The number one challenge with existing surveillance systems today is the difficulty to monitor and [oversee] all cameras
The report says almost 50% of the public transport organisations are willing
to broaden the type of video analytics used

A detailed survey of public transport operators shows a growing demand for networked/IP systems and video analytics to help cope with the requirements of large surveillance systems. The report, Video Surveillance in Public Transport, published by the international public transport association UITP and Axis Communications, is based on 74 respondents across 30 countries, most of whom are public transport operators or transport authorities. They cover a variety of modes of transport including bus, trolleybus, light rail, tram, metro, commuter rail, mainline rail and ferry.

The future belongs to IP, but analogue still feels good

Almost all those responding to the report – 97 percent – have video surveillance installed. Around two-thirds (67 percent) have IP cameras as part of their surveillance systems with 53 percent having a hybrid IP/analogue system.

Some 74 percent of those responding have investment plans for their surveillance systems, with 85 percent saying they will consider network/IP cameras.

“This clearly shows a preference for network cameras for the future,” the report says. “However, it is important to note that legacy analogue cameras will clearly still have an important presence in public transport systems for the foreseeable future.”

Huge crowds attract CCTV installations

Cameras are predominantly installed at stations (81 percent), on board rolling stock (76 percent) and at depots and rail yards (70 percent). Video in stations, on rolling stock and at depots is very often recorded (73 percent, 72 percent and 57 per cent respectively) with video being stored for a determined period of time. Cameras are often found in areas with high passenger volumes such as public station areas (75 percent) and on platforms (64 percent). They are also found in key areas such as ticket gates, help points and escalators (each 47 percent) and in elevators (40 per cent).

Cameras can also be found, although to a lesser extent, at non-public areas of the infrastructure such as crossings (32 percent), along the infrastructure (24 percent), inside tunnels (19 percent) and at bridges (7 percent), although not all respondents have tunnels or bridges as part of their assets. Fewer still are video recordings made at these infrastructure sites.

More than half of respondents (53 percent) say that video surveillance would be installed on rolling stock in the next 12 months – suggesting that onboard cameras will become more common.

 

Modern IP-video systems offer real-time possibilities that are increasingly being used to manage incidents live as they occur
Real-time usage with analytics is on the rise as public transport systems seek
to react to security events as and when they happen

Static locations call for real-time surveillance

Real-time monitoring of video is higher in static locations – for example 72 percent in stations – than is the case for real-time surveillance of rolling stock (27 percent). Looking ahead, around a quarter (26 percent) plan to increase their use of real-time video, with around the same number not using real-time monitoring at all.

In terms of the lifecycle of an incident, using video footage for investigations into crime, injury, suicide, accidents and so on is rated as the most valuable use of cameras by 86 percent, while detection of incidents in real-time is around 72 percent.

Legal and regulatory requirements

The legal landscape for video surveillance varies considerably from country to country. In the survey, 38 percent of respondents reported that surveillance monitoring is a legal requirement. For those for whom it is not a legal requirement, surveillance may still be regulated when used in different ways.

In terms of video recording, all the respondents said that recording is allowed but almost all of them (41 percent) are subject to additional regulation such as limited storage time – ranging from 48 hours to 100 days – recording certain areas only at 13 percent, police use only (11 percent) and other regulations (34 percent).

For 67 percent of respondents, the quality of video used as evidence in court is regulated in some way, either by law or police guidelines. Different standards exist in different parts of the world in terms of the quality of images for court use. Regulations are also in place aimed at protecting the privacy of the public and this is seen as essential in many cultures for systems to be accepted.

Reasons given by train operators for installing surveillance cameras include:

  • Increasing security and safety for staff (81 percent)
  • Minimising, deterring and managing various types of criminality (78 percent)
  • Assisting investigations of crime, injury, suicide, accidents and other medical emergencies (70 percent)
  • Increased perceived security and staff safety (69 percent)
  • Meeting legal requirements and policies of directives (16 percent)
  • Being prepared for possible terrorism (16 percent)
  • Reducing fare evasions (11 percent)

The greatest challenge for rail operators is the difficulty in monitoring the large numbers of cameras in public transport surveillance systems (43 percent), poor image quality (27 percent), technical issues (23 percent), and the fact that systems can be resource intensive and require special skills (20 percent). In terms of image quality, it is interesting to note that 55 percent of respondents with analogue systems said poor image quality is a problem, compared to only 17 percent with network/IP systems. But, the report says, this figure is not statistically sound because of too few responses from users of IP-only networks.

