We’re Tracking the Future of Security

Author: Osiris

  • DroneShield Fields Vehicle-Mounted Counter-Drone System on US Army Infantry Squad Vehicles

    DroneShield Fields Vehicle-Mounted Counter-Drone System on US Army Infantry Squad Vehicles

    DroneShield said it has completed installation and operational acceptance of its DroneSentry-X Mk2 counter-drone system on US Army Infantry Squad Vehicles, reaching the milestone roughly 80 days after the contract was awarded under Joint Interagency Task Force 401. The installation process included fitting the system to the vehicles, a live-drone acceptance test and operator training, establishing what the company calls initial operational capability.

    Unlike fixed-site counter-drone installations, the vehicle-mounted system is designed to give mobile forces detection and electronic-countermeasure capability against drones while on the move. DroneShield said three additional DroneSentry-X Mk2 units are planned under a recent contract modification.

    Why it matters

    Mobile counter-drone capability addresses a gap that fixed installations can’t: forces operating away from a base still face the same low-cost drone threats that have driven counter-UAS investment at airports, stadiums and critical infrastructure sites.

    Sources

  • Critical Flaw in Siemens Reyrolle Grid Protection Relays Allows Authentication Bypass

    Critical Flaw in Siemens Reyrolle Grid Protection Relays Allows Authentication Bypass

    CISA published an advisory disclosing 14 vulnerabilities in Siemens Reyrolle 7SR5 protection relays, devices used in electrical substations worldwide to detect faults and trigger circuit breakers. The most severe, CVE-2026-62645, carries a CVSS score of 9.8 out of 10 and stems from the relay’s web interface exposing information that lets an attacker calculate current and past session IDs — enough to bypass authentication entirely without any privileges or user interaction.

    The advisory also describes a related flaw allowing predictable session-ID generation from insufficient entropy, an out-of-bounds write reachable through crafted URLs that can force the device to reboot, and a physical-access vector that could allow unsigned code execution through a maintenance-mode key sequence. Siemens has released firmware version 2.70 to address the vulnerabilities; earlier versions remain exposed.

    Why it matters

    Protection relays are a core safety component of the electrical grid — an attacker who can bypass authentication on one gains the ability to interfere with fault detection and circuit-breaker operation, which is exactly the kind of access that grid-security planners worry about most.

    Sources

  • At GSX 2026, Security Executives Push Back Against AI Hype in Favor of Practical Results

    At GSX 2026, Security Executives Push Back Against AI Hype in Favor of Practical Results

    On the second day of GSX 2026 in Atlanta, Security Info Watch interviewed seven security-industry executives about what customers and partners are actually asking for on the show floor. The consistent theme across the conversations: integration and day-to-day usability concerns are outweighing pure AI-feature hype, and reliable service delivery remains the top purchasing driver for many buyers.

    Executives also pointed to longer-term questions emerging about the future of access-control credentials as AI capabilities proliferate across security systems, suggesting the next wave of purchasing decisions may hinge less on which vendor has the most AI features and more on which systems integrate cleanly with what customers already operate.

    Why it matters

    The pushback signals that buyers in physical security are becoming more discerning about AI claims after two years of heavy marketing around the technology, which could shift vendor competition toward integration quality and service reliability rather than feature lists.

    Sources

  • Robotics Startup Splan Debuts SENA Visitor and Access Robot at GSX 2026

    Robotics Startup Splan Debuts SENA Visitor and Access Robot at GSX 2026

    Robotics startup Splan introduced SENA — short for Smart Entry & Navigation Assistant — at GSX 2026 in Atlanta, an AI-powered robot designed to handle visitor registration, identity verification, guard tours and incident management at building entrances. The unveiling was among the AI-focused product debuts on the opening day of the show, which drew more than 500 exhibitors to the Georgia World Congress Center.

    According to trade-press coverage of the show floor, SENA is positioned to work alongside human guards rather than replace them, automating repetitive front-desk and patrol tasks so staff can focus on higher-judgment security decisions. The launch reflects a broader theme at this year’s GSX: multiple exhibitors showed AI systems meant to move beyond simple event detection toward actively assisting with day-to-day security operations.

