SIA Standards

Video Perimeter
Application Paper
SIA Standards Perimeter Security Subcommittee
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... 3
Section 1: Goal Definition ...................................................................................................... 4
Section 2: Detection System Performance Evaluation ............................................................ 9
Section 3: Assessment Camera Performance Validation ....................................................... 14
Section 4: Integrated Video System Considerations .............................................................. 17

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 2

Acknowledgements

SIA Standards would like to thank the following individuals for their contributions to this application
paper and their participation in the SIA Standards Perimeter Security Subcommittee.

John Romanowich, SightLogix (chair)

Pete Acetero, Premise Intelligence
Lori Anderson, Safe Skies Alliance
Larry Bowe, PureTech Systems
Ian Ehernberg, Xtralis
Bill Klink, Flir
Mahesh Saptharishi, Avigilon
Steve Surfaro, Axis Communications
Lloyd Uliana, Bosch

© 2015, Security Industry Association. All rights reserved. Except as expressly granted by the Security
Industry Association, no other implied or express license or right is made or granted by Security Industry
Association to this work. Moreover, the documentation cannot be used, displayed, excerpted, modified,
distributed, or offered for resale or use, without the prior written consent of the Security Industry
Association.
Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 3
Section 1: Goal Definition
High-profile security breaches around the world highlight the need for accurate, dependable video
perimeter systems to protect critical assets. Perimeters are the first line of defense for protection of
people, facilities and assets; any threat that is eliminated or mitigated at the perimeter no longer poses
a threat inside a facility.

Video perimeter systems combine the strengths of machines and people. Upon detection, cameras are
able to “see” what is happening over site perimeters, and people, when armed with accurate
information, can make fast and appropriate response decisions. In order to do this in the most effective
way, it is important to follow best practices of site design and camera deployment. This document is
intended to assist with these important tasks.

1.1
Before engaging in a video deployment for a large, outdoor perimeter it is important to define the
detection, identification, and operational requirements of the site. In some cases these requirements
may already be defined. In certain industries such as nuclear, there are numerous safety and security
standards that are required by regulation. In many other industries there are public safety codes that
should be followed and must inform the security decisions. A map of the site which includes a bird’s eye
view of the perimeter to be secured and immediate surroundings is highly recommended. This view
gives the best canvas to model field of views from devices. A Security Plan which details the steps to
follow for alarm response should also be clearly defined.

1.3 Object Characteristics

When assessing a site, a foundational place to begin is defining what classes of objects or targets will be
detected by the system, often determined by which targets can cause harm and their size. For example,
a particular boundary may only consider humans or boats as threats; other applications may consider
small animals to be a threat to the security of a site. Although the goal is to be prepared for anything,
the terrain types surrounding the perimeter secured can dictate the type of objects that are most likely
to intrude. A paved road would likely allow the most diverse amount of object traffic to approach the
perimeter, a variety of vehicles of different sizes, single passenger vehicles such as bikes and ATVs, cars,
small trucks, large trucks etc., as well as pedestrians and animals. The chart below provides a sketch of
terrain types and possible object types (that correlate to sizes and motion types) that one should be
prepared to detect.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 4

 Paved Road Dense Fields Light Woods Dense Woods Water
Pedestrian X X X X X
Small Animal X X X X X
Single X X X
Passenger
Vehicle
Car/Small X X
Truck
Large X X
Truck/Humvee
Small X
Inflatable Boat
Speedboat X

Figure 1.1 – Object Types and Terrains

Most commercially available devices should be able to detect objects of these sizes, however factors
such as camouflaging and speed of approach must be taken into account when selecting a device.
Devices must be able to deliver enough pixels on target at or before a critical range to detect the
presence or motion of these common object types.

1.4 Object Details

In many cases detection is not the only requirement of a perimeter video surveillance system. Once the
object types that must be detected are defined, depending on site requirements it will likely be
necessary to recognize or identify a target.
For the given application the following questions must be asked:

- What do we need to know about the target?

- Do we need to know exactly who/what the target is?
- Is it enough to recognize the type of target or is identification of a specific target?

