Security and systems integrators across the nation are recommending and providing long-term security solutions to their customers. But when it comes to physical security entrances, integrators can easily fall into the trap of simply fulfilling an end user’s exact request without much pushback. Why? We believe the complexity and variety of entrances available makes it difficult to consult on the best solution, but also because there are a lot of assumptions at play.

Determining the correct security entrance solution

There is confusion in the security industry on the meaning of the word, “turnstile.” End users, when requesting a solution, tend to use the word “turnstile” to describe anything from an old fashioned, 3-arm turnstile to a high-tech optical turnstile to a security revolving door.

We encourage security integrators to ask questions to discover how their clients want to mitigate the risk of unauthorised entry or “tailgating.” This can help determine the correct security entrance solution to meet the end user’s goal and budget. By asking the right questions and offering true solutions, you can enhance a relationship built on trust and consultation leading to potential repeat business.

Below are four physical security goals—crowd , deterrence, detection, and prevention—accompanied by the type of “turnstile” and its capabilities. This breakdown can help the integrator to confidently address an end user’s request for a “turnstile,” and then recommend a solution that truly fulfills their security goals.

1. Crowd control: Tripod/waist-high turnstiles

Typically seen in stadiums, amusement parks, universities, and fitness centers, tripod turnstiles are considered a low security solution for crowd management. Designed for counting employees or slowing down high traffic volume to collect tickets or payments, tripod turnstiles are built to withstand the most abusive of conditions. Here’s what security integrators should know about tripod turnstiles:

  • Low capital cost, but high annual operating cost due to needed 24/7 guard supervision
  • Lack of sensors can lead to defeat – turnstiles can be crawled under or jumped over without alarm/notification to guard staff
  • Little to no metrics capabilities available – no sensors or alarms if defeated
  • High throughput, handling 30 persons per minute in one direction

Full height turnstiles are a tall, robust solution for perimeter fence lines, metro stations or parking garages
Optical turnstiles employ sensors and alarms to detect tailgating when it occurs


2. Deterrent: Full-height turnstiles

A physical deterrent to infiltration, full height turnstiles are a tall, robust solution for perimeter fence lines, metro stations or parking garages. While full height turnstiles do physically stop tailgating (an unauthorised person following someone in the next compartment), they have no means to prevent piggybacking. Two people in collusion can gain access through the full height turnstile by badging once and then squeezing into the same compartment. Here are some other things to note about full height turnstiles:

  • Low capital cost, low annual operating cost
  • Guard supervision is up to the user
  • Little to no metrics capabilities available – no sensors or alarms if defeated
  • Moderate throughput, handling 18 persons per minute in one direction

3. Detection: Optical turnstiles

A staple in lobby security to accommodate visitors, optical turnstiles utilise complex sensors to detect a tailgating attempt. Most models available today offer sliding or swinging barriers. A very common assumption in the security industry is that optical turnstiles prevent unauthorised entry, which isn’t true. In fact, once the barriers are open, a second user can slip through. Or, in the case of a wide lane for disabled use, two people can walk through side by side. In either case, an alarm is generated and supervision is therefore essential in order to respond swiftly. The cost of 24/7 supervision must be factored into the security budget. Here are some other points to make note of:

  • Moderate capital cost, but high annual operating cost due to need for 24/7 guard supervision
  • Sensors detect tailgating and sound an alarm for post-tailgating reaction, but turnstiles can still be defeated
  • Moderate metrics capabilities available (for example, # times tailgating occurred, passback rejection)
  • High throughput, handling up to 30 persons per minute in one direction

4. Prevention: Security revolving doors and portals

The entry solution of choice for Fortune 1000 companies, security revolving doors and mantrap portals completely prevent tailgating due to their working principle, ensuring the safety and security of staff and visitors. Commonly used at employee-only entrances, security doors are an unmanned entrance solution that cannot be defeated; sensors in the ceiling prevent tailgating (following in a trailing compartment). Optional piggybacking detection systems are also available (preventing two people in the same compartment from entering).

The benefits of utilising a truly unmanned door are unparalleled: guard staff can be reduced or reallocated, and this entrance offers an ROI of just 1-2 years. Here’s more information security integrators should know about security revolving doors and portals:

  • High capital cost, low annual operating cost due to no required guard supervision
  • Sophisticated metrics capabilities available, allowing the end user to prove the value of their security investment
  • Security revolving doors = 20 persons per minute, simultaneously in two directions; Security portals = 6 persons per minute in one direction
  • Biometric devices and bullet-resistant glass can be incorporated for an even higher level of security

As we’ve demonstrated here, “turnstile,” in the eyes of an end user, is a complex term that can range from a low security, crowd control solution to a high security, tailgating prevention entrance. Security integrators need to first accurately determine the security goals of their customers and then break down the “turnstile” barrier of confusion to recommend the best solution for fulfilling those goals.

