Sooner or later (hopefully sooner), the novel coronavirus global pandemic will allow workplaces to reopen. But as we move into this recovery phase, there are many questions surrounding the transition. How can companies ensure facilities are in acceptable working order to reopen? How do they decide who is coming back and when? How will social distancing impact the operation of a company’s physical access control system? How can companies ensure that both visitors and employees are aware of the policy changes and extra controls?

For answers to these and other salient questions, we called on Ian Lowe, Product Marketing Director of HID SAFE Identity and Access Management (IAM) solutions.

There’s no doubt about it: the global pandemic will change the way we live, work, and conduct business for some time,” says Lowe. “Over the past several weeks, we have been working with customers to enable a safe return to the workplace. We have observed that the number of challenges in the mid-to-long-term level and the associated complexity vary by location.”

Lowe shares some of the proactive measures and best practices that can assist in a safe return to the workplace as we settle into a “new normal”.

Challenge 1: Ensuring building readiness

After being unoccupied for weeks or months, building readiness must be addressed completely before welcoming anyone inside. Even though employees may be eager to return, the workplace itself may not be ready. Companies may want to consider continuing remote work while facility operations are prepped.

Challenge 2: workforce management

There’s no doubt about it: the global pandemic will change the way we live, work, and conduct business for some time

While it is dependent on location and industry, taking a phased approach is the best course of action when allowing employees, contractors and visitors back into facilities. First, facilities management will want to survey the property for readiness and then provide an estimate as to when employees may begin reporting back into the office.

Next, it’s important to consider that office density needs are interrelated to the facility architecture. It is possible to accommodate a higher capacity of workforce in an airy, open office space than in a constrained one. A good rule of thumb is to start by introducing no more than 30% of employees back into the workplace at first. This could be a rolling group model in which the population total remains controlled and constant, but specific individuals vary from day to day. This option is good for a workforce that needs to be together in person but not necessarily all at the same time due to office density concerns.

Welcoming visitors or customers into the office should be delayed as long as possible. If that’s not feasible, visitor numbers should be factored into the total density count. A cloud-based visitor management system can help with implementation.

Challenge 3: Controlling access

The ability to vet staff, employees, contractors and visitors before and during the return will vary greatly depending on the location. Policies should be implemented that require employees to be screened regularly — and for an extended amount of time. Look to answer the following questions:

  • Where have you visited in the days since last entering the workplace?
  • Have you come into contact with anyone else who has recently visited high-risk areas?
  • Have you shown any symptoms of infection in the past xx number of days?

Policies should be implemented that require employees to be screened regularly — and for an extended amount of time

If there is cause for concern, refuse the visitor and/or supplement the screening process with additional steps. Temperature checking is mandatory in many organizations⁠— often multiple times a day. This applies to interactions at delivery bays, too.

A policy-based physical identity and access management solution integrated with existing physical access controls makes it possible to enforce, monitor and report this type of activity.

Challenge 4: Social distancing and contact tracing plan

Social distancing may continue within the office, which will impact restrictions and guidelines related to access control. The office layout may be reworked for proper distance between cubicles, workplace positions and employees. Specific entrances, exits and pathways may be designated as one-way-only.

Assigning Bluetooth LE beacons to employees once they are inside the workplace will allow companies to monitor proximity to others and measure localised density in real-time⁠ by using location services, contact tracing, and surge response technologies.

Challenge 5: Reduced physical touchpoints

Contactless technologies can help enforce social distancing and reduce touchpoints on common surfaces

Reducing the number of physical touchpoints is desirable throughout a workplace. Contactless technologies can help enforce social distancing and reduce touchpoints on common surfaces such as faucets, doorknobs, coffee pot handles, etc. While introducing additional security checks and screenings, it’s important to not increase touchpoints and further infection risks. There have been more requests for a contactless experience to secure workplace access, including automatic doors and turnstiles, contactless cards and mobile access.

Challenge 6: Communicating for confidence

Proactive communication is key to provide reassurance that appropriate safety measures have been taken and that both visitors and employees are aware of the policy changes and extra controls. Equally important is to communicate a policy change – and the reasoning behind it – before it happens. While there may not be an exact expiration date on these new policies, ensuring that impacted individuals will have a safer experience is universally appreciated.

Share with LinkedIn Share with Twitter Share with Facebook Share with Facebook
Download PDF version Download PDF version

Author profile

Larry Anderson Editor, SecurityInformed.com & SourceSecurity.com

An experienced journalist and long-time presence in the US security industry, Larry is SecurityInformed.com's eyes and ears in the fast-changing security marketplace, attending industry and corporate events, interviewing security leaders and contributing original editorial content to the site. He leads SecurityInformed's team of dedicated editorial and content professionals, guiding the "editorial roadmap" to ensure the site provides the most relevant content for security professionals.

In case you missed it

What Is The Impact Of Remote Working On Security?
What Is The Impact Of Remote Working On Security?

During the coronavirus lockdown, employees worked from home in record numbers. But the growing trend came with a new set of security challenges. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: What is the impact of the transition to remote working/home offices on the security market?

