U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials from the Area Port of Dallas have joined with DFW airport officials and executives from dnata Cargo USA to publicly announce the opening of the nation’s first and only CBP Centralized Examination Station (CES) with direct access to an Airport Air Operations Area (AOA). This innovative setup, which traditionally takes place outside of a secure airfield environment at other airports, enables the direct transfer of cargo from airplanes to the CBP inspection facility, eliminating the need for additional transport and significantly enhancing efficiency.
“This ambitious venture with dnata Cargo USA and DFW supports a strong economy and gives the Area Port of Dallas the cargo processing space to consolidate CBP enforcement efforts and the unprecedented volume of International e-commerce shipments,” said CBP Dallas Area Port director, Jayson Ahern. “These streamlined efforts allow CBP to better leverage our resources and manpower while ensuring we fulfill our national security mission. We are better suited to process legitimate cargo while protecting American business and consumers by intercepting illicit and possibly unsafe goods. This is at the core of CBP’s mission.”
The facility is strategically designed, from its location to its operational processes. With CBP officers on site, the CES ensures smooth inspections and optimal use of CBP resources. Additionally, it features the latest non-intrusive inspection technology to expedite cargo exams, streamlining the overall package clearance process at DFW.
“The CES is a key part of supporting DFW Airport’s rapid growth of international e-commerce package clearances,” said Chris McLaughlin, DFW’s executive vice president operations. “We’re just beginning to tap into our immense business potential in cargo, thanks to our location in the center of the country, coupled with our extensive air service network. We thank our partners at CBP for choosing DFW as the first airport in the nation to lean into this new operating model.”
In fiscal year 2020, DFW Airport processed 16,000 international e-commerce clearances. The airport has seen its e-commerce clearances increase to 20 million packages in 2023. In the first half of 2024, that number has already exceeded 23 million packages.
While the vast majority of importers follow U.S. laws and regulations, transnational criminal organizations constantly attempt to circumvent the system by hiding their contraband under the massive flow of legitimate shipments. CBP now has another resource to address the challenges faced in the de minimis environment, helping CBP better protect the American people.
“By expediting the commercial flow of legitimate goods, this innovative Centralized Examination Station has proven to be an economic stimulus to the region,” Ahern said. “CBP has assigned officers, agriculture specialists, and supervisors to this facility since its inception, and we have seen greater speed and efficiency in clearing cross-border e-commerce and imports targeted for inspection. For the American consumer, it means their products make it to their doorstep faster and safer. This CES will serve as a model for future port efforts throughout the United States. Together with our DFW and dnata Cargo USA partners, we’re proud to be on the front end of this innovative effort.”
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced $1.9 billion for 519 grants in 48 states, Guam, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, in its fifth announcement under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). An additional $269 million was also announced in FY 2023 Supplemental Discretionary Grants to fund 62 projects at 56 U.S. airports. This competitive grant program under the Airport Improvement Program assists airport owners and operators in the development and improvement of our nation’s airport system.
“The Biden-Harris Administration is funding projects across the country that are making airports safer and more efficient for the passengers who travel through them and for the airport and airline employees who work tirelessly behind the scenes to make these complex systems run as smoothly as possible,” said U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg. “The grants we’re announcing today will improve airfield operations for dozens of airports and help ensure the U.S. retains its global leadership in aviation.”
This fifth round of the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants, the largest announcement in program history, funds a variety of projects including airport safety and sustainability improvements and airport noise reduction in airports of all sizes and across all parts of the country. For the first time, the grants include funding for the testing of technologies to reduce, mitigate, and remove contaminants caused by Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) and other per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals” which can contaminate air, water, and soil, and are harmful to human health.
“Today, we invest in our future —enhancing safety, improving sustainability and ensuring our infrastructure meets the needs of the traveling public,” said FAA Associate Administrator for Airports, Shannetta R. Griffin, P.E. “This funding helps ensure traveler safety, reduces the environmental impacts on communities, and builds more resilient airports nationally.”
Also being announced is a $2.9 million Military Airport Program (MAP) grant for Tipton Airport in Maryland. This grant will provide funds to the military airfield for the construction of a new terminal. The MAP provides grants provides grants for converting former military airfields to public use, which adds system capacity and reduces congestion at existing airports experiencing significant delays.
The 2023 Supplemental Discretionary Grant Program provides grants to eligible airports for improvement projects including:
Development of resilient airfield infrastructure improvements.
Infrastructure required for on-airport handling and distribution of sustainable aviation fuels.
Improving air quality at commercial service airports, even at airports in air-quality attainment areas.