The answers to these questions will determine the device needed to provide enough pixels on target at
the critical range to recognize or identify the target. The most common measure of “detectability” for
video surveillance is the Johnson Criteria which defines the number of pixels on target required based
on the approximate dimensions of an object. While models such as the Johnson Criteria have been
established to assist with determining range, they primarily refer to the detection limit of the image
sensor within the camera. Later, we will discuss the Johnson Criteria as it compares to the distance an
automated camera can detect motion of security relevance.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 5

Commonly applied Johnson Criteria (pixels on target) in the commercial world are:

Critical Detection Recognition Identification

Dimension
Man .75m 2 8 16
Small Truck 2m .7 2.6 5.2
Rubber 3m .5 2 4
Inflatable Boat

Figure 1.2 Johnson Criteria – Pixels on Target for Detection, Recognition and Identification

1.5 Alerts and Alarms

A perimeter video surveillance system will produce alerts that are defined based on the site
requirements. It is necessary for a site to have an alert management process - known as a Security Plan -
that allows for an effective response when alarms occur. The Security plan will reflect the security
requirements for the application, and may be based on several factors, including the size of the facility,
the number of staff monitoring these alarms, and the ability of the site to respond to potential threats.
Depending on the sensitivity of the system there will also be nuisance alerts, the number of which must
also be right-sized for the application and security threat level:

The Security Plan should dictate the type of system need although finer details can also be created in
tandem with the system install. The philosophy should detail at the very least:

 What are the different alert types? (e.g. critical, of interest, normal behavior, nuisance)

 How are alerts prioritized? (by type, by zone, velocity, etc.)

 What are the different alert responses (alarm, perimeter fortification, deployment of guards,
clear/override)?

 Does an alert type require an immediate response?

 Does an alert type require an acknowledgement and further investigation?

 How much time should elapse between acknowledgement and response?

 What other systems does this alert effect?

 Are other systems notified of the alert automatically, or manually?

 What alerts are logged?

 How long are alert logs retained?

 Recording for auditing purposes/compliance to regulation

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 6
Any video solution should have the alert and alarm handling capability to meet or exceed the
requirements of the site’s alarm and alert philosophy.

1.6 Environmental Factors

Any site survey should take into account both the natural and unnatural environmental attributes of the
site. There are a number of environmental factors that will affect the detection performance of the
system. Weather, for example, can cause the detection ranges of certain devices to decline. Rainfall,
snow and fog are direct obscurants while wind can affect both the stability of the device and its
components and interact with other environmental elements to create obscurants such as dust blowing
in the wind. Device choices should be made with climate and the seasonal weather conditions that are
common for such climates in mind. Some devices may offer capabilities that help to overcome
environmental impact (e.g., electronic stabilization can compensate for wind and movement).

Natural lighting considerations such as the position of the sun in relation to target approaches can
greatly reduce the functional range of detect of surveillance equipment when operating in the visible
spectrum. Long wave infrared Thermal (LWIR) cameras can help manage these situations assuming they
are optimized for 24 hour use through image processing.

Moreover geographical constrains such as terrain, bodies of water or natural occlusions can negatively
affect the stated detection performance of a device in experimental conditions. It is strongly
recommended that these uncontrollable environmental factors are considered when selecting devices,
determining detection ranges for the system and determining camera placement.

Additionally, there are site-generated obscurants that may be able to be controlled such as steam,
smoke and glare – common elements in industrial facilities.

1.7 Financial Considerations

All requirements come with a financial component, and all requirements may not be able to be met due
to financial constraints. At the beginning of system selection, a risk assessment and a site survey can
help determine how costs can be controlled.

1.7.1 Risk Assessment

A risk assessment of the entire site can determine areas where perimeter video surveillance is
absolutely vital and where other low cost countermeasures or deterrents are sufficient. Many different
factors go into a risk assessment such as geography, normal ingress and egress patterns, and location of
critical site assets and size of the security force. Bolstering security with video should be a priority at
higher risk areas and may only be a part of the security solution at lower risk areas of the site. An
automated video system may allow a site to reassign operators or guards to realize efficiencies
elsewhere.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 7

1.7.2 Site Survey
A site survey should be performed to right-size the system. Such a site survey should model the site and
allow for experimental placement of perimeter devices. Cost savings can be found by controlling the
number of devices that will be deployed at the site. A successful site can illuminate areas where
perhaps one device of superior performance can replace multiple lesser devices.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 8

Section 2: Detection System Performance Evaluation
2.1 Introduction
With the objectives in Section 1 documented, and equipment and devices proposed, the devices for
detection can be evaluated.

