[0054] In one aspect, the Facility Defender 320 may be a collaboration of several people. Likewise, the Facility Attacker 322 may be a collaboration of several people. In one aspect, the test game 308 may be remotely implemented among one or more players utilizing two or more computers linked using a local-area network (LAN), a wide-area network (WAN), an intranet, and/or the Internet. In some cases where complex security systems 101 and facilities and/or the security area 100 are being tested, various experts may join from remote locations. This may be the case when designing and/or testing military installations. These personnel may be expert in the security system 101 and/or in the security elements 110 used in the security system 101 and, therefore, may join on the side of 1o the Facility Defender 320. Likewise, these personnel may be expert in military and/or assault tactics and, therefore, join in on the side of the Facility Attacker 322.
[0055] In one embodiment, a method of training personnel using a computer-modeled security system 201 may include selecting a breach scenario for the modeled security system 201 and responding to the breach scenario using a computer 113, 306. The method can be implemented using either the flow chart described above and shown in Figure 2 or using the role-playing game flow chart described above and shown in Figure 3. This training method is a simulator method somewhat like the use of flight simulators for pilot training and proficiency tests.
The simulator may be a separate facility using a model 201 of an actual security system 101, or the simulator may be run on an actual security system 101 having a command and control center 112 with a computer 113, 306 programmed with various breach scenarios.
[0056] Personnel may be trained and/or proficiency tests may be performed using various illustrative embodiments of the method according to the present invention. A security system 101 and the security area 100 may be modeled according to the flow chart of Figure 2. This portion of the method, or simulator, may be preprogrammed and stored on a facility 100 security system 101 computer 113 that may be part of the facility command and control center 112 or a separate computer. Breach scenarios may be preprogrammed and selected or they may be entered during the simulation. Personnel being trained respond to the breach scenario using countermeasures and/or procedures that would normally be made available in a real breach event. The countermeasures may be entered by the trainee during the simulation and/or may be selected from the simulator. The simulator may then judge the trainee's response and may provide an output relating to the effectiveness of the response. The simulator may also be programmed to counter the trainee response with one or more additional breach scenarios.
[0057] The foregoing description is directed to particular embodiments of the present invention for the purpose of illustration and explanation. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art having the benefit of the present disclosure that many modifications and changes to the embodiments set forth above are possible without departing from the scope of the present invention and the following claims.
[0046] Intruder forces may be modeled 324 using a tool box including people, soldiers, vehicles, and/or any object that may be moved within the facility to create a security threat.
[0047] The C&C models 316 and the breach scenario models 324 may then be used on a computer 306 with one or more users in a role-playing style game 308 for determining whether an intruder can breach or otherwise defeat the security system 101 model 201.
[0049] Facility Defender 320 - This Player may see the command and control center 112, alarms, and/or viewers 316. The Facility Defender 320 must respond to any and all alarms with designated counter measures (such as a Security Force).
[0051] Facility Attacker 322 - This Player may attempt to enter the facility and/or the security area 100 with any available asset from the breach scenario model 324 and/or may generate a breach scenario in real-time.
[0053] In one aspect, the Facility Defender 320 may use a computer-generated Facility Attacker 322. A computer-generated Facility Attacker 322 may be an algorithm utilizing the security breach scenario models 324 to present a security threat to the facility and/or the security area 100. The program may be implemented as an iterative process to test each aspect of the security system 101. In one aspect, substantially simultaneous breach scenarios may be executed to determine whether the security system 101 model 201 can respond adequately to substantially simultaneous attacks.
[0054] In one aspect, the Facility Defender 320 may be a collaboration of several people. Likewise, the Facility Attacker 322 may be a collaboration of several people. In one aspect, the test game 308 may be remotely implemented among one or more players utilizing two or more computers linked using a local-area network (LAN), a wide-area network (WAN), an intranet, and/or the Internet. In some cases where complex security systems 101 and facilities and/or the security area 100 are being tested, various experts may join from remote locations. This may be the case when designing and/or testing military installations. These personnel may be expert in the security system 101 and/or in the security elements 110 used in the security system 101 and, therefore, may join on the side of 1o the Facility Defender 320. Likewise, these personnel may be expert in military and/or assault tactics and, therefore, join in on the side of the Facility Attacker 322.
