22


feature


fire, safety & security


on occupancy, identify unusual access patterns, optimise energy usage and trigger alerts without human intervention. But this also creates dependency, which us mere humans take for granted. Disruption to one platform can quickly affect wider operations, and If an automated building management system is compromised, manipulated or taken offline, the consequences can extend far and wide. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) and The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in the USA have been quite vocal on the risks to smart infrastructure, highlighting how poorly secured operational technology environments are becoming attractive targets for cybercriminals. But it’s one thing to understand


operational vulnerability, yet another to design an intelligent, or smart, environment with processes in place to combat it. Removing silos – but concentrating risk Another major trend is the growth of unified platforms, where multiple building functions are integrated into single operational ecosystems. Access management, surveillance, visitor


systems, HVAC controls and occupancy management can now operate through interconnected platforms designed to streamline operations and improve visibility. All of which are transforming the user experience, and ultimately improving public safety. But we must be wary that the removal of silos, including those which saw physical and cyber security operating independently, can also create concentration of risk. Especially now we see hybrid threats across physical, cyber and aerial domains. For instance, a compromised access management platform could potentially affect physical entry points across an entire building. A vulnerable building management system may provide pathways into wider corporate networks. And increasingly, cyberattacks are targeting operations, not just data. There have been well-documented cases


of breaches through smart technology, too. Albeit around seven years ago, one ‘infamous’ incident involved cybercriminals gaining access to a North American casino network through a smart fish tank thermometer, ultimately allowing them to extract sensitive data from the organisation’s systems. In addition, the UK’s National Protective


KD212


outdated software environments, creating additional vulnerabilities when integrated with newer connected platforms. The challenge here for architects and


Security Authority (NPSA) has highlighted how HVAC systems and building automation controls can create potential vulnerabilities within modern buildings if security is not properly considered. It warns that building automation and control systems should be carefully secured, with organisations needing clear oversight of who can access and control systems remotely. As smart infrastructure becomes more deeply embedded within commercial developments, building resilience is increasingly dependent on securing both physical and digital environments together. And the risk escalates, with (massive) IoT, which is designed to extract data from multiple, potentially hundreds of thousands of smart technology points, in commercial and domestic settings across the globe. Smart technology is becoming a standard


expectation within many commercial and public sector environments now, especially as we strive for a ‘frictionless’ user experience, and convenience. This is changing how buildings are being specified and at the same time, ESG priorities are driving the use of smart sensors and automated energy management systems designed to optimise performance and sustainability. However, the IBM X-Force Threat


Intelligence Index highlights how operational technology and connected infrastructure environments are becoming increasingly attractive targets because of the disruption attackers can cause through them. Likewise, many smart buildings still rely on legacy operational technology and


developers is one of convenience and connectivity over resilience. Namely, are buildings being designed around operational efficiency without sufficient consideration of recovery, fallback, and system segregation? Personally, I think we’ve moved way past this and have much greater focus upon the holistic approach, which incorporates operations, and security across all layers. Why architects and specifiers are now central to resilience Today, architects and specifiers are playing a much more influential role in shaping how resilient buildings become. Decisions around integration platforms, infrastructure pathways, connectivity, access flows and operational technology now directly influence long-term security. This is particularly relevant in commercial


real estate, healthcare, transport, energy, data centres, and critical infrastructure environments where continuity is absolutely vital, and has become just as important as physical protection. The goal is to create buildings that


are both intelligent and resilient - environments where security is embedded into design from the outset, rather than retrofitted later in response to emerging threats. From what I hear in my everyday conversations with prospects and suppliers, that is very much the case. We are ahead of the curve, and we need to be, because the curve will always be where the threat, the criminal mind, is. The future of smart buildings will not be defined solely by how connected they become, how easy it is for people to move around, or how technology has forged forwards like a reconnaissance mission ensuring everything is ready when a visitor or member of staff arrives. I believe they will be defined by how resilient they are designed to be, and as buildings continue to evolve into interconnected digital ecosystems, physical and cyber security will become increasingly intertwined. This also means resilience, access


governance and security need to be considered alongside sustainability, efficiency and user experience from the earliest stages of design. Because the smart buildings of the future, those that haven’t even entered the mind let alone the drawing board, will undoubtedly be more intelligent, more automated and more connected than ever before.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52