Water Plant Attack Emphasizes Cyber’s Impact On Physical Security
Water Plant Attack Emphasizes Cyber’s Impact On Physical Security

At an Oldsmar, Fla., water treatment facility on Feb. 5, an operator watched a computer screen as someone remotely accessed the system monitoring the water supply and increased the amount of sodium hydroxide from 100 parts per million to 11,100 parts per million. The chemical, also known as lye, is used in small concentrations to control acidity in the water. In larger concentrations, the compound is poisonous – the same corrosive chemical used to eat away at clogged drains. The impact of cybersecurity attacks The incident is the latest example of how cybersecurity attacks can translate into real-world, physical security consequences – even deadly ones.Cybersecurity attacks on small municipal water systems have been a concern among security professionals for years. The computer system was set up to allow remote access only to authorized users. The source of the unauthorized access is unknown. However, the attacker was only in the system for 3 to 5 minutes, and an operator corrected the concentration back to 100 parts per million soon after. It would have taken a day or more for contaminated water to enter the system. In the end, the city’s water supply was not affected. There were other safeguards in place that would have prevented contaminated water from entering the city’s water supply, which serves around 15,000 residents. The remote access used for the attack was disabled pending an investigation by the FBI, Secret Service and Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office. On Feb. 2, a compilation of breached usernames and passwords, known as COMB for “Compilation of Many Breaches,” was leaked online. COMB contains 3.2 billion unique email/password pairs. It was later discovered that the breach included the credentials for the Oldsmar water plant. Water plant attacks feared for years Cybersecurity attacks on small municipal water systems have been a concern among security professionals for years. Florida’s Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted that the attempt to poison the water supply should be treated as a “matter of national security.” “The incident at the Oldsmar water treatment plant is a reminder that our nation’s critical infrastructure is continually at risk; not only from nation-state attackers, but also from malicious actors with unknown motives and goals,” comments Mieng Lim, VP of Product Management at Digital Defense Inc., a provider of vulnerability management and threat assessment solutions.The attack on Oldsmar’s water treatment system shows how critical national infrastructure is increasingly becoming a target for hackers as organizations bring systems online “Our dependency on critical infrastructure – power grids, utilities, water supplies, communications, financial services, emergency services, etc. – on a daily basis emphasizes the need to ensure the systems are defended against any adversary,” Mieng Lim adds. “Proactive security measures are crucial to safeguard critical infrastructure systems when perimeter defenses have been compromised or circumvented. We have to get back to the basics – re-evaluate and rebuild security protections from the ground up.” "This event reinforces the increasing need to authenticate not only users, but the devices and machine identities that are authorized to connect to an organization's network,” adds Chris Hickman, Chief Security Officer at digital identity security vendor Keyfactor. “If your only line of protection is user authentication, it will be compromised. It's not necessarily about who connects to the system, but what that user can access once they're inside. "If the network could have authenticated the validity of the device connecting to the network, the connection would have failed because hackers rarely have possession of authorized devices. This and other cases of hijacked user credentials can be limited or mitigated if devices are issued strong, crypto-derived, unique credentials like a digital certificate. In this case, it looks like the network had trust in the user credential but not in the validity of the device itself. Unfortunately, this kind of scenario is what can happen when zero trust is your end state, not your beginning point." “The attack on Oldsmar’s water treatment system shows how critical national infrastructure is increasingly becoming a target for hackers as organizations bring systems online for the first time as part of digital transformation projects,” says Gareth Williams, Vice President - Secure Communications & Information Systems, Thales UK. “While the move towards greater automation and connected switches and control systems brings unprecedented opportunities, it is not without risk, as anything that is brought online immediately becomes a target to be hacked.” Operational technology to mitigate attacks Williams advises organizations to approach Operational Technology as its own entity and put in place procedures that mitigate against the impact of an attack that could ultimately cost lives. This means understanding what is connected, who has access to it and what else might be at risk should that system be compromised, he says. “Once that is established, they can secure access through protocols like access management and fail-safe systems.”  “The cyberattack against the water supply in Oldsmar should come as a wakeup call,” says Saryu Nayyar, CEO, Gurucul.  “Cybersecurity professionals have been talking about infrastructure vulnerabilities for years, detailing the potential for attacks like this, and this is a near perfect example of what we have been warning about,” she says.  Although this attack was not successful, there is little doubt a skilled attacker could execute a similar infrastructure attack with more destructive results, says Nayyar. Organizations tasked with operating and protecting critical public infrastructure must assume the worst and take more serious measures to protect their environments, she advises. Fortunately, there were backup systems in place in Oldsmar. What could have been a tragedy instead became a cautionary tale. Both physical security and cybersecurity professionals should pay attention.

How Have Security Solutions Failed Our Schools?
How Have Security Solutions Failed Our Schools?

School shootings are a high-profile reminder of the need for the highest levels of security at our schools and education facilities. Increasingly, a remedy to boost the security at schools is to use more technology. However, no technology is a panacea, and ongoing violence and other threats at our schools suggest some level of failure. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: How have security solutions failed our schools and what is the solution?