RE: RFC 2527 Physical Security Controls Question

["Phillip M Hallam-Baker" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bob,

> However, in all of those cases the justification would be to 
> protect human life,
> and only secondarily to protect property and major financial 
> assets.  

I can't think of many cases in which a PKI would be the last barrier 
protecting such facilities. In the case of a reactor you can run the 
boron feed pumps and so on...

In the UK nuclear installations are guarded by the British Nuclear Police
which is the only part of the police force which is permitted to carry
firearms at all times. I suspect they are authorized to fire if someone
attempts to steal nuclear material but they have yet to shoot one of 
the many protestors who make a habit of unauthorized entries to such
facilties.


> Unlike 
> a government that could conceivably deploy automatic, lethal defenses to 
> protect nuclear missiles, 

Actually the US is one of a very small number of governments that could
do this. The rest have signed up for the landmine ban treaty!


> US law strongly frowns on people who 
> set up deadfall 
> devices or shotguns triggered to go off if someone attempts to 
> open a door.  

If for no other reason than such devices have a habit of going off
and killing innocent bystanders, in particular the emergency services.


> Another problem is how to deal with the conflicting demands of 
> the fire codes and security.

Quite so, deployment of deadfall devices is probably contrary to
every fire code in the country.

Failing to attend to fire codes can itself be a serious problem.
For example anyone who digs out a bunker has to be aware of the
possibility of methane gas build up. More than one pumping station 
has gone up as visitors have neglected the no-smoking signs.

Folk who build secure bunkers underground would be well advised
to consider such issues. After all a fire is likely to compromise 
one's security substantially...


	Phill