[0055] In one embodiment, a method of training personnel using a computer-modeled security system 201 may include selecting a breach scenario for the modeled security system 201 and responding to the breach scenario using a computer 113, 306. The method can be implemented using either the flow chart described above and shown in Figure 2 or using the role-playing game flow chart described above and shown in Figure 3. This training method is a simulator method somewhat like the use of flight simulators for pilot training and proficiency tests.
The simulator may be a separate facility using a model 201 of an actual security system 101, or the simulator may be run on an actual security system 101 having a command and control center 112 with a computer 113, 306 programmed with various breach scenarios.
[0056] Personnel may be trained and/or proficiency tests may be performed using various illustrative embodiments of the method according to the present invention. A security system 101 and the security area 100 may be modeled according to the flow chart of Figure 2. This portion of the method, or simulator, may be preprogrammed and stored on a facility 100 security system 101 computer 113 that may be part of the facility command and control center 112 or a separate computer. Breach scenarios may be preprogrammed and selected or they may be entered during the simulation. Personnel being trained respond to the breach scenario using countermeasures and/or procedures that would normally be made available in a real breach event. The countermeasures may be entered by the trainee during the simulation and/or may be selected from the simulator. The simulator may then judge the trainee's response and may provide an output relating to the effectiveness of the response. The simulator may also be programmed to counter the trainee response with one or more additional breach scenarios.
[0057] The foregoing description is directed to particular embodiments of the present invention for the purpose of illustration and explanation. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art having the benefit of the present disclosure that many modifications and changes to the embodiments set forth above are possible without departing from the scope of the present invention and the following claims.
Claims (25)
1. A method of computer modeling and testing a security system, the method comprising:
a) selecting at least one security element of a security system for a predetermined security area;
b) modeling the security system using the at least one selected security element placed in at least one location in the predetermined security area;
c) selecting at least one breach scenario to test the modeled security system; and d) executing the at least one breach scenario.
a) selecting at least one security element of a security system for a predetermined security area;
b) modeling the security system using the at least one selected security element placed in at least one location in the predetermined security area;
c) selecting at least one breach scenario to test the modeled security system; and d) executing the at least one breach scenario.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one selected security element comprises at least one selected sensor having known specifications.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one selected security element comprises at least one of i) an ultra wide-band (UWB) sensor, ii) a closed-circuit TV (CCTV), iii) a microwave sensor, iv) a laser sensor, v) a contact switch, vi) an infrared sensor, vii) a motion sensor, viii) a heat detector, ix) a smoke detector, x) a pressure sensor, xi) an accelerometer, and xii) a vibration sensor.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one selected security element comprises selected personnel.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one selected security element comprises a response procedure.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined security area comprises at least one structure comprising at least one of i) a man-made structure and ii) a natural structure.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined security area comprises at least one facility that supports the predetermined security area.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the predetermined security area comprises grounds comprising at least one of i) grounds within a defined perimeter and ii) grounds outside a defined perimeter.
9. The method of claim 1 further comprising modeling a command and control center for the security system.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein testing the modeled security system further comprises implementing a computer simulation in the form of a game, wherein a first player protects the predetermined security area using the modeled security system to respond to an attack from a second player implementing the at least one breach scenario.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein testing the modeled security system further comprises using the test of the modeled security system to determine whether there is at least one weakness in the modeled security system.
12. The method of claim 11 further comprising updating the security system based at least in part on the at least one determined weakness in the modeled security system.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the modeled security system is a model of an existing security system.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein testing the modeled security system is performed at least in part remotely using at least two computers connected by one of i) a LAN, ii) a WAN, iii) an intranet, and iv) an Internet.