Download PDF version

Author Profile

Greg Schreiber Vice President of Sales, Boon Edam

Greg Schreiber has been the Vice President of Sales of Boon Edam Inc. since 2013 and has been with the company a total of 15 years.

In case you missed it

Drawbacks of PenTests and ethical hacking for the security industry
Drawbacks of PenTests and ethical hacking for the security industry

PenTesting, also known as “ethical hacking” or “white-hat hacking,” has always been viewed as the “sexy” side of cybersecurity, a task that is far more exciting than monitoring systems for intrusions, shoring up defenses, or performing compliance audits. Numerous security conferences are devoted to the fine art of attempting to hack into systems – with an owner’s full knowledge and permission – and reporting on the results. At an organisational level within businesses, they also value PenTesting under the premise that it allows them to identify security vulnerabilities before cyber criminals can. There are some regulatory requirements like PCI-DSS that require penetration assessments as part of their PCI compliance. However, many organisations have come to over-rely on PenTesting, thinking that if all the issues were identified in a PenTest, they’re good to go. Not only is this not helping them improve their security posture, it is also leaving them with a false sense of security. A penetration test is a simulated, live attack on your environment by a white-hat hacker What is PenTesting? A penetration test is a simulated, live attack on your environment by a white-hat hacker, customised to address specific problem areas, such as web-based applications, mobile applications and infrastructure services like border VPNs and firewalls. The PenTest may include different types of attacks based on the requested scope from an organisation so that the tester attempts to come at each system from all sides, the way a cyber-criminal would. The goal is to identify which systems and data the tester was able to access and how an organisation can address the vulnerabilities that allowed them to get in. The limitations of PenTesting There is great value in performing periodic PenTests, which is why PCI DSS and other security standards mandate them. However, PenTesting has three significant limitations: PenTesting does not provide solutions Let’s be honest: No one likes reading technical reports, but typically, that's the only deliverable provided by a PenTester. The value of a PenTesting report varies wildly based on the scope of the testing, the PenTester’s technical expertise and their writing ability. The tester may miss some things, or not clearly convey their findings. Additionally, a PenTest is a snapshot in time and the PenTester could miss changes in the systems, configurations, attack vectors and application environments. Even if your system “passes” a PenTest, will it crumble in the face of a brand new, more powerful attack vector that emerges a week later? The worst type of “PenTest report” consist of an analyst producing nothing more than the results of a vulnerability scan. Even if the PenTester produces a well-written, comprehensive report filled with valuable, actionable information, it’s up to your organisation to take the action, which leads to the next limitation of PenTesting. The value of a PenTesting report varies wildly based on the scope of the testing, the PenTester’s technical expertise and their writing ability PenTesters only exploit vulnerabilities and do not promote change PenTesting does not highlight the missing links in your organisation's technology stack that could help you address your security vulnerabilities. This is often in the guise of being agnostic to the technologies that exist because their expertise is only offensive security – unless, of course, the performing company has “magic software” to sell you. PenTests also do not help to develop your organisational processes. Additionally, they do not ensure that your employees have the knowledge and training needed to treat the identified fixes. Worst of all, if your in-house expertise is limited, any security issues that are identified during a PenTest aren't validated, which leads to a misrepresentation of their magnitude and severity while giving your team a false sense of security. PenTesters are self-serving Too often, PenTesting pits the assessment team against the organisation; the goal of the assessment team is to find the best way to "shame" the business into remediation, purchasing the testing company’s “magic software”, then call it a day. Once the PenTesters find, for example, a privilege escalation or a way to breach PII, they stop looking for other issues. The testers then celebrate the success of finding a single “flag”. In the meantime, the business is left in a precarious situation, since other unidentified issues may be lurking within their systems. Shifting the paradigm of PenTesting The goal of PenTesters is to find the best way to "shame" the business into purchasing the testing company’s “magic software”, then call it a day Penetration testing can uncover critical security vulnerabilities, but it also has significant limitations and it’s not a replacement for continuous security monitoring and testing. This is not to say that all PenTesting is bad. PenTesting should be integrated into a comprehensive threat and vulnerability management programme so that identified issues are addressed. The purpose of a mature vulnerability management programme is to identify, treat and monitor any identified vulnerabilities over its lifecycle. Vulnerability management programme Additionally, a vulnerability management programme requires the multiple teams within an organisation to develop and execute on the remediation plan to address the vulnerability. A mature threat and vulnerability management plan takes time and is helpful to partner with a managed security services provider (MSSP) to help you in the following areas: Improve your cyber-risk management program so that you can identify and efficiently address vulnerabilities in your infrastructure, applications and other parts within your organisation’s ecosystem on a continuous basis; Perform retests to validate any problems identified through a vulnerability scan or a PenTest assessment; Ensure that your in-house staff has the knowledge, skills and tools they need to respond to incidents. Cyber risk management and remediation is a "team sport." While periodic testing conducted by an external consultant satisfies compliance requirements, it is not a replacement for continuous in-house monitoring and testing. To ensure that your systems are secure, you must find a partner who not only performs PenTesting but also has the engineering and development experience to assist you in fixing these types of complex problems in a cost-effective manner and ensuring that your systems are hardened against tomorrow’s attacks.