    Why it matters

    Visitor-management and reception robots are one of the more visible test cases for how far building owners are willing to let autonomous systems handle identity verification — a function with real liability and access-control consequences if it gets a decision wrong.

    Sources

  • Italian Startup Exein Hits $1.7B Valuation to Secure ‘Physical AI’ Robots and Drones

    Italian Startup Exein Hits $1.7B Valuation to Secure ‘Physical AI’ Robots and Drones

    Rome-based cybersecurity startup Exein raised $270 million in an oversubscribed funding round, pushing its valuation to $1.7 billion and making it Europe’s most valuable cybersecurity company, the company said this week. The round was led by Headline, with participation from Sofina, Goldman Sachs, the EIB Group’s European Tech Champions Initiative and KfW Capital, among others.

    Exein’s Photon runtime-security platform already secures more than 2 billion connected devices across industrial automation, automotive, energy, healthcare, aerospace and semiconductor manufacturing. The company said it plans to use the new capital to build a proprietary foundation model aimed specifically at securing “Physical AI” systems — industrial robots, drones and autonomous vehicles that increasingly run their own AI models at the edge — with a target release in the first quarter of 2027. Exein reported that annual recurring revenue roughly quadrupled in the first half of 2026 and said it will open a new office in the San Francisco Bay Area as part of a US and Asia-Pacific expansion.

    Why it matters

    As physical-security systems increasingly embed AI models directly on cameras, robots and industrial controllers rather than in the cloud, runtime security for those edge AI systems becomes a new attack surface that traditional endpoint or network security tools were not built to cover.

    Sources

  • Mailroom and Package Screening Security Technology

    Mailroom and Package Screening Security Technology

    Every piece of mail and every parcel delivered to a facility is, from a security standpoint, an unverified object entering a controlled environment from the outside world. Most of the time that’s a non-issue. But letter bombs, powder threats, and concealed contraband have made mailroom screening a standard layer of protection at government buildings, financial institutions, corporate headquarters, and other facilities that present an attractive target or handle sensitive operations, in much the same way lobby screening protects a building’s main entrance.

    Isolating the Mailroom From the Rest of the Building

    The starting point for a serious mail screening program is physical isolation. A dedicated mailroom, separated from general building circulation and ideally served by its own ventilation system rather than sharing return air with the rest of the building, limits how far a threat can spread if something makes it past initial screening or activates before screening is complete. Some high-risk facilities go further, screening mail at an off-site or separate structure entirely before cleared items are transported into the main building.

    X-Ray and Trace Detection for Parcels

    X-ray screening of incoming parcels and larger mail items works on the same imaging principle used in other security screening contexts, letting trained screeners identify suspicious density patterns, wiring, or concealed objects without opening the package. This is typically paired with explosive and narcotics trace detection, which samples a package’s exterior for microscopic particle residue and analyzes it for chemical signatures associated with explosive compounds or controlled substances. Neither technology alone is comprehensive, which is why serious mail screening programs use both together rather than relying on a single method.

    Powder and Biological Threat Response

    Letters or parcels containing unknown powders present a different challenge than a density-based explosive threat, since the concern is often airborne contamination rather than a device that x-ray can characterize. Mailrooms designed for this risk incorporate containment procedures: sealed handling stations, negative air pressure to prevent particles from migrating into occupied space, and protocols for isolating a suspicious item and the immediate area around it. Staff training on visual indicators of suspicious mail, alongside the equipment itself, remains a significant part of this layer.

    Workflow, Chain of Custody and Access Control Integration

    Screening only adds security value if it’s built into a consistent workflow: every incoming item passes through screening before internal delivery, exceptions are documented, and any item held for further review has a clear chain of custody until it’s cleared or escalated to law enforcement. Mailroom access itself is typically restricted through the building’s access control system, limiting who can enter the space and creating a log of mailroom activity that can be reviewed alongside any incident.

    Scaling to Facility Risk Level

    Not every facility needs the same intensity of mail screening. A small office might rely primarily on staff awareness and a simple isolation protocol, while a government building, financial headquarters, or facility with elevated threat history may operate a dedicated, staffed screening center with x-ray, trace detection, and physical isolation all in place simultaneously. The right level of investment tracks the facility’s overall threat profile and the population size it’s protecting.

