Security Mantraps on the way

Security Mantraps on the way

Security mantraps came into use during the 16^th century and were mechanical devices used for catching poachers and trespassers. Today, a security mantrap is commonly described as a small room, area or compartment that is designed to temporarily hold (trap) an individual between two doors (barriers) so that their credentials can be verified before granting access. Verification may be manual, with security personnel doing the verification, or automatic, with technology doing the verification. Most systems installed today are automatic with various integrated technologies to enhance security, safety and prevent unauthorized entry.

In the 17^th century, sally ports were built to control the entryway to a fortification or prison. They often included two sets of doors (or gates) to delay enemy penetration. Today, a sally port used for security applications may include doors, gates or other physical barriers to control access of people (or vehicles) to a secure area. Both security mantraps and sally ports are in widely used for security applications, however, despite some similarities, the terms are not used interchangeably, and only sally ports are referenced in the building codes.

A mantrap is an access control tool designed and restricted to a physical space, which is separated from the adjoining spaces (rooms) by two doors, usually an exit and an entry door that cannot be unlocked at the same time. Mantraps are like a double-door checking system that use either airlock technology or interlocking doors.

Today's simplified automatic mantrap rooms enable access with access cards, key fobs and mobile phones. Since mantraps prevent two persons (unless authorized) to be in the same room, they can be used for shared spaces in hospitals, dormitories and boarding rooms or anywhere else where people have some need for privacy.

Both the International Building Code (IBC) and the Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) describe a sally port as a compartmented area with two or more doors (or gates) where the intended purpose is to prevent continuous and unobstructed passage by allowing the release of only one door at a time. Both codes restrict their use to institutional type occupancies (e.g., prisons, jails, detention and correctional centers) and require provisions for continuous and unobstructed travel through the sally port during an emergency egress condition.

During 2017, the most digital damage from cyber-attacks includes continuous targeting of critical infrastructure, ransomware, government emails being hacked, exfiltration of Central Intelligence Agency documents, and the multinational WannaCry ransomware attack of over 200,000 systems. Gartners’ global information security spending forecast estimates that by the end of 2017, purchases for security products and services could reach $84.5 billion or a seven percent increase since 2016. Defenses have progressively improved and measures continue to be implemented. However, there is one area which lags far behind – that is the physical security of data centers and, specifically, the adoption and employment of mantraps.

According to BICSI, a mantrap is created using two interlocking doors which open only one at a time after the correct credentials have been validated. To physically secure a facility or data center, periodic risk assessment and policy reviews should be conducted. Ideally, drills should be included to engrain the training scenarios and validate policies and procedures. An example of layered security can be found in the TIA-942 where tiers I through IV are used to differentiate each level including Kevlar or bullet resistant walls, windows, doors, closed circuit television (CCTV) monitoring, access control and more.

Despite their widespread use, security mantraps are not referenced by either IBC or NFPA, which has given rise to a plethora of terms and definitions, including, for example: security portals, security vestibules, security airlocks, security booths, security cabins, control vestibules and personnel interlocks. For the supplier, designer or code official, this lack of regulation can result in different interpretations of building code and life safety requirements. Generally, the most appropriate sections of the code are applied and enforced, which may include sections on doors, gates, turnstiles, revolving doors and accessibility requirements. Because security mantraps are unique in their design and operation, the enforcement of code sections intended for other technologies may result in installed systems that are over- or under-designed with added costs and project delays, if accepted at all.

A security mantrap may be manual or automatic, manned or unmanned, pre-engineered or built from the ground up, located indoors or outdoors, and include a variety of technologies to enhance security, safety, aesthetics, throughput, service and overall performance. The systems come in various sizes, shapes, styles and configurations with a multitude of finishes, glazing and door options, including ballistic and vandal resistant. Other options and features include: metal/weapons detection, left object detection, tailgating/piggybacking detection, monoblock construction, wall mount versions, network interface capabilities, video cameras, intercoms, anti-pass back integration, biometrics, manual releases, and inputs/outputs for control and alarm monitoring. most common mantraps work with a system of two interlocked doors, there are solutions that can be implemented on three or more doors, including varied authentication systems. “Real” mantraps typically have two locked doors. Some interlocked mantraps, such as those used at bank entrances, are unlocked to begin with, and only lock when one of the doors is open.

Security mantraps are commonly found in high-security, mission-critical facilities (e.g., government, military, critical infrastructure), but can also be found in many commercial and industrial facilities (e.g., banking, data centers, pharmaceutical, health care, airports, casinos, executive suites, high-end retail, R&D labs). Some of the key drivers for using security mantraps include the ability to detect and prevent tailgating and piggybacking incidents in unmanned locations, satisfying various regulatory compliance standards (e.g., GDPR, GLBA, PCI DSS, HIPPA, FISMA, SOX) by restricting access to critical information systems, and protecting against other security threats that have become more prevalent in the world today (e.g., espionage, terrorism, theft, vandalism, protests, etc.).

When security mantraps are being considered as a countermeasure to mitigate unauthorized entry, it is important to establish clear goals and objectives for the equipment, application and environment. Then, carefully review and evaluate the proposed system based on form, fit and function. When these systems become part of the building infrastructure, provisions for security and safety must be met. This often starts with a security risk assessment for the facility or site.

Two Major Types of Mantraps:

• Air Lock Control – low-security systems used only for environmental control also referred to as normally unlocked.
• Restricted Entry and Exit – these are considered the highest security type that is used with normally locked doors. Opening any door keeps all other doors secure. The man trap buffers simultaneous requests for access which prevents any two doors from being unlocked.

Additionally, some man traps may incorporate the use of Request-to-exit (REX) device – typically located on the inside secured door, most are identified as a ‘quick release’ latch.

Mantrap Pros:

• Allows only one person to enter or exit at a given time
• Requires proper identification and authentication
• Restricts movement into and out of the data center
• Can be used to closed unwanted visitors until authorities are called
• Provides an audit trail for personnel and visitors

Mantrap Cons:

• Highly secure doors are more expensive
• May not permit movement of large boxes, dollies, deliveries, etc.
• May fail during electrical power outage unless backup exists
• If not properly implemented according to policy and design, may present a safety risk

The goal of any security risk assessment is to develop a protection strategy that mitigates risk to people, property and information systems, and, for security mantraps, the primary goal is to prevent unauthorized entry. The security risk assessment process begins with asset identification and valuation, followed by evaluation and analysis of associated threats, vulnerabilities and potential loss impact. Finally, security measures are recommended and form the basis of an integrated protection strategy.