The massive power failure that paralyzed the northeast region of North America two weeks ago was caused by an aging, under-financed power infrastructure. The deregulation of the power industry means that the system now is used to transport electricity long distances, a task for which it was not designed, and that leaves it vulnerable.
Carl Weinschenk continues his discussion of best practices for keeping the data center secure. This time he focuses on protecting hardware from the human component — whether it be terrorism, employee sabotage, or other internal and external threats.
So much for the good news.
Good news? Yes, simple because any cause, no matter how fundamental and troublesome, is better than what people most feared when the power went out: The blackout was not caused by another terrorist attack.
The bad news, of course, is that terrorism and sabotage remain massive threats. In the wake of 9-11, some enterprises increased efforts to secure their data centers. Although the blackout wasn’t caused by terrorists, it’s a good time for organizations to step back and assess the ways they can improve the physical security of their data centers.
Which brings us to the opposite disaster recovery book-end of last week’s article: protecting the data center from deliberate, human-generated events.
Without a doubt, the most important step is to impress on everybody — from the president down to the kids in the mailroom — that their jobs and physical safety rely on the security of the workplace.
Common sense should be the first line of defense: Things out of the ordinary must be reported, doors that should be locked must not be propped open, and security cards and keys must not be loaned. At the executive level, the CFO must heed a consultant’s explanation that a guardhouse manned 24/7 is necessary, but building the guardhouse and manning it only 16 hours a day is a sham.
The following are some of the many steps enterprises can take while planning, building, and operating a data center.
Construct the data center of slab-to-slab concrete. In most construction, concrete walls end a foot or two below the ceiling and above the floor. Finishing the job — creating a six-sided box instead of a four-sided one, as Rothstein puts it — will make it more difficult for intruders to get in.
Alarm all windows. Air ducts should not be wide enough for a person to shimmy through. If the facility has wide air ducts, consider purchasing devices known as “man traps” or alarms to make it impossible to use the ducts for passage.
Build a guardhouse with a perpetually open link to security personnel in the building, and install a perimeter camera system with night vision capabilities. Make sure the system is digital. Software that automatically finds a specific object (e.g., a red van) is available. Moving to IP — perhaps on an intranet — will make the video available in many places simultaneously.
In addition, the entry doors themselves should be constructed in a way that makes it difficult for a second person to rush in with an individual legitimately gaining entry.
Security cards and other systems should keep track of when an individual belongs in the building. It is unlikely that a mailroom attendant would need to be in the building at 3 a.m. If there is an occasion when that person’s presence is required at an odd hour, special steps can be granted, but the default setting should not allow him or her in after hours.
It is equally important that a company have a termination process. Anything that can be duplicated — such as cards and keys — should be changed. A key is easily copied, so simply getting it back is meaningless. Be aware that some low-level employees (e.g., mailroom attendants) often have more physically spread out duties than executives. Such employees may have a lot of information on passwords and other access facilitators. React accordingly when one of these employees quits or, particularly, is terminated.
These steps and others like them are almost all rooted in common sense. For them to be effective, however, management must adhere to them.
For a while it seemed September 11 was the harbinger for security to be a top priority. Two years later the big question is whether the procedures put in place are being followed. “What I’ve seen in some cases is that there is a flurry of activity and then it’s faded fast. In others there has been an overreaction, way too much emphasis on some issues, [while] other have been ignored,” Rothstein says. “I think it’s impossible to generalize. Some [enterprises] have done a great job, some lousy.”
Carl Weinschenk writes a weekly server hardware series for ServerWatch.
Carl Weinschenk is a long-time IT and telecom journalist. His coverage areas include the IoT, artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence, drones, 3D printing LTE and 5G, SDN, NFV, net neutrality, municipal broadband, unified communications and business continuity/disaster recovery. Weinschenk has written about wireless and phone companies, cable operators and their vendor ecosystems. He also has written about alternative energy and runs a website, The Daily Music Break, as a hobby.
Property of TechnologyAdvice. © 2025 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved
Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.