15. The method of claim 10, wherein at least one of the first player and the second player is computer generated.
16. The method of claim 10, wherein at least one of the first player and the second player further comprises a plurality of players.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one security element is selected from a database of known security elements.
18. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one breach scenario is selected from a database of known breach scenarios.
19. The method of claim 1, further comprising selecting at least one parameter to promote realism in the executing the at least one breach scenario.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the at least one parameter is selected from i) temperature, ii) wind, iii) precipitation, iv) fog, v) natural vibration, vi) machine vibration, vii) high water, and viii) ice.
21. A method of training personnel in the use of a security system, the method comprising:
a) selecting at least one breach scenario for the security system; and b) responding to the at least one breach scenario using a computer.
a) selecting at least one breach scenario for the security system; and b) responding to the at least one breach scenario using a computer.
22. The method of claim 21 further comprising selecting at least one parameter to promote realism for responding to the at least one breach scenario using the computer.
23. The method of claim 21, wherein using the computer further comprises training on a computer of an actual security system.
24. The method of claim 21, wherein using the computer further comprises training on a computer having programmed thereon a model of the security system.
25. A computer-readable medium with instructions recorded thereon for modeling and testing a security system using a computer, the instructions comprising:
a) selecting at least one security element of a security system for a predetermined security area;
b) modeling the predetermined security area using the at least one selected security element placed in at least one location in the predetermined security area;
c) selecting at least one breach scenario to test the modeled security system; and d) executing the at least one breach scenario.
a) selecting at least one security element of a security system for a predetermined security area;
b) modeling the predetermined security area using the at least one selected security element placed in at least one location in the predetermined security area;
c) selecting at least one breach scenario to test the modeled security system; and d) executing the at least one breach scenario.
Applications Claiming Priority (5)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US65642805P | 2005-02-24 | 2005-02-24 | |
| US60/656,428 | 2005-02-24 | ||
| US11/112,437 US7308394B2 (en) | 2005-02-24 | 2005-04-22 | Method for modeling and testing a security system |
| US11/112,437 | 2005-04-22 | ||
| PCT/US2006/006396 WO2006091726A2 (en) | 2005-02-24 | 2006-02-23 | Method for modeling and testing a security system |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2599130A1 true CA2599130A1 (en) | 2006-08-31 |
Family
ID=36913894
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002599130A Abandoned CA2599130A1 (en) | 2005-02-24 | 2006-02-23 | Method for modeling and testing a security system |
Country Status (5)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (2) | US7308394B2 (en) |
| EP (1) | EP1866811A2 (en) |
| JP (1) | JP2008536199A (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2599130A1 (en) |
| WO (1) | WO2006091726A2 (en) |
Families Citing this family (27)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JP2006504178A (en) * | 2002-10-22 | 2006-02-02 | ウンホ チェ | Comprehensive infringement accident response system in IT infrastructure and its operation method |
| US7415385B2 (en) * | 2006-11-29 | 2008-08-19 | Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc. | System and method for measuring performances of surveillance systems |
| US8099711B2 (en) | 2008-01-08 | 2012-01-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for multi-level security filtering of model representations |
| US9111237B2 (en) * | 2008-12-01 | 2015-08-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Evaluating an effectiveness of a monitoring system |