    Reference sources

  • Multi-Family and Apartment Complex Security Technology

    Multi-Family and Apartment Complex Security Technology

    Multifamily housing sits at an unusual intersection of residential and commercial security. A single property can house hundreds of residents who move in and out regularly, share common amenities and parking structures, and expect the convenience of modern connected living, while the property owner carries liability for the safety of common areas they don’t fully control. This combination produces a distinct set of technology priorities that differ from both single-family residential security and typical commercial office security.

    Credential Turnover at Scale

    A property with hundreds of units and regular lease turnover can’t rely on the kind of static keying or long-lived badge issuance that suits a stable office workforce. Mobile credentials, using a resident’s smartphone as their access token, have become widely adopted in multifamily specifically because they let property management issue and revoke access remotely the moment a lease starts or ends, without the cost and delay of rekeying locks or reprogramming physical cards. Cloud-based access control platforms extend this further, giving off-site property managers the ability to manage access across a portfolio of buildings from a single interface.

    Video Intercom as the Front Door Experience

    Video intercom systems have become central to how multifamily properties handle the front-door problem: verifying visitors, delivery personnel, and guests at a building entrance that no staff member is physically monitoring most of the time. Modern systems let residents answer intercom calls remotely from their phone regardless of where they are, and integrate with the same access control platform that manages resident credentials, so a resident can grant a visitor temporary entry without needing to come downstairs.

    Common Area Coverage and the Package Problem

    Shared amenities, lobbies, mail and package rooms, laundry facilities, fitness centers, and pools, represent both a security responsibility and a liability exposure for property owners. Package theft in particular has become one of the most common resident complaints in multifamily housing as e-commerce delivery volume has grown, driving adoption of dedicated package rooms with individual electronic lockers or camera-monitored bulk delivery areas rather than packages simply left in open lobbies.

    Parking Structures and Vehicle Access

    Multifamily parking garages and surface lots share many of the same security considerations as standalone parking facilities, lighting, camera coverage of vehicle and pedestrian pathways, and license plate capture at entry gates, but are also tied directly into resident access credentials, since garage access is frequently bundled with unit access rather than managed as a separate system. Analytics that flag loitering or unusual dwell time in parking areas and stairwells have found particular traction in this vertical.

    Integrating With Property Management Operations

    What distinguishes multifamily security technology most from other verticals is how tightly it needs to integrate with property management software rather than functioning as a standalone system. Move-in and move-out dates, lease status, and maintenance access requests all need to translate into access control changes automatically for the system to keep pace with a property’s turnover rate, and video systems increasingly feed into resident-facing communication, proof of delivery, incident documentation for insurance claims, or visitor logs, that goes beyond the traditional security-only use case.

    Reference sources

  • Body-Worn Cameras for Security and Public Safety Personnel

    Body-Worn Cameras for Security and Public Safety Personnel

    Body-worn cameras began as a law enforcement accountability tool, but the same core technology has spread into private security guarding, retail loss prevention, healthcare security, and transit enforcement roles. Wherever a person rather than a fixed camera is the primary vantage point for an incident, a body-worn camera captures a perspective that fixed surveillance infrastructure simply cannot: close-range audio, direct interaction context, and a first-person view that moves with the officer or guard through the environment.

    Core Hardware and the Pre-Event Buffer

    A body-worn camera unit combines a compact camera, onboard storage or wireless upload capability, a battery sized for a full shift, and an activation mechanism, typically a physical button, though some systems support automatic activation triggered by a paired device such as a holstered weapon or a vehicle light bar. One of the more important design features is pre-event buffering: many units continuously record a rolling buffer of the preceding 30 seconds to two minutes even before the wearer manually activates recording, so that when an incident prompts activation, the footage captures how the situation developed rather than starting only at the moment someone remembered to press the button.

    Recording, Upload and Video Management Integration

    Footage can be stored locally on the device pending a docking-station upload at the end of a shift, or streamed live over cellular or Wi-Fi to a cloud platform in real time. Live streaming supports use cases where a control room or supervisor needs situational awareness during an active incident, but consumes considerably more bandwidth and battery than local recording with a later upload. Many deployments increasingly connect body-worn footage into the same video management platform used for fixed camera infrastructure, letting an investigator pull footage from a body camera and nearby fixed cameras side by side for a single incident timeline.