D-Fend Solutions, maker of field-proven radio frequency (RF) cyber-based, non-kinetic, non-jamming, counter-drone takeover technology, announced a new agreement with the Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division (NSWC PCD) under its Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) program. This program will focus on conducting extensive evaluation of D-Fend Solutions’ advanced counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS) technologies in various Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) test beds.
The testing will be conducted at various selected governmental airfields, commercial airports, and other facilities upon the mutual concurrence of both organizations. These evaluations will collect data to evaluate the capabilities of the EnforceAir C-UAS detection, tracking, and identification system on a continuous basis in an airport environment, with the system operational to gather data on drones when airspace regulations are violated. The test data will be analyzed, and test reports generated.
“Partnering with the Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division under the CRADA program provides a pivotal opportunity for us to continue to advance our counter-drone technology in complex and challenging military and civil aviation environments,’ said Zohar Halachmi, chairman and CEO of D-Fend Solutions. “The expertise and rigorous standards of the NSWC PCD make them an exceptional partner, as we move to fulfil evolving airport security demands. Together, we will accelerate the evaluation and demonstration of our leading RF-Cyber C-UAS technology as we carry out the mission of protecting public safety and maintaining the continuity of essential operations.”
D-Fend Solutions’ participation in the program is further recognition of the company’s leading presence in programs which demonstrate EnforceAir’s airport C-UAS technology capabilities. In 2023, D-Fend participated in and completed the FAA’s Airport UAS Detection and Mitigation Section 383 Research Program at Atlantic City International Airport (KACY) and Syracuse Hancock International Airport (SYR).
In the same way that it is not the job of a marriage guidance counsellor or psychotherapist to be openly judgmental of their client, for a security service provider to succeed, they need to avoid the blame game. Historical, or even biblical, claims to land are not their issue, nor are the rights and wrongs of political arguments. Whether or not they agree with the strategy of the Israeli government in response to the barbaric attacks of October 7, whatever they think of the integrity of the United Nations and regardless as to who or what they classify as a terrorist or terrorist organization, it is incumbent upon those responsible for aviation security to recognize the likely impact of the conflict. Our aim is to save the lives, and well-being, of those passengers and crew on board our aircraft and over whom we fly. Let’s consider the challenges in achieving this goal.
Like the assassination of JFK, the death of Princess Diana and, of course, the September 11 attacks — subject to one’s age — we all know where we were when the news of the terrorist attacks of October 7 filtered through. When it did, those in the world of security consultancy did not need to listen to any political pundits, academic or otherwise, to know that a line had been crossed and that the impact was going to be far-reaching and devastating. Innocent lives, and many of them, were going to be lost. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu might have actually voiced the words, “The Bible says that there is a time for peace and a time for war. This is a time for war,” but most — adore him or loathe him — knew that this was the new reality for the region. Diplomacy, whilst hopefully not extinguished, was clearly on the back burner.
It is impossible to tackle this topic without being deemed to have demonstrated some degree of political bias; few articles have managed to navigate the turbulent waters of opining without doing so. For those of you interested in the conflict, and listening to the viewpoints of both sides, I do recommend “Hurt People Hurt People, October 7 and its Aftermath” (produced by Beetz Brothers and ZDF in association with Zygote Films) — a feature-length documentary, viewable online, which explores the repercussions of the Hamas attacks and the ongoing cycle of violence in the Middle East as a whole. Of course, both sides will claim that “they didn’t mention X,” or “how could they not show Y,” but it does, in 90 minutes, attempt to demonstrate that both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are hurting and both have reason to do so. “Hurt People Hurt People” is not, as so often is alleged, simply a platitude used as an excuse for aggressive behavior; rather, it attempts to delve into the psyche of the average Israeli and the average Palestinian and help understand their respective mindsets and, equally importantly, those of their leaders.
As the conflict rages on, innocent civilians are dying in droves as Israel bombs Hamas, Hezbollah and even Houthi targets ensconced in the midst of population centers.
“From the River to the Sea” placard-waving demonstrators, Hamas and Hezbollah apologists or, on the flip side, advocates for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank (and/or reoccupation of the Gaza Strip) and champions of a “greater Israel” are not seeking to empathize with the plight of the other side. They believe in their mantra, listen solely to media outlets reflecting their stance, spread hatred (leading to Islamophobia or antisemitism) through social media and remain convinced that they occupy the moral high ground. There is no concession, nor opportunity for respectful debate.
An image from the documentary “Hurt People Hurt People, October 7 and its Aftermath” shows bullet holes in a vehicle on October 7, 2023.
