Today, the trendiest fields of private and public security are facial recognition, PTZ cameras and software with the ability to track in large cities (video analytics), and the American standard for air and seaport security, as outlined in the ISPS Code. Benni Glaidman, security engineer with over 30 years experience in the field, shares his thoughts regarding what’s behind these movements.
In order to find the beginnings of the world’s technological history, it suffices to back up only half a decade. Almost all of that which existed ten years ago has nearly disappeared, from volumetric detectors in rooms, to window contacts and analog cameras using coaxial cables. Benni Glaitman, and engineer with over 30 years experience in the public and private sectors, states that the world of security is not characterized by its revolutions, but rather by its evolutions.
The majority of new security technology has developed as a result of changing needs. First there was the basic need to secure perimeter spaces such as fences and walls to prevent intrusions. Then there was the need to track suspicious behavior with cameras and motion detectors, including access control to facilities or restricted spaces. While these technologies were useful, they were not without their deficiencies. Their inefficiency was partly technical, and partly due to the fact that they were based on continuous monitoring and the human factor in real-time.
“The movement from security monitoring via analog to digital is the single greatest revolution in the history of security history”, states Glaitman. “Once this change from analog to digital was established, new security technologies appeared at a much faster pace, continuously modifying traditional systems to which the world had become accustomed. Today, one of the trendiest technologies is facial recognition”.
“The dream of any police investigator”, states Glaitman, “is that, for example, a camera will be able to identify an individual amidst the crowd in a packed football stadium”. This dream has actually become a reality. Although some deficiencies are being troubleshooted, facial recognition technologies exist, and are even being used in various places. One of the greatest advantages of this type of technology is that it allows for passive monitoring, without having to have physical contact with the suspect. The camera recognizes that face from a distance, compares it in an archived database of authorized individuals, or wanted persons, and creates an automatic alarm.
Until recently, the major problem with facial recognition systems was the relatively large lag in time that the system needed to compare the target face with all entries in the database, and produce a positive or negative confirmation. The precision, which reaches up to 99% today, does not suffice. The Diamond Exchange in Tel-Aviv, Israel, for example, has a daily transit figure of about 25,000 persons a day. In this case, a one percent margin of error means that 250 people daily will not be accurately identified and thus will have to be checked using other means. In addition to a waste of time, this type of situation may prove uncomfortable for those individuals whose identity has been mistaken. Therefore, the ideal percentage of precision, which has not yet been achieved, is 99.9%.
The solution can be found in a change in the type of recognition used, from a one-to-many ratio, to a one-to-one ratio. “We’re talking about combining traditional identification via personal identification cards or codes, and facial recognition technologies”. This type of technology is already being used in airports. Once, individuals had to present their swipe or proximity cards for the system to identify their profile in the database and permit or deny access at passport control. Now, many airports use biometric technologies such as hand readers to achieve the same purpose.
Over the past 30 years, Glaitman has seen how security technology has evolved, sometimes with big changes, and other times with large adjustments. “For example, the world of motion detectors and alarms has not evolved significantly” states Glaitman. “Detectors may be more efficient and exact, but they haven’t undergone any extraordinary changes. Video cameras, on the other hand, have certainly evolved. In the beginning, camera footage was taped on VHS, which, due to the nature of its technology, allowed for a maximum of two or three hours of taping. Five years have passed, and while cameras and monitors continue to be in separate places, what lies between them has drastically changed. Today, IP based wireless cameras transmit their signals to DVRs, and are activated only once motion is sensed, or, on the contrary, once an object is introduced to the given space and left motionless”.
“Today, with the development of the PC, there are no boundaries to recording time, or camera and monitor location. A camera can be mounted in one part of the world, and the monitor housed across oceans. Today’s technology allows for the control of dozens of parameters, including activation and cessation, recording angle, resolution, activation of the zoom function, filming speed, and much more”.
True technological activity is taking place in the field of city surveillance, especially in regards to processing video images. This field, called video analytics, offers the possibility of immediate analysis of an event in the context of prior events. For example: a vehicle driving against the traffic or in a bus lane, or a person wandering between cars in a parking lot, instead either entering or exiting a car.
“These systems have the intelligence to differentiate between a man and a cat, for example, taking into account differences in size as a result of distance” explains Gaitman. “This same technology can be used to identify the movements of an intoxicated individual, or the atypical congregation of a group of individuals in a specified location. The camera is even able to count the number of individuals in a given space. Another possibility is the recognition of an abandoned object, or of an individual who suddenly abandons his or her belongings and flees. The identification of the presence or absence of objects is a function used in, for example, museums”.
Today, video cameras are used in the fight against car theft through the ability to capture the license plate numbers of cars driving on the highway or entering a parking lot. Glaitman shares that in many large parking lots or on specific highways, cameras have already been installed with the capability to identify stolen cars, compare these in a police database and send out an immediate warning.
“In general, the field of city surveillance provides much work for specialized companies”, continues Glaitman, “especially in Latin-American cities. In Mexico City for example, they are completing an enormous project where 1,750 cameras have been installed city-wide”. Israel is considered one of the leaders in this field. Among the top ten companies leading the field of video analytics, technologically and in volume of sales, three are Israeli companies.
Finally, Glaitman highlights the activity taking place in the field of seaport security as a result of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS Code) established by the United States. This code, which sets the technical and procedural guidelines for the protection of port ships and facilities, was initiated by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), an entity working within the framework of the United Nations. Among the ISPS’s objectives, which took effect in July of 2004, is the identification of security threats, collaboration between different agencies privy to relevant security information, and risk analysis. The code also creates secured areas for the involved agents, including the realization of definitive actions, enforcement of different protocols, application of types of alarms, and the definition of sterilized zones where access is prohibited.
“At first, most countries didn’t take the code seriously. They were uneager to put it into practice, until the Americans declared that their ships would be prohibited from entering those ports that refused to adhere to the ISPCS standard. This was enough for international port authorities to begin getting down to work”.
PURCHASE THE ONLINE SECURITY MANAGEMENT COURSE
PSOSONLINE© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part prohibited without the prior written consent of PSOS.
