Much emphasis is placed on the ability of security systems to protect premises from the unexpected but this is only part of the story. Careful consideration also has to be given to the capacity of such systems to operate effectively despite the attentions of professional criminals.
Without adequate preventative measures damage will inevitably be caused by the targeting of cameras and detectors on-site, with obvious repercussions not only for the equipment itself but a site's overall security. It has even been known for complete cameras to be removed from a site in broad daylight, undetected - surely far from an ideal situation.
So what steps can and should security providers take to counter such threats, to protect the protectors from the unexpected? When it comes to remotely monitored, detector activated CCTV, for example, it is important - as highlighted in BS8418 - that a system should have the ability to monitor and indicate video loss to the RVRC (Remote Video Response Centre), that tamper indications operate locally or to the RVRC depending on the unset / set state of the system and that the system has an alternative signaling path to indicate failure of the main signaling path to the RVRC.
The reality is without such provision being made there is the very real danger that an incident will take place and no one will know until long after the criminals have left the scene.