    Chain of Custody and Evidentiary Integrity

    Because body-worn footage frequently becomes evidence in a criminal case, civil claim, or internal investigation, the platform managing it needs the same evidentiary rigor applied to any other video evidence: cryptographic hashing to prove footage hasn’t been altered after capture, detailed access logs showing who viewed or exported a clip, and retention policies that prevent footage from being deleted before a legal hold period expires. Redaction tools that blur faces or license plates before footage is released publicly or to third parties have become a standard feature.

    Privacy, Consent and Policy Considerations

    Continuous recording of interactions raises privacy questions that vary significantly by jurisdiction and use case; some regions require notifying individuals that they’re being recorded, and policies differ on whether cameras should record continuously during a shift or only during specific activations. Organizations deploying body-worn cameras generally need a clear written policy covering when recording is mandatory, when it’s discretionary, and how footage of non-incident interactions is retained or discarded.

    Beyond Law Enforcement

    Retail loss prevention teams use body-worn cameras to document shoplifting confrontations and de-escalate disputes by making both parties aware they’re being recorded. Hospital security teams use them in similarly high-tension patient and visitor interactions. Transit and event security staff use them to document crowd incidents in environments where fixed cameras can’t capture close-range detail. Across all these applications, the underlying technology stack, capture hardware, buffering, upload workflow, and evidentiary video management, remains largely the same, even as the operational policy governing when and how it’s used varies by industry.

    Reference sources

  • Wireless Mesh Networking for Security System Backhaul

    Wireless Mesh Networking for Security System Backhaul

    Not every security deployment has the luxury of a conduit run or existing fiber path. Large campuses, agricultural sites, construction projects, parking lots, and remote infrastructure locations often need to connect cameras, sensors, and access control points across distances or terrain where trenching cable is expensive, disruptive, or simply impossible on the project timeline. Wireless mesh networking has become one of the standard answers to this problem, offering a way to extend a security network’s reach without a continuous physical cable path.

    Point-to-Point, Point-to-Multipoint and True Mesh

    Wireless backhaul for security systems generally falls into three topologies. Point-to-point links connect two fixed locations directly, useful for bridging a single gap such as across a road or between two buildings. Point-to-multipoint extends one central node’s connectivity out to several remote locations, common when a single equipment room serves multiple outlying camera clusters. True mesh networking goes further: every node can relay traffic for its neighbors, and the network automatically recalculates routing paths if a node fails or a link degrades. This self-healing property makes mesh particularly attractive for large or irregularly shaped sites where a single point of failure in a point-to-multipoint design could take an entire branch of cameras offline.

    Bandwidth, Latency and Video Traffic

    Video is a demanding payload for wireless infrastructure. Unlike simple sensor telemetry, camera streams require sustained bandwidth and are sensitive to latency and jitter, particularly for live monitoring or analytics that depend on consistent frame delivery. Mesh network design for security applications has to account for the cumulative bandwidth each hop needs to carry as traffic aggregates back toward the wired network edge. Designers typically size wireless links with meaningful headroom above camera bitrate requirements, and may selectively favor point-to-point links for the highest-bandwidth camera clusters while reserving mesh for lower-bandwidth sensor and access control traffic.

    Spectrum, Interference and Environmental Factors

    Outdoor wireless security links operate in either licensed or unlicensed spectrum, each with trade-offs. Unlicensed bands are cheaper to deploy but share spectrum with other users and consumer devices, creating interference risk in dense environments. Licensed spectrum offers more predictable performance but adds cost and regulatory lead time. Weather, foliage growth, and physical line-of-sight obstructions all affect wireless link reliability over time in ways a buried cable simply doesn’t experience, which is why wireless security deployments typically include a maintenance plan for periodic link health verification rather than a one-time installation.