Prior to performance validation, detailed maps and/or diagrams of the system installation and coverage
areas should be available. Diagrams of the installation should include all infrastructure associated with
the system including but not limited to mounting structures, brackets, height, and direction (N, S, E, W).
Coverage area maps should document known blind spots, existing structures, ground cover and natural
reference points. Markers should be installed at designated locations to identify start and/or stop points
for the validation scenarios (i.e. the system detection area covers 2,000’ so markers are placed every
500’ to establish zones for conducting the performance tests).

2.2 Perimeter Coverage

The foremost consideration is whether the devices selected can provide coverage of the complete
perimeter. This can be done on a device by device basis; for example, one can confirm that a single
camera provides a sufficient field of view for the application or a portion of the application. Once this is
confirmed representative devices can be overlayed on a facilities map to demonstrate that the planned
devices and their placements can cover the entire facility.

2.3 Testing Considerations (Performance and Environmental)

Next, it must be determined whether the detection parameters specified are met. We all know that
potential threats come in different shapes, sizes and velocities and we will discuss how to represent
these factors shortly. For the purposes of a basic detection performance test a human can be used as a
test subject. A detection device must be able to detect an object (person) at a required distance from
three different directions – moving directly toward the device; moving cross-field to the device field of
view; and moving at a 45° angle to the field of view. (Figure XX). These tests should reveal detection
distances (detection ranges) published and claimed by the device vendor, or more importantly the
tolerable ranges required for the given application.

During the performance validation, the following factors should be considered for human detection:

 Body Position: Upright, Belly Crawl, Hands/Knees Crawl, Roll

 Pace: Faster than normal (run), normal (walk), slower than normal (slow walk)

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 9

A sample Human Detection Scenario Matrix for a Video Intrusion Detection System is in Figure 2.1
below:

Masking / Angle to Field of Distance From

Camouflaging Body Position Pace View Device

minimum
Faster than
90° angle midway
normal
maximum

minimum
Straight toward
midway
camera
maximum
Upright
minimum
None
Normal 90° angle midway

maximum

minimum

45° angle midway

maximum

minimum
Slower than
Belly crawl 90° angle
normal
maximum

Figure 2.1 – Sample Human Detection Scenario Matrix

A stated in the goal definition, there are a number of environmental factors that will affect the detection
performance of the system. Some can be controlled and others cannot. Weather, for example, can
cause the detection ranges of certain devices to decline. Rainfall, snow and fog are direct obscurants
while wind can affect both the stability of the device and its components and interact with other

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 10

environmental elements to create obscurants such as dust blowing in the wind. Moreover geographical
constrains such as terrain, bodies of water or natural occlusions can negatively affect the stated
performance of a device in experimental conditions. It is strongly recommended that these
uncontrollable environmental factors are considered when selecting devices for the detection system.
Some devices may offer capabilities that help to overcome environmental impact (e.g., electronic
stabilization can compensate for wind and movement).

Moreover, there are site-generated obscurants that may be able to be controlled such as steam, smoke
and glare – common elements in industrial facilities. It is recommended that these types of obscurants
be directed away from fields of view when possible. Good perimeter maintenance such as pruning of
foliage and removal of waste and clutter can help to ensure clear sight of intrusions. Another way to
ensure devices perform as expected is proper mounting and stabilization considerations. Devices should
be mounted and housed in such a way that external factors such as weather and birds cannot
manipulate them.

2.4 Maximizing Probability of Detect

Detection scenarios are about maximizing Probability of Detect (PoD) for a given field of view and a
defined device height. There are a number of factors that govern PoD:

2.4.1 Device Height

For perimeter fence applications where the objective is detecting persons or vehicles, best practice
dictates that the camera be mounted at 20 ft (7m). Cameras may be mounted on poles or buildings. This
approximate height works well for typical fence line or building-mounted applications.

