A.V. Telnyy - Ph. D. (Eng.), Associate Professor, Department of Informatics and Information Security, Vladimir State University named after A.&N. Stoletovs. E-mail: andre.izi@mail.ru M.Yu. Monakhov - Dr. Sc. (Eng.), Professor, Head of Department of Informatics and Information Security, Vladimir State University named after A.&N. Stoletovs. E-mail: mmonakhov@vlsu.ru

Legal and regulatory documents available for safety and security of various objects provide to reveal in full measure only the drawbacks of the existing state of engineering and technical hardening of perimeter premises and the object for protecting against unauthorized access. At the same time the «sufficiency» degree assessment of the object protection status is essential for the object owner as an assurance factor of the low unauthorized access to the guarded object. Technical means sufficiency concept of engineering and technical hardening is associated with the financial expenses on the object security from unauthorized access. It provides to estimate appropriate resources reasonability of the object protection. The aim of the article is to develop informative content upgrade method and quality result interpretation of guided objects integrated survey by assessing engineering and technical hardening degree sufficiency. Engineering and technical hardening sufficient assessment of premises and object facilities depends on many factors, including the types of objects, patterns of ownership, structure of organization, scope of activities, their category, secured values, penetration probability, criminal or background situation in the region, the location of physical security duty, technology intensiveness for safety and security, etc. As sufficiency criteria of engineering and technical hardening of premises and object facilities may be: 1. Security enforcement of normative and regulatory documents for security activity of engineering and technical hardening of premises and object facilities. 2. Providing the necessary detention of offending person for time sufficient for reaction of physical security duty (detention group) and prevention of unauthorized access to the premises in any place or in any object facilities. 3. Providing the necessary detention of offending person for time sufficient for reaction of physical security duty (detention group) at penetration for the secured premises or building, but at the same time to prevent unauthorized access to a specific site area or in a specific object facility with deposits of valuables. This approach provides engineering and technical hardening of only soft spots at structural building components (places of the most probable penetration) and the specific object facility with deposits of valuables. 4. Cumulative expenses on ensuring engineering and technical hardening of premises and object facilities have to make a certain share (percentage) from cost estimation of the protected resources (deposits of valuables). Thus equipment of engineering and technical hardening of premises and object facilities (the expenses share of protected resources estimation cost) as to correspond to probability of attempt of infringement of the secured premises or object. This is a combination of economic and probabilistic approaches (separately probabilistic and economic approaches are theoretically possible). Use of expert estimations and elements of fuzzy logic at the assessment of the object protection «sufficiency» against unauthorized access is caused by the fact that all basic data for calculations are obtained as result of arbitrary survey of the protection and safety system condition by the inspector. It is offered to estimate engineering and technical hardening «sufficiency» of premises, buildings and object facilities with the generalized weighed relation coefficients from 0 to 1. The possibility to create the support information system for organization decision-making inspection structure carrying out protection of objects on the basis of assessment technique of engineering and technical hardening is very urgent task.

 

1. MVD Rossii. GUVO MVD. P. 78.36.028-2012. «Tekhnicheskie sredstva obnaruzhenija proniknovenija i ugroz razlichnykh vidov. Osobennosti vybora, ehkspluatacii i primenenija v zavisimosti ot stepeni vazhnosti i opasnosti obektov. Rekomendacii». M.: NIC «Okhrana». 2012. 359 s.
2. MVD Rossii. GUVO MVD. R78.36.032-2013 «Inzhenerno-tekhnicheskaja ukreplennost i osnashhenie tekhnicheskimi sredstvami okhrany obektov, kvartir i MKHIG, prinimaemykh pod centralizovannuju okhranu podrazdelenijami vnevedomstvennojj okhrany. CHast 1». M.: NIC «Okhrana». 2013. 44 s.
3. A.V. Telnyjj, O.R. Nikitin, I.V. KHrapov Ob organizacii informacionnojj raspredelennojj sredy integrirovannykh sistem okhrany i bezopasnosti // Priborostroenie. 2012. № 8.
4. A.V. Telnyjj Organizacija vzaimodejjstvija mezhdu podsistemami integrirovannojj sistemy bezopasnosti // Trudy KH Rossijjskojj nauchno-tekhnich. konf. «Novye informacionnye tekhnologii v sistemakh svjazi i upravlenija». Kaluga. 1-2 ijunja 2011. Kaluga: Izdatelstvo OOO «Noosfera». 2011. S. 582−584.