| US20100146395A1 (en) * | 2008-12-08 | 2010-06-10 | Gustavo De Los Reyes | Method and System for Exploiting Interactions Via A Virtual Environment |
| US7861434B2 (en) | 2009-03-13 | 2011-01-04 | Knudsen N Eric | Post sleeve positioning apparatus and method |
| FR2946440B1 (en) * | 2009-06-05 | 2012-01-13 | Thales Sa | DEVICE FOR SIMULATION OF AN ENVIRONMENT OF A SYSTEM OF SUPERVISION OF AN INFRASTRUCTURE |
| WO2011061767A1 (en) * | 2009-11-18 | 2011-05-26 | Elsag Datamat Spa | Smart security-supervision system |
| US9898921B2 (en) | 2013-03-15 | 2018-02-20 | Adt Us Holdings, Inc. | Security system installation |
| WO2014144867A1 (en) * | 2013-03-15 | 2014-09-18 | Adt Us Holdings, Inc. | Security system using visual floor plan |
| HUP1300328A3 (en) * | 2013-05-23 | 2017-03-28 | Mta Szamitastechnika Es Automatizalasi Ki | Method and system for integrated three dimensional modelling |
| US10007792B1 (en) * | 2013-11-27 | 2018-06-26 | Amazon Technologies, Inc. | Modeling a network security environment as a game |
| DK3275204T3 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2020-09-21 | Carrier Corp | SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR COLLECTING AND ANALYZING MULTI-DIMENSIONAL BUILDING INFORMATION |
| US10756830B2 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2020-08-25 | Carrier Corporation | System and method for determining RF sensor performance relative to a floor plan |
| US10944837B2 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2021-03-09 | Carrier Corporation | Floor-plan based learning and registration of distributed devices |
| CN107660290B (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2022-03-22 | 开利公司 | Integrated system for sale, installation and maintenance of building systems |
| EP3274934A1 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2018-01-31 | Carrier Corporation | Floor plan coverage based auto pairing and parameter setting |
| US10230326B2 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2019-03-12 | Carrier Corporation | System and method for energy harvesting system planning and performance |
| EP3274976A1 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2018-01-31 | Carrier Corporation | Systems and methods for providing a graphical user interface indicating intruder threat levels for a building |
| US11036897B2 (en) | 2015-03-24 | 2021-06-15 | Carrier Corporation | Floor plan based planning of building systems |
| US9473522B1 (en) * | 2015-04-20 | 2016-10-18 | SafeBreach Ltd. | System and method for securing a computer system against malicious actions by utilizing virtualized elements |
| US9710653B2 (en) | 2015-04-20 | 2017-07-18 | SafeBreach Ltd. | System and method for verifying malicious actions by utilizing virtualized elements |
| US10214940B2 (en) | 2016-03-11 | 2019-02-26 | N. Eric Knudsen | Post sleeve positioning apparatus and related methods |
| US10581802B2 (en) | 2017-03-16 | 2020-03-03 | Keysight Technologies Singapore (Sales) Pte. Ltd. | Methods, systems, and computer readable media for advertising network security capabilities |
| US11042947B1 (en) | 2019-03-19 | 2021-06-22 | Gwen C. Banas | System for matching and assembling a water leak detection system |
| RU2719506C1 (en) * | 2019-09-16 | 2020-04-20 | Акционерное общество "Федеральный научно-производственный центр "Производственное объединение "Старт" им. М.В. Проценко" (АО "ФНПЦ ПО "Старт" им. М.В. Проценко") | Method of assessing the level of protection of a protected area against intruder threats |
| US11533329B2 (en) | 2019-09-27 | 2022-12-20 | Keysight Technologies, Inc. | Methods, systems and computer readable media for threat simulation and threat mitigation recommendations |
Family Cites Families (10)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US4613952A (en) * | 1983-07-11 | 1986-09-23 | Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation | Simulator for an industrial plant |
| US4568288A (en) * | 1983-09-27 | 1986-02-04 | The Singer Company | System and a method to visually simulate subsystems in a fossil fuel power plant simulator |
| GB2175421B (en) * | 1985-05-13 | 1989-11-29 | Singer Link Miles Ltd | Computing system |
| US4962473A (en) * | 1988-12-09 | 1990-10-09 | Itt Corporation | Emergency action systems including console and security monitoring apparatus |