Those who read my article in this journal a year ago will know that I am a staunch believer in a two-state solution — the state of Israel living harmoniously and securely side-by-side an independent Palestinian state — and whilst that seems a complete pipe dream at the moment, that optimistic vision, or a variation of it, seems to me to be the one solution that offers the potential of a just peace. Around the globe, that aspiration for the so-called “day after” (the conflict) remains the prevalent objective for those not directly scarred by the ravages of war. Fortunately, even in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, there are those who are actively advocating for it. The Olmert Al-Kidwa peace proposal is just one example of this with former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Nasser Al-Kidwa, a former Palestinian minister of foreign affairs, jointly presenting their plan to Pope Francis at the Vatican on October 17 this year. Amazingly, the mainstream media paid little attention.
In the meantime, the conflict rages on. At the time of writing (October 23), innocent civilians are dying in droves as Israel bombs Hamas, Hezbollah and even Houthi targets ensconced in the midst of population centers (so often beneath hospitals and schools), Israeli towns remain uninhabitable as those same groups launch missile attack after missile attack in the hope of penetrating the Iron Dome, and the 100+ remaining Israeli hostages seized on October 7 have yet to return home. Anger and resentment reign and this could well impact civil aviation around the globe.
I wish to focus on six concerns. The threat to aviation from, or due to:
• industry insiders;
• operations in/over conflict zones;
• the intentional hijacking and/or bombing of aircraft/airports;
• inadvertent carriage of explosives on board aircraft;
• disruption due to protests; and,
• unruly passenger incidents as a result of conflict between passengers and/or crew.
Insider Threats
The insider threat is, I believe, the greatest challenge if one looks at aviation from a global perspective. Often ill-informed opinions, formed on the basis of social media postings, are rife with sometimes well-intentioned advocates for one side or the other liking, sharing or re-posting fake news that further inflames public sentiment. Supposedly unbiased media outlets have clearly taken sides and are shaping public opinion with the imagery they are choosing to show, the words and terminology they are opting to use, the experts they have decided to invite to interview and the degree of balance they are electing to exercise. Against this background, with so many very strong opinions being expressed within families in social groups and at places of worship, there are those who feel that the conflict warrants acts of civil disobedience.
Most western states are keen to ensure that the right to protest remains sacrosanct. The holding of vigils, sit-ins (and die-ins), rallies, marches, the organization of petitions, boycotts, and even effecting walkouts or striking are part and parcel of democracy at work — as long as the rallying call is not in support of terrorist organizations. And here’s the rub — that very caveat. If the opinion of the masses is that a certain group is a legitimate political movement rather than a terrorist organization and/or that a state has gone rogue and is itself committing atrocities, the mood music changes. Peaceful protest can transform into criminal action. When religious ideology enters the equation, the consequences can be catastrophic.
There has been widespread condemnation of Israel on the Arab street and in the Muslim world. With there being almost two billion Muslims and more than 50 states with a Muslim-majority population, their cry is significantly more powerful than that of the 15 million Jews and the one state in which they are the majority. Additionally, the size of the Muslim community in non-Muslim states and the understandable number of non-Muslims who are equally horrified by the deaths, maiming, orphaning and suffering being witnessed on their television screens and on social media, has resulted in a sense of fury with the political leadership of, primarily, western states, supporting Israel. As that sense of injustice brews so does the chance that those employed at airlines, airports, freight forwarding companies, catering and cleaning firms, in law enforcement and in airside operations might decide to act against the industry and its interests. We need to remember that it only takes one rogue employee with a warped ideology to cause a disaster.
The scale of utter hatred being demonstrated on social media platforms is terrifying. The number of employees of airlines, airports, regulatory agencies and, yes, even United Nations bodies in my own LinkedIn network using vile language, expressing clearly antisemitic sentiment and openly calling for the destruction of Israel illustrates that my concern over the insider threat is not far-fetched. And yet, despite this I will resolutely defend the use of behavior detection and argue passionately against racial profiling. Why? Because there are enough people who do not fit a stereotype who could be perpetrators of a terrorist atrocity out there and our focussing on one group would not be conducive to good security practice.
Overflight of Conflict Zones
Aircrew and passenger concern about flying in the region is completely understandable. After all, commercial airliners have been destroyed by surface-to-air missiles in combat zones, or in security-challenging locations, either intentionally or in error. These include the loss of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014 and the destruction of a Ukraine International Airlines flight departing Tehran in January 2020.
“As that sense of injustice brews so does the chance that those employed at airlines, airports, freight forwarding companies, catering and cleaning firms, in law enforcement and in airside operations might decide to act against the industry and its interests.”