Has the gap closed between security fiction and security reality?
Has the gap closed between security fiction and security reality?

Among its many uses and benefits, technology is a handy tool in the fantasy world of movie and television thrillers. We all know the scene: a vital plot point depends on having just the right super-duper gadget to locate a suspect or to get past a locked door. In movies and TV, face recognition is more a super power than a technical function. Video footage can be magically enhanced to provide a perfect image of a license plate number. We have all shaken our heads in disbelief, and yet, our industry’s technical capabilities are improving every day. Are we approaching a day when the “enhanced” view of technology in movies and TV is closer to the truth? We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: How much has the gap closed between the reality of security system capabilities and what you see on TV (or at the movies)?

How moving to Security as a Service benefits both providers and end users
How moving to Security as a Service benefits both providers and end users

The way we purchase services and products is changing. The traditional concept of buying and owning a product is giving way to the idea that it is possible to purchase the services it offers instead. This approach has come from the consumer realisation that it is the outcome that is important rather than the tools to achieve it. For example, this approach is evident with the rise of music streaming services as opposed to downloads or physical products.   With the physical security industry becoming ever more integrated – and truly open systems now a reality – there is every reason to assume this service-lead trend will come to dominate the way our industry interacts with its clients as well. Interest in service-based security There is a significant change of mindset that the security industry needs to embrace before a large-scale move to Security as a Service can take place. Like many technology sectors in the past, security providers have focussed on ‘shifting boxes’ as their definitive sales model. This approach was especially prevalent when proprietary systems were the mainstay of the security industry. Essentially, if the customer wanted more services they simply bought a new product. This was a straightforward and economic sales approach for manufacturers and installers alike.The security industry needs to embrace a change of mindset before a move to SaaS can take place The flexibility of integrated and open technology has changed the way consumers view their purchase, so it shouldn’t be any surprise that there is increased interest in a service-based approach. Customer choice equates to a change of focus and interest, with physical products being eclipsed by the benefits of the overall solution. We have already seen these changes in other technology areas, notably with smart devices and general IT systems. Cloud-based services put the onus on the result rather than which device the user chooses. This approach is even starting to manifest in areas that couldn’t have been predicted in the past, such as the car industry for example. Consumers are focusing more on the overall costs and convenience of buying a car over the specific specification of the vehicle. Equally, urban dwellers don’t necessarily want the hassle and expense of owning and parking their own vehicle anymore. If you don’t use it every day, it can make more sense to rent a vehicle only when you travel beyond public transport. For these consumers the car has become a service item for a specific journey. Benefits for end users At the heart of this approach is the simple equation that consumers have a need and suppliers need to provide the most cost-effective, and easiest, solution. At the same time, the security operator may not necessarily want to know (or care) what specification the system has, they just want it to perform the task as required.   By discussing with consumers, we can ensure we work even more closely with them to provide the expert support they need and deserve Most security buyers will identify the specific business needs and their budget to achieve this. This is where a service approach really comes into its own. Customers need expert advice on a solution for their requirements which takes away the stress of finding the right products/systems. In the past there was always a risk of purchasing an unsuitable solution, which could potentially be disastrous. The other issue was having to budget for a big capital expenditure for a large installation and then having to find further resources once an upgrade was due when systems went end of life. Most businesses find it far easier to pay a sensible monthly or annual fee that is predictable and can easily be budgeted for. A service model makes this far easier to achieve. Benefits of a service sales model As well as the benefits for end users, there are considerable benefits for security providers too. Rather than simply ‘shifting boxes’ and enduring the inevitable sales peaks and toughs this creates; a service sales model allows manufacturers and installers to enjoy a more stable business model. You don’t have to win new business with every product, but rather sell ongoing services for a set period. Its highly likely that the whole security industry will start to take this approach over the next few years. Manufacturers are already well aware of this shift in customer expectations and are changing their approach to meet demands.There are major opportunities on offer in return for a change of perspective in the security industry With the service and leasing approach already firmly entrenched in other industries, this is well proven in a consumer market. The airline industry is a great example. Manufacturers understand that airlines need flexibility to upscale and downscale operations and therefore whole aircraft and even individual key components (such as engines or seating) can be leased as required. Using this approach, airlines can concentrate on what customers demand and not worry about the logistics of doing this. Manufacturers and leasing businesses provide assurances and guarantees of service time for aircraft and engines, taking care of the servicing and maintenance to ensure this delivery. This approach is just as well suited for the provision of security systems. Servicing the future security market Undoubtedly there are major opportunities on offer in return for a change of perspective in the security industry. However, this will involve substantial changes in some quarters to ensure the business model is aligned with the market. Overall, the security industry needs to not only develop the right systems for the market, but also to deliver them in the right way as well. This will ensure we work even more closely with customers to provide the expert support they need and deserve.