| US5213503A (en) * | 1991-11-05 | 1993-05-25 | The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Navy | Team trainer |
| JPH07334779A (en) * | 1994-06-10 | 1995-12-22 | Nippon Denshi Kogaku Kk | Method and device for guard diagnosis for machine guard system |
| JPH09297524A (en) * | 1996-05-01 | 1997-11-18 | Fujitsu Ltd | Training stimulation device of facility controlling system |
| CA2194749C (en) * | 1997-01-09 | 2002-01-08 | Thomas George Guertin | Building emergency simulator |
| US6052524A (en) | 1998-05-14 | 2000-04-18 | Software Development Systems, Inc. | System and method for simulation of integrated hardware and software components |
| US7158022B2 (en) * | 2004-10-29 | 2007-01-02 | Fallon Kenneth T | Automated diagnoses and prediction in a physical security surveillance system |
-
2005
- 2005-04-22 US US11/112,437 patent/US7308394B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
-
2006
- 2006-02-23 EP EP06735881A patent/EP1866811A2/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2006-02-23 CA CA002599130A patent/CA2599130A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2006-02-23 JP JP2007557151A patent/JP2008536199A/en active Pending
- 2006-02-23 WO PCT/US2006/006396 patent/WO2006091726A2/en active Application Filing
-
2007
- 2007-10-31 US US11/932,827 patent/US20080059130A1/en not_active Abandoned
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| EP1866811A2 (en) | 2007-12-19 |
| JP2008536199A (en) | 2008-09-04 |
| WO2006091726A8 (en) | 2006-11-23 |
| US20080059130A1 (en) | 2008-03-06 |
| WO2006091726A2 (en) | 2006-08-31 |
| WO2006091726A3 (en) | 2009-04-16 |
| US7308394B2 (en) | 2007-12-11 |
| US20060190228A1 (en) | 2006-08-24 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| US7308394B2 (en) | Method for modeling and testing a security system | |
| US20110173146A1 (en) | Complexity systems management method | |
| Garcia | Vulnerability assessment of physical protection systems | |
| Ba et al. | Multi-hazard disaster scenario method and emergency management for urban resilience by integrating experiment–simulation–field data | |
| Su et al. | Data-driven fire safety management at building construction sites: Leveraging CNN | |
| Wadoud et al. | Physical protection evaluation process for nuclear facility via sabotage scenarios | |
| WO2019059816A1 (en) | Method of automated design and analysis of security systems | |
| Barnard | Intrusion detection systems | |
| Perdikaris | Physical security and environmental protection | |
| Chipley et al. | Primer to Design Safe School Projects in Case of Terrorist Attacks and School Shootings. Buildings and Infrastructure Protection Series. FEMA-428/BIPS-07/January 2012. Edition 2. | |
| Mariš et al. | Security of infrastructure systems: infrastructure security assessment | |
| Li | Intelligent Science Empowers: Building Fire Protection Technology Development | |
| EA043326B1 (en) | METHOD FOR AUTOMATED DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF PHYSICAL PROTECTION SYSTEMS AND SECURITY SYSTEMS IN GENERAL | |
| Masek et al. | Critical infrastructure protection risk modelling with games technology | |
| Little et al. | Protection from extreme events: using a socio-technological approach to evaluate policy options | |
| Yadav et al. | Current Challenges, Constraints and Recommendations for Reducing Cost of Physical Security at US Commercial Nuclear Power Plants | |
| Cummings et al. | Defining the Tradespace for Passively Defending Against Rogue Drones | |
| Chornoboy | Determining the effectiveness of nuclear security through computer simulation | |
| Ilya et al. | Planning and Quality Evaluation of Physical Protection Systems Using Simulation Modeling | |
| Raybourn et al. | Applying Model-Based Situational Awareness and Augmented Reality to Next-Generation Physical Security Systems | |
| Echeta et al. | PPS Evaluation of An Oil Refinery Using EASI Model | |
| Rowshan et al. | Highway vulnerability assessment: A guide for state departments of transportation | |
| Leach et al. | Conducting a Nuclear Security Assessment | |
| Maki | Considerations in outdoor intrusion sensor testing | |
| Adderly et al. | Design of an Interactive Nuclear Security Physical Training Model. |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| FZDE | Discontinued |