2.4.2 Coverage Area of the Device

The coverage area of the device is governed by the detection range (measured above) and the field of
view of the device. The area directly beneath the device is a “blind spot” and not included in the
coverage area of the device. Every security camera has a blind spot underneath its installed location,
typically starting at the foot of a pole and extending a measurable distance dependent on the camera’s
height, tilt angle, and Field of View (FOV). This blind spot can cover a meaningful portion of the camera’s
overall range. The narrower the field of view, the longer the blind spot will become.

To provide complete coverage, each camera must overlap and include the blind spot of the camera in
front of it. All effective perimeter security systems should be designed with such a “zero blind spot”
approach.

An automated video intrusion system operates by detecting targets that move into a camera’s detection
area. The installer should test to determine the system’s true detection distances in order to design a
dependable system with no coverage gaps.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 11

The best practice is to measure the distance at which an automated camera can detect a person walking
“inbound” or directly towards it. A person walking towards an automated camera produces very little
motion (compared with a person walking across the field of view), which makes the target harder for a
video perimeter security system to detect at longer ranges. This is the most difficult detection task for
an automated camera, but measuring the detection range in this manner avoids any gaps in coverage.

Every camera has a specific field of view which is determined by its lens. Visible cameras typically offer a
variable lens which can be zoomed or widened in the field. Most thermal cameras have a fixed lens and
specific field of view. When using automated cameras with fixed lenses, it is important to place the
camera along the perimeter system to detect intruders within the camera’s capable field of view. Some
manufacturers offer web-based tools that are able to assist lens selection and camera placement along
the perimeter to avoid gaps.

2.4.3 Object Contrast to Background

The concept of camouflaging is reducing the amount of contrast an object has with its surroundings.
Reduction in contrast of an object whether in color or temperature (for thermal devices) will negatively
affect the PoD and range.

2.4.5 Approaches
Targets can approach a camera directly or across its field of view. Targets which come straight toward
an automated camera generate the least motion and are the hardest to detect. For this reason, it is
important to follow the guidance under Detection Range to determine the automated system’s inbound
detection distance.

While models such as the Johnson Criteria have been established to assist with determining range, they
primarily refer to the detection limit of the image sensor within the camera. Real-world security
applications are based on automated detection range, which is defined as the ability of an automated
camera to detect motion of security relevance (usually people or vehicles), while ignoring other motions
such as blowing debris and foliage. Such automated detection requires more than the < 2 pixels of
movement prescribed by the Johnson criteria.

For real-world automated detection applications, use the following recommended target sizes for each
scenario at a minimum of 24 pixels:

1. Target size of a human being - 1.85 meters x .05 meters

2. Target size of a vehicle (front view) – 2 meters x 3 meters

3. Inflatable boat (front view) – 3 meters by 4 meters

Sometimes, a target might be partially occluded by objects in the camera’s field of view. For instance,
you may need to detect a person passing on the other side of a low wall which is half a person’s height,

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 12

partially blocking them. A simple remedy is to assume a minimal target of twice this size (in this case 48
pixels). This would allow you to account for half of the target being completely blocked from the
camera while leaving enough pixels for detection purposes.

2.5 Nuisance Alarm Rate for Stationary and Translating Targets

Video Intrusion Detection Devices should have low operational nuisance alarm rates (NARs) to be
effective. NARs are caused by the environment (weather, sound, wildlife, people, vehicles, etc.) and are
influenced in part by the detection rule sets defined during system configuration. In addition to
documenting the rate of nuisance alarms observed, alarms should be categorized. Categorizing nuisance
alarms may help refine previously established rule set to enhance system performance. Also, although a
primary goal is to keep the occurrence of nuisance alarms as low as possible, sometimes nuisance
alarms validate that the system is working as designed.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 13

Section 3: Assessment Camera Performance Validation
3.1 Introduction
With the objectives in Section 2 documented, and equipment and devices proposed, the devices for
assessment can be evaluated.

Prior to performance validation, detailed maps and/or diagrams of the system installation and coverage
areas should be available. Diagrams of the installation should include all infrastructure associated with
the system including but not limited to mounting structures, brackets, height, and direction (N, S, E, W).
Coverage area maps should document known blind spots, existing structures, ground cover and natural
reference points. Markers should be installed at designated locations to identify start and/or stop points
for the validation scenarios (i.e. the system detection area covers 2,000’ so markers are placed every
500’ to establish zones for conducting the performance tests).