The photographs of flights landing in, and departing from, Beirut and Tel Aviv amidst explosions on the ground or Iron Dome intercepts in the skies is unnerving. When one considers that there were in excess of 28,000 rocket, missile or drone attacks on Israel in the year subsequent to October 7 (9,000 rockets were fired by Hezbollah from southern Lebanon), including the two attack waves from Iran, airline risk managers have certainly been earning their keep in respect of operations to and from both Israel and Lebanon, let alone the overflight concerns in the region as a whole.
The Iron Dome has been a phenomenal success story, far exceeding the expectations of many. Yet it is not infallible, and drones have managed to penetrate Israel’s air defenses. Whilst Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis just might do so with intent, neither Israel nor Iran are going to intentionally target civil aviation; that, however, does not mean that an accidental shootdown will not occur.
Exemplifying this, a German media outlet reported that, on October 1, an Air France flight in Iraqi airspace — en route from Paris to Dubai — was dangerously close to being hit by ballistic missiles launched by Iran towards Israel that night.
Hijacking and Bombing
Hijacking might seem passé, but a mindset believing that such tactics will not be used again would be seriously shortsighted. Throughout the 1990s it was argued that terrorist groups had moved on from acts of aerial piracy. And then September 11 happened…
“… an Air France flight in Iraqi airspace – en route from Paris to Dubai – was dangerously close to being hit by ballistic missiles launched by Iran …”
What recent events have demonstrated is that terrorist groups — especially those backed by rogue states — have evolved into highly proficient paramilitary outfits capable of sophisticated operations. The October 7 attacks clearly demonstrated this and the infrastructure unearthed beneath the ground in both Gaza and Lebanon is testament to both the financial investment and commitment to warmongering. I seriously doubt that the United Nations agencies and forces in situ were completely ignorant of what was being created beneath their feet, indicating the degree to which these non-state actors, and their operations, had become “accepted” in an ostrich-like fashion by the international community. That head-in-the-sand attitude was also something Israel’s powers-that-be could be accused of being guilty of in the lead up to October 7 — the indicators were there but there was a failure to act accordingly.
It is this complacency which could come back to bite the aviation industry. We remain committed to the very same technologies and processes that were developed well over a decade ago and in order to identify the same weapons and explosives that were used in the last century. Those who wish to penetrate the aviation system are moving forward at speed. Our opponents are not necessarily have-a-go freedom fighters; they are the types of units that are capable — and have — seized ships by air in the open seas.
Hijacking need not solely be achieved by armed terrorists on board. The potential for cyberattacks and other remote disruption of aircraft operation exists. In February, an El Al Israel Airlines flight was operating from Phuket, Thailand, to Tel Aviv when it received a rogue radio message instructing it to set its route on an alternative heading. It is unclear as to the ultimate goal of the Somaliland-based (some reports claim Somalia-based) transmitters who claimed to be air traffic controllers. One ominous possibility is that they intended to ‘hijack’ the aircraft causing it to fly into the range of a Houthi group in Yemen who could have targeted the aircraft in-flight. Another El Al flight operating to Bangkok the same week received similar notification. In both cases, the crew disregarded the instructions, suspecting external interference, and continued with their intended flight plans.
The magnitude of the level of destruction in Gaza is shocking to all. The loss of innocent lives and scale of those incurring severe and life-changing injuries is bad enough. Yet, together with the challenges of getting essential humanitarian aid into the Strip and provision of shelter for those with no place to escape to, have resulted in numerous calls for a cessation of hostilities by both the international community and those charities operating in the region. Images such as this further fuel the resentment that is brewing and increase the possibility of attacks elsewhere.
The day after the first anniversary of the October 7 attacks, Ken McCallum, the director general of the U.K.’s MI5, spoke publicly revealing that, “Since March 2017, MI5 and the police have together disrupted 43 late-stage attack plots. Some of those plotters were trying to get hold of firearms and explosives, in the final days of planning mass murder.” Furthermore, McCallum reported that “13% of all those being investigated by MI5 for involvement in U.K. terrorism are under 18. That’s a threefold increase in the last three years.” In other words, children.
“… an El Al Israel Airlines flight was operating from Phuket, Thailand, to Tel Aviv when it received a rogue radio message instructing it to set its route on an alternative heading.”
“Al-Qaeda has,” according to McCallum, “sought to capitalize on conflict in the Middle East, calling for violent action.” And, when it comes to Iran, he highlighted the fact that, “Like the Russian services, Iranian state actors make extensive use of criminals as proxies — from international drug traffickers to low-level crooks.” It is these communities that could knowingly or unwittingly infiltrate weapons or devices onto aircraft.