 

There is a clear tendency towards network/IP cameras in terms of future investment, in particular up-and-coming analytics applications for specific issues such as graffiti behaviour detection
Video analytics in use include intrusion detection, perimeter protection, rail
track access detection, and fire/smoke detection

Key role of video analytics

Awareness of the types of video analytics available ranges from loitering detection (36 percent), tailgating detection (40 percent) and aggression detection (40 percent) to facial recognition, perimeter detection and intrusion detection – all at 79 percent of respondents. In terms of actual use of video analytics, intrusion detection tops the table at 25 percent, followed by perimeter protection (20 percent), rail track access detection (16 percent), and fire/smoke detection (12 percent). Between 30 percent and 64 percent of respondents were interested in using video analytics in the future, depending on the type of analytics.

The report concludes: “The number one challenge with existing surveillance systems today is the difficulty to monitor and [oversee] all cameras. Surveillance systems are made up of, on average, thousands of cameras in public transport networks.

“To address the key challenge of monitoring and [monitoring] the large amount of cameras – and further adding value to the detection phase of incidents – approximately half of the public transport organisations say they will broaden the type of video analytics used.”

The report goes on to say:

  • There is a clear tendency towards network/IP cameras in terms of future investment, in particular up-and-coming analytics applications for specific issues such as graffiti behaviour detection.
  • On the other hand, legacy analogue cameras will continue to have an important presence in public transport systems for the foreseeable future.
  • Real-time usage with analytics is also on the rise as public transport systems seek to react to security events as and when they happen, with alerts guiding the operators rather than the impossible task of coping with hundreds of live feeds.

Commenting on the report’s findings, Patrik Anderson, Director of Business Development, Transportation at Axis Communications – co-authors of the report – told SourceSecurity.com:

 “We can see that many public transport operators utilise video surveillance for more than just recorded evidence and investigations after incidents have occurred. Modern IP-video systems offer real-time possibilities that are increasingly being used to manage incidents live as they occur, to detect, prioritise and respond correctly. There is also a high awareness of video analytics and the…interest to use video analytics [in the future] is very broad amongst the operators and transit authorities.”

Share with LinkedIn Share with Twitter Share with Facebook Share with Facebook
Download PDF version

Author profile

Ron Alalouff Contributing Editor, SourceSecurity.com

In case you missed it

COVID-19 worries boost prospects of touchless biometric systems
COVID-19 worries boost prospects of touchless biometric systems

Spread of the novel coronavirus has jolted awareness of hygiene as it relates to touching surfaces such as keypads. No longer in favour are contact-based modalities including use of personal identification numbers (PINs) and keypads, and the shift has been sudden and long-term. Both customers and manufacturers were taken by surprise by this aspect of the virus’s impact and are therefore scrambling for solutions. Immediate impact of the change includes suspension of time and attendance systems that are touch-based. Some two-factor authentication systems are being downgraded to RFID-only, abandoning the keypad and/or biometric components that contributed to higher security, but are now unacceptable because they involve touching. Touchless biometric systems in demand The trend has translated into a sharp decline in purchase of touch modality and a sharp increase in the demand for touchless systems, says Alex Zarrabi, President of Touchless Biometrics Systems (TBS). Biometrics solutions are being affected unequally, depending on whether they involve touch sensing, he says. Spread of the novel coronavirus has jolted awareness of hygiene as it relates to touching surfaces such as keypads “Users do not want to touch anything anymore,” says Zarrabi. “From our company’s experience, we see it as a huge catalyst for touchless suppliers. We have projects being accelerated for touchless demand and have closed a number of large contracts very fast. I’m sure it’s true for anyone who is supplying touchless solutions.” Biometric systems are also seeing the addition of thermal sensors to measure body temperature in addition to the other sensors driving the system. Fingerscans and hybrid face systems TBS offers 2D and 3D systems, including both fingerscans and hybrid face/iris systems to provide touchless identification at access control points. Contactless and hygienic, the 2D Eye system is a hybrid system that combines the convenience of facial technology with the higher security of iris recognition. The system recognises the face and then detects the iris from the face image and zeros in to scan the iris. The user experiences the system as any other face recognition system. The facial aspect quickens the process, and the iris scan heightens accuracy. TBS also offers the 2D Eye Thermo system that combines face, iris and temperature measurement using a thermal sensor module. TBS's 2D Eye Thermo system combines face, iris and temperature measurement using a thermal sensor module Another TBS system is a 3D Touchless Fingerscan system that provides accuracy and tolerance, anti-spoofing, and is resilient to water, oil, dust and dirt. The 2D+ Multispectral for fingerprints combines 2D sensing with “multispectral” subsurface identification, which is resilient to contaminants and can read fingerprints that are oily, wet, dry or damaged – or even through a latex glove. In addition, the 3D+ system by TBS provides frictionless, no-contact readings even for people going through the system in a queue. The system fills the market gap for consent-based true on-the-fly systems, says Zarrabi. The system captures properties of the hand and has applications in the COVID environment, he says. The higher accuracy and security ratings are suitable for critical infrastructure applications, and there is no contact; the system is fully hygienic. Integration with access control systems Integration of TBS biometrics with a variety of third-party access control systems is easy. A “middleware” subsystem is connected to the network. Readers are connected to the subsystem and also to the corporate access control system. An interface with the TBS subsystem coordinates with the access control system. For example, a thermal camera used as part of the biometric reader can override the green light of the access control system if a high temperature (suggesting COVID-19 infection, for example) is detected. The enrollment process is convenient and flexible and can occur at an enrollment station or at an administration desk. Remote enrollment can also be accomplished using images from a CCTV camera. All templates are encrypted. Remotely enrolled employees can have access to any location they need within minutes. The 3D+ system by TBS provides frictionless, no-contact readings even for people going through the system in a queue Although there are other touchless technologies available, they cannot effectively replace biometrics, says Zarrabi. For example, a centrally managed system that uses a Bluetooth signal from a smart phone could provide convenience, is “touchless,” and could suffice for some sites. However, the system only confirms the presence and “identity” of a smart phone – not the person who should be carrying it. “There has been a lot of curiosity about touchless, but this change is strong, and there is fear of a possible second wave of COVID-19 or a return in two or three years,” says Zarrabi. “We really are seeing customers seriously shifting to touchless.”

How to maximise your body temperature detection systems
How to maximise your body temperature detection systems

There are many companies jumping into selling temperature detection systems to the state, local governments, hospitals, airports and local businesses, but do they know how to drive one? Anyone can get behind a car and drive it into a wall by accident. The same can happen with a temperature detection system.  The first thing you should ask is “does my firm have a certified thermographer?”. If not, the firm are at risk of getting a low quality system that is being resold to make quick cash. Businesses that are doing this do not know how to operate it properly. Asking the right questions Secondly, you should ask whether the system is NDAA compliant. NDAA compliance means that your temperature detection equipment is protected by U.S. law. Does your system have a HSRP device (blackbody)? HSRP (Heat Source Reference Point) is a device that will allow the camera to detect the correct temperature a distance. Even if the room temperature does change throughout the day, treat it as a reference point for the camera to know the temperature at that distance. Can your system scan mutliple people at once? Can your system scan mutliple people at once? This is a bad question but often asked since most systems will say yes. For ease, everyone wants to scan many people at once, but the best practice according to FDA and CDC guidelines is to run one person at a time for best accuracy. Why? The HSRP (blackbody) device tells the camera what the correct temperature is at a given distance away from the camera. Every foot you are away from the HSRP device will be off by 0.1 degrees roughly. If you are in a room full of people, let's say 6, in view of the camera, every person that is not next to the HSRP device (5) will be given an inaccurate reading. Hence why it is so important to run the system correctly with just one person at a time. You will also need to follow the 6 feet rule. If you take that into consideration, one at a time at 6 feet apart, the device should tell you how you need to run the system. Sensitivity of thermal imaging Is your system’s sensor accurate enough? The FDA recommends an error of ±0.5°C or better. When looking for a system, make sure it is better than what they recommend. I would recommend ±0.3°C or better. Do not purchase a system over ±-.5°C degrees as you are doing yourself and your customers or employees an injustice.  Another thing to look at is how many pixels it can determine the temperature from. Some cameras can only tell the temperature of 6 points on the screen, whilst others can take a temperature reading from each pixel. Take a 384x288 camera, for example, which would be over 110,000 points of temperature taking on a single image.      Thermal cameras are very sensitive, so there are a lot of do’s and don’ts. For example, the system cannot see through glasses or hats. On the below image you can see a person with the visual camera on the right, whilst on the left side is through a thermal camera.  Both are pointing at the same area. It is clear the person on the left side is “invisible” to the thermal imaging camera. Demonstrating the sensitivity of thermal imaging If you are a company who wants to detect the temperature of customers or employees though the front door, window or a car window, the answer would be no. You need a clear line of sight without any interference to scan for temperatures. Other things you need to look out for is wind and distance away from the HSRP (blackbody) device. Air and distance away from the HSRP device will make the system less and less accurate the more space between the device. Air and distance away from the HSRP device will make the system less and less accurate Thermal imaging and COVID-19 If you have a clear line of sight, is there anything I need to know? The answer is yes. Reflective materials such as metal can interfere with your temperature readings. Reflective materials are easily picked up from the thermal side so pointing at a medal, glass or anything reflective can cause inaccuracies within the system. In the age of COVID-19, temperature detection systems are more important than ever. Organisations must get a system in place to help scan for high temperatures in order to reduce the spread of the virus.

What are the security challenges of the oil and gas market?
What are the security challenges of the oil and gas market?

Protecting the oil and gas market is key to a thriving economy. The list of security challenges for oil and gas requires the best technology solutions our industry has to offer, from physical barriers to video systems to cybersecurity. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: what are the security challenges of the oil and gas market?