3.2 Pixels on Target

There are two types of assessment – recognition-level which is using video to determine what
something is (person, animal, class of vehicle), and Identification-level which is using the video to
identify an object specifically (who a person is, license plate tags).

Sufficient detail and clarity is available to determine if a human-sized target is determined to be a threat
or non-threat based on the type of clothing worn, equipment carried and/or other contextual clues. All
properties of Detection- and Recognition-level imaging still apply. Additionally, body movements,
different uniform types, and the presence of headgear, backpacks or other objects can be determined.

Recognition-level video has at minimum:

 40 horizontal pixels on target (60 pix/m)

 230 vertical pixels on target

Sufficient detail and clarity is available to allow for an already familiar human-sized target to be
determined as a specific individual. All properties of Detection-, Recognition- and Identification-level
images still apply. Additionally, the target’s type of headgear can be distinguished (e.g. bicycle helmet
or soldier’s helmet), and specific objects on the body can be determined (weapons, phones, etc.).

Identification-level video has at minimum:

 75 horizontal pixels on target (150 pix/m)

 250 vertical pixels on target

During the day, capturing usable images requires appropriate camera and lens to the desired number of
pixels on target. As long as the camera and lens are property set up and in good working condition, the

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 14

results are predictable. Poor maintenance such as a dirty camera window or challenging weather
conditions will reduce image quality.

In addition to the challenges of daytime video surveillance, light on target is the most obvious influence
on nighttime image quality. Video noise is the limiting factor for nighttime video imaging. Visible
cameras have built-in image optimization (frame integration, AGC) that will try to produce a minimum
image brightness. If the video signal isn't high enough, the camera will increase gain to make the image
brighter, but does so at the expense of image detail due to increased noise. Thermal cameras are not
affected by these concerns but will not provide the necessary detail for identification. For a given
camera and lens combination, there is a direct relationship between the amount of illumination on
target and video image quality that can be used to predict imaging performance at night.

Being too rigid on geometry alone doesn’t address the real world needs of assessment. Pixels on target
alone is actually a low-level way to derive assessment. Aspect Ratio may be the first thing people use to
assess a target, which does not have a lot to do with pixels on target. If we’re talking about visible light
cameras, things that will challenge a visible light camera will be different than with a thermal camera.

3.3 System Considerations for Assessment

The scene content criteria, among other factors, should incorporate resolution, object size, speed,
trajectory, scene lighting level, and required refresh rate.

Resolution as required by the system primary function should be measured in pixels per foot (ppf). The
pixels per foot calculation should be derived for both horizontal and vertical pixels and is equal to the
imager’s pixel dimensions divided by the corresponding field of view linear dimension (feet).

The use of video cameras and encoding technology with built-in pixel counting should be considered as
an enhancement to the design process, measurement, and verification of pixels on target.

The size of the object(s) in the scene content should be considered in the design of the system and
related to the systems primary function. Smaller objects should require more optical zoom or higher
resolution image capture assuming sufficient lighting. HDTV video cameras should be required in
systems where the object(s) of interest occupy 10 percent or less of the vertical field of view. Refresh or
display rate in frames or images per second (fps) for the assessment function should be matched for the
target velocity with faster targets requiring a higher frame rate.

The display rate for the assessment function should be matched to the percentage that the object(s) of
interest occupy within the field of view, together with the object’s speed and trajectory.

3.4 Positioning
Device placement is critical for successful identification as it ensures that persons or objects are
captured at a favorable angle. If, for example, cameras are placed high above the ground, images will
Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 15
have a birds-eye-view perspective, making objects distorted and difficult to assess. Devices should be
firmly fixed in order to minimize blur and vibrations caused by camera movement.

Stability can be challenging if the camera is mounted on a tall pole and you are using a zoom lens with a
long focal length. Then, even small vibrations will translate to large movements in the resulting image.

3.5 Illumination
Lighting level should be considered in the assessment system design process. The ability for the
assessment device to render images that match the primary function should be considered. Lighting is
measured as reflected and the scene environment should be considered, together with the scene’s light
sources. The performance of the assessment device to produce suitable images should be measured
through site testing with actual test objects or test charts to include but not limited to ISO 12233 Digital
Imaging Test Chart, ISO Camera Test Charts, and ACCU CHART HDTV Test Chart (below).