Inadvertent Carriage of Explosives
On September 17 a highly sophisticated synchronized remote attack on Hezbollah resulted in pagers exploding in the hands of their militants across Lebanon. If, as very few doubt, it was an Israeli operation, it will go down in folklore — alongside the Entebbe rescue — as being one of their “greatest” intelligence-lead operations of all time. Almost 3,000 people were injured, including Iran’s ambassador to Lebanon, and 12 killed, when they received a message supposedly from Hezbollah leadership.
The next day, walkie-talkies started exploding, killing 30 and injuring more than 700.
Regardless as to whether one believes that the tactic was a completely justified way of attacking known terrorists or one argues that the use of such booby-trapped devices was contrary to international law as it posed a danger to civilian populations, the plot was technologically brilliant. However, it should also sound alarm bells; the pagers had been in circulation for around five months, according to a Reuters source in Lebanon, each one “laced with a highly explosive compound known as PETN” which, because it was “integrated into the battery pack made it extremely difficult to detect.” Another security source told Reuters that “up to three grams (0.11 ounces) of explosives had been hidden in the new pagers, apparently months before the blasts.” 3,000 pagers had exploded, yet 5,000 had been bought by Hezbollah. That means that another 2,000 could still be in circulation. Furthermore, whilst Hezbollah combatants are not known for their regular use of air travel, it is highly likely that many of them did fly — possibly many times — in the five months they had pagers in their possession. None, it would seem, were detected by any airport security screening system.
Shown here is a memorial composed of photos of young Israelis killed during the terrorist attack at the NOVA Festival.
Of course, three grams of PETN is not enough to bring down an aircraft. Yet if we look at the physical impact of the blasts on those targeted, any such detonation in flight would be more than a slight cause for concern.
Some carriers, including, not surprisingly, Qatar Airways, introduced bans on the carriage of pagers in the aftermath of the attack. The real lessons, however, were that; firstly, remote-controlled improvised explosive devices are very much a reality of the modern world; secondly, that seemingly innocuous devices can operate (for months) normally without impediment and yet still be adapted as an IED; and, thirdly, that our screening systems simply cannot identify all explosives.
Protests
I’ve already mentioned that we wish to preserve the civil right to protest. Yet protests are also a distraction to the security services, especially if they take place at airports.
In September, the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign organized a protest at Shannon Airport. Their website called for people to, “Join us for a National Mobilization at Shannon Airport on Sunday September 8,, between 2 p.m. and 3.30 p.m., to say ‘Stop Arming Israel – No weapons or military flights to Israel through Shannon!” They even encouraged people to “Book your place on the buses from Dublin and Cork” to protest the Irish government’s refusal “to inspect U.S. warplanes that stop at Shannon Airport or otherwise use Irish airspace.”
On April 15, pro-Palestinian activists prevented traffic from accessing Terminal 1 at Chicago’s O’Hare airport. Forty of them were allegedly arrested for the disruption they caused.
These are just two of a myriad of airport-based incidents around the globe, each one providing a challenge to the local law enforcement community. Arguably more problematic are the individual protests industry employees are conducting by wearing emblems or flags associated with the conflict. Aircrew often wear flags to depict the languages they speak, but their wearing of the Palestinian flag has been a cause for debate on social media — some applauding them for standing up for what they believe in, others condemning them for displaying political bias whilst in a work environment.
Qantas passengers on a flight from Melbourne to Hobart on December 20 last year were shocked to find that crewmembers had affixed the Palestinian flag to their lapels. Photographs appeared on social media and the airline was forced to remind its crew of its uniform policy. In a January 4 statement, Qantas stated, “We understand there are strong and opposing views on the current conflict, but there is no room for these to be expressed by our employees in the workplace. Our priority is creating a safe and respectful environment for our customers and all our people. Unauthorized badges can’t be worn by employees and we’ve reminded all employees of the policy, along with the seriousness of this particular matter.”
On July 5 this year, a Delta flight attendant was photographed wearing a Palestinian pin on a flight from Boston to West Palm Beach, and in May a Delta gate agent was wearing one at Ronald Regan airport.
The issue is not the Palestinian flag alone — Israeli, Ukrainian, and any other flag not indicative of the language spoken by the crewmember in question is inappropriate in a professional work environment.
Unruly Passengers
With Islamophobia and antisemitism on the rise and so much anger related to the conflict being openly expressed, it’s hardly surprising that, regardless of what pins crewmembers might wear, there will be plenty of opportunities for animosity between different passenger types. It’s prevalent on public transport systems on the ground too.
On October 21, a passenger was photographed on the Paris Metro at Saint-François-Xavier station wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words ‘Anti Juif’ (Anti Jew). Imagine this had been worn on an aircraft and the potential fallout.
As tweeted by @carolinemarcