Boon Edam Inc., a global pioneer in security entrances and architectural revolving doors, announced the results of a survey regarding the risks and security threats associated with tailgating. A majority of the respondents, made up of security professionals, believe that tailgating remains a critical threat and does not seem to be abating.
Risk of a breach
More than 185 end users and security advisors (consultants and integrators) within the U.S. and Canada responded to eight multiple-choice questions. All respondents shared the same three questions to begin the survey about their general perspective on the risk of a breach from tailgating.
Unmanned barriers that prevent tailgating” are effective methods to curtail tailgating
End users and the security advisors were then posed different questions to gain more insight into their perceptions about tailgating vulnerability within a facility versus across various industries. Participants were volunteers that responded to social media ads or were in Boon Edam’s contact database.
Guards and barriers
Based on what participants have seen in the media the past decade, 69% of all the respondents believe that security breaches resulting from tailgating either are holding at the same levels or are increasing. End-user perception of an increasing trend was greater with more than 43% saying they thought it was increasing, while only 35% of security advisors echoed that opinion.
In response to this perceived threat, a strong majority of all respondents (77%) say that “guards and barriers” and “unmanned barriers that prevent tailgating” are effective methods to curtail tailgating, but only 18% of end-user respondents indicated they were using either option. There is also a sharp divide between end users and security advisors when it comes to the impact of a tailgate breach.
Physical attack on the IT environment
Eight percent of end-user respondents believe the cost of violent crime or theft due to tailgating is insignificant, while none (0%) of the security advisors agree. However, 54% of end users and 72% of security advisors believe the cost of a breach would be $500,000 up to “too high to measure.” Meaning that 46% of end users see the potential cost as lower than $500,000 while only 28% of security advisors believe the same.
“The risk of tailgating (or the impact) depends on the nature of the business, the type of area and the risk scenarios to be expected. Theft of company goods, valuables, unauthorized entry of press, eavesdropping for espionage or a physical attack on the IT environment,” says one respondent.
Turnstiles, security doors
Most end user respondents realize that their facilities are vulnerable to physical infiltrationThe survey also highlights the fact that most end user respondents realize that their facilities are vulnerable to physical infiltration. The majority (78%) are taking a reactionary stance to deal with tailgating (using an access control system, guards, cameras and video management software). At the same time, the majority (74%) fail to track tailgating, yet they believe they are vulnerable to a physical breach from tailgating (71%).
Only 18% of end users say they are currently using some kind of security entrance (turnstiles, security doors), in addition to other options to physically control access into their facilities. Four percent say they are not using any security technologies at all to curtail tailgating and only 54% say they must comply with government regulations.
Potential impact of tailgating
The survey demonstrates that security advisors seem to grasp the potential impact of tailgating better than their end-user clients in many cases. A solid majority of security advisors say they discuss the use of security entrances with their clients, with 63% saying they discuss with them ways to mitigate the risk of tailgating and another 68% add that they discuss means to comply with industry regulations.
“Our survey shows that security end users and advisors in the Americas see tailgating as a threat that is growing and more needs to be done to address it,” comments Valerie Anderson, President of Boon Edam Inc. “Also, the cost of tailgating breaches is seen as potentially very expensive to priceless -- this indicates there will be continued investments in tailgating prevention at facilities in the coming years.”
Prevent physical intrusion
While both end users and security advisors agree on the threat posed by tailgating this survey also demonstrates that their perceptions differ.
- Both end users and security advisors overall see tailgating as a serious issue and there is a high level of perceived vulnerability. A strong majority believes that what they have is not enough to prevent physical intrusion and they understand that physical barriers are the best approach (with guards when applicable).
- Security advisors see the potential costs of a breach as more expensive than end users – likely because of their exposure to more data concerning breaches and the impact on organizations. They may need to find a way to convince end users the cost of a breach is more expensive than perceived.
- A majority of security advisors understand and recommend security entrances to mitigate tailgating, but a minority of end users have invested in them even when a majority of them believe they are vulnerable. This implies there are justification and/or budget and approval hurdles to overcome.
- A majority of end users and security advisors are aware of industry regulations and the need to comply with them. However, a solid majority of end users use reactive, forensic strategies for addressing tailgating (alarming and responding after the fact), which may put them at additional risk of incurring hefty fines.