ISO 15739 Gray Scale Test ISO 14524 Noise Chart

ISO 12223 Resolution Chart
Chart

Color Fidelity Chart CamAlign ChromaDuMonde Chart

Figure 3.1 – Common Image Quality Charts

In outdoor surveillance it is important to take into account that the sunlight shifts in intensity and
direction through the course of a day. Weather conditions will also affect lighting and reflection. Snow,
for example, will intensify the reflected light, while rain will absorb much of the reflected light. For
identification of a human face, balanced illumination in the region of 300-500 lux is recommended.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 16

Section 4: Integrated Video System Considerations
When considering the design and selection of a Video Surveillance System, the physical security
designer, user, or integrator needs to consider the individual needs of each use case and market in
which they are working to achieve the highest image quality. The use case is the combination of
hardware, software, and peripheral components that are used to meet a specific use case desired by the
implementation of the system.

Perimeter surveillance cameras located in areas such as airports must be able to detect and analyze a
vehicle or a person in an unauthorized location, and notify airport law enforcement. Although these
cameras are not actively observed, video analytics within the camera and at a VMS provided a real-time
notification of a possible threat.

The requirements for a complete Video Surveillance System for a large perimeter may include:

 Lighting: existing, with specific improvements for higher traffic or known points of access with
white LED fixtures; or thermal cameras which are unaffected by lighting can be used

 Source: Camera with built-in removable storage, continuous secondary recording in the event of
infrastructure outage

 Physical Infrastructure: primary fiber infrastructure with secondary wireless infrastructure

 Logical Infrastructure: remote Layer 2 network switches

 Control/Analysis: keyboard/joystick access, automated analytics advanced video motion

detection, cross-line detection object left behind, fixed vehicle license plate recognition/capture
applications

 Rules Engine: to trigger alerts and create event files, typically provided by a VMS

 Storage: local Network Attached Storage (NAS) or Cloud Storage if allowed by site policy.

 Display: Command Center Display array controlled directly by the system’s rules engine or
Physical Security Information Management (PSIM) gateway application; mobile appliances with
smart transcoding.

4.1 Video System Design

4.1.1 Existing vs New System

The considerations for adding perimeter detection and assessment systems to an existing video
surveillance system are different than those of a new system. Interoperability with legacy devices and
applications are of utmost importance when selecting devices for the system.

4.1.2 Image Frame Rate and Resolution

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 17
Refresh or display rate in frames or images per second (fps) should be matched for the display size.
Mobile devices with smaller display resolution should require a lower minimum frame rate; larger
displays should require a higher frame rate. The selected display rate should be matched to the
percentage that the object(s) of interest occupy within the field of view, together with the object’s
speed and trajectory. Systems designed for recognition such as vehicle license plate recognition, facial
recognition, face location, smoke and fire detection, object recognition, pattern recognition, cross-line
detection, object temporal characteristic, color recognition, and trajectory should meet a minimum
resolution of 80 ppf. The Designer should verify the performance of the video camera or encoding
device, together with the recognition application to produce suitable data through site testing with
actual test objects.

4.1.3 Number of Cameras on System

The number of cameras in a system should be a function of coverage area. Cameras with longer/wider
coverage area will reduce camera count and supporting infrastructure.

4.1.4 Display Requirements

The system should consider all possible resolutions and match them appropriately with the application.
The chart follows summarizes available display device resolutions:

Figure 4.1 – Commonly available display resolutions

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 18

4.1.5 Alarm Handling Requirements
The system designer must take into account when the system should alarm and create an alarm
philosophy or rules for alarms (a Security Plan) that are integrated with other facility alarm handling
utilities. Alarms performance should be benchmarked, “bad actors” should be analyzed and calibrated
and the system should be audited periodically.

4.1.6 Remote and Mobile Clients and Viewing

If the system requires remote viewing or if the solution is using managed or hosted video, the Designer
should verify that the end user’s connectivity (upstream bandwidth) can support these requirements.
Remember that mobile devices require lower resolution and network attached storage can accept a
HDTV stream while a lower resolution stream is sent to the remote user or the managed video service.