    Securing the Wireless Link Itself

    A wireless backhaul link is also a network attack surface that a buried cable is not. Security-grade wireless deployments use strong encryption on every hop, disable unnecessary management interfaces on outdoor radios, and monitor for rogue access points or unauthorized devices attempting to join the mesh. Because these radios are often physically accessible in a way core network switches are not, mounted on poles, roofs, or perimeter fencing, physical tamper resistance and secure mounting are treated as part of the cybersecurity posture, not just the mechanical installation.

    Where Mesh Makes Sense

    Wireless mesh is rarely the first choice when wired infrastructure is feasible; fiber and copper remain more predictable in bandwidth and less susceptible to environmental interference. Its value is clearest in scenarios where wired installation costs or timelines are prohibitive: temporary event security, construction sites with cameras that need to relocate as the project progresses, large agricultural or logistics yards, and remote infrastructure sites where trenching across the full distance simply isn’t economical relative to the value of the assets being monitored.

    Reference sources

  • Commercial Kitchen Fire Suppression Systems: How Hood and Duct Protection Works

    Commercial Kitchen Fire Suppression Systems: How Hood and Duct Protection Works

    Commercial kitchens present a fire risk unlike almost any other space in a building. Deep fryers, griddles, and open-flame ranges generate sustained high-temperature heat sources sitting directly beneath a network of grease-laden exhaust ductwork. A grease fire that starts at a fryer can travel into the hood plenum and duct system within seconds, turning a contained appliance fire into a structure fire. General-purpose fire suppression, sized for offices or server rooms, is not designed for this problem. Commercial kitchens require dedicated, appliance-specific suppression engineered around the chemistry of cooking-oil fires.

    Why Grease Fires Behave Differently

    Cooking oil and animal fat fires are classified separately from ordinary combustibles because they burn at very high temperatures and can reignite even after flames appear extinguished. Water is actively dangerous on a grease fire, since it can cause the burning oil to splatter and spread. This is why kitchen suppression systems rely on wet chemical agents formulated specifically for this fuel class. When the agent contacts hot oil, it reacts with the fatty acids to form a soap-like layer across the surface, a process known as saponification, that smothers the fire, blocks oxygen, and cools the fuel enough to prevent flashback reignition.

    System Architecture: Hood, Duct, Plenum and Appliance

    A properly engineered kitchen suppression system covers four zones simultaneously: the cooking appliances themselves, the plenum immediately above them, the hood, and the exhaust duct running to the roof. Nozzles are positioned and sized according to each appliance’s fuel type and heat output, since a fryer, a griddle, and a charbroiler each require different discharge patterns and agent volumes. Detection is typically handled by fusible links tuned to activate at a specific temperature, though electronic heat and flame detection is increasingly used alongside or in place of mechanical links for faster response and remote monitoring capability.

    Automatic Shutoff and Building Integration

    Activation of a kitchen suppression system does more than discharge agent. A properly integrated system automatically shuts off the gas or electrical supply to the affected appliances, preventing the fire from being continuously re-fed even after the agent has been applied. Many installations also tie into the building’s manual pull station network and the broader fire alarm system, so that suppression activation triggers audible alarms, notifies the fire panel, and can initiate HVAC shutdown to prevent smoke recirculation.

    Inspection, Testing and Maintenance

    Grease accumulation is the enemy of a reliable kitchen suppression system. Nozzles can become clogged, fusible links coated, and duct interiors lined with flammable residue if inspection schedules slip. Semiannual professional inspection is standard practice in most jurisdictions, alongside more frequent internal checks by kitchen staff, such as verifying nozzle caps are intact, extinguishing agent gauges read in the normal range, and manual pull stations are unobstructed. Duct cleaning is a related but separate maintenance discipline, since a suppression system is only as effective as the duct it is protecting.

    Scaling From Single Restaurants to Large Foodservice Operations

    The same core principles apply whether the facility is a single quick-service restaurant or a hotel with multiple kitchens, a hospital cafeteria, or a stadium concession concourse. What changes at scale is system count, central monitoring integration, and how suppression activation is reported to a security or facilities operations center. Large foodservice operators increasingly want kitchen suppression status, activation events, low-agent alarms, inspection due dates, visible in the same monitoring platform used for the rest of their physical security and life safety systems, rather than isolated on a separate panel that only the fire protection contractor checks.

    Reference sources