4.2 Video System Network and Storage Requirements

4.2.1 Network Security and Authentication

Best practices for network security usually place devices like these well behind corporate firewalls and
therefore are not generally accessible to the public. The system designer should utilize Port
Authentication Protocol (802.1x) to better manage video streaming and accessibility of the recording
and monitoring devices that exist directly on a site network. The designer is cautioned, however, to
model all systems that utilize authentication protocols to assure the level of performance that their user
requires.

Current evolving capabilities which further extend the security framework of the network infrastructure
components to the system include creating a “trust model”, or high assurance identity and access
control framework that use a security technique known as public key infrastructure, or (PKI) to
implement cryptographic requirements for authenticating Non-Person Entities (NPEs) such as cameras
or other sources. , Through PKI, video is encrypted during transmission over fixed and wireless networks,
as well as stored in mobile, network attached, or cloud hosted storage repositories.

4.2.2 Video Storage Retention Time

The system designer should specify storage to accommodate user compliance requirements. Facilities
processing personally-identifiable information and conforming to the PCI-DSS, SAS70 and SSAE 16
standards for Physical and Logical Security should require a minimum of 90 days DMC retention, unless
otherwise directed by those standards. If no specific compliance is required, video retention times can
be solely a function of storage capacity and site specific forensic tolerance.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 19

4.2.3 Bandwidth and Latency
Two key elements of network performance are bandwidth and latency. Bandwidth is easy to control and
can be increased as the load on the network increases. For some applications, bandwidth use can be
configured to only send video data over the network when an alarm event occurs. However, latency
matters equally to the effectively of the network. The designer should specify a Quality of Service
requirement to maintain consistent performance on a network by managing both bandwidth and
latency in a coordinated fashion. This can be done by assessing the network demands of the applications
and devices during different demands on the network. For example peak activity times may trigger more
alerts and increase bandwidth demands. Processing of these alerts can cause latency delays on the
network. Proper network design and testing can help coordinate these demands.

4.2.4 Compression
Advanced video solutions are enabled through the increasing efficiency of network camera compression
schemes. Video compression in modern networked video cameras is performed using either h.264 or
Motion JPEG codecs.

The latest iteration of MPEG-4—MPEG-4 Part 10, h.264 or the Advanced Video Codec (AVC)—is the
most efficient commonly used compression technology to date. To view compressed video, it is
necessary to decode it. Fixed and mobile devices today typically decode h.264 video streams.
Previously thought to be too complex and processor intensive, h.264 decoding is now so common that
the designer has the choice of using software or hardware decoders, allowing DMC to be viewed
everywhere there is internet or network connectivity. The next generation of this compression
specification h.265 has recently been developed and device manufacturers are in the beginning stages
of implementing them into commercially available products.

4.3 Integration with other Systems

The integration of related systems, including access control, intrusion, fire/safety, and communication
can provide for beneficial interoperability. This level of integration relies on the level of integration
achieved with any given manufacturers API or SDK. PSIM solutions manage all of the data produced by
the various security applications (where the security application manufacturers API or SDK allows), and
aggregates them to produce meaningful intelligence. The ability to achieve this true system
interoperability relies on devices, platforms and applications conforming to open industry standards.
Some security industry standards that the designer should be aware of are those developed by ONVIF,
Physical Security Interoperability Alliance (PSIA), and the Security Industry Association. As well as a host
of other IT focused standards organizations such as OASIS, and the Cloud Security Alliance.

4.4 Deterrents and Countermeasures

The best case scenario in all situations is no threat at all, and many threats can be avoided with
appropriate deterrents and countermeasures. Deterrents and countermeasures come in many forms.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 20

 Audio Deterrents – Triggered warnings that play over a loudspeaker upon initial detection.

Visual Deterrents – Visual deterrents such as signage, lights, and even placing cameras in the
sightline of threats can be a visual deterrent; however it is always recommended that all cameras
are functional.

Physical Deterrents – Barriers, bollards, gates, fences and locks are the traditional physical
deterrents that prevent breach. These should always be used and operational.

Video Perimeter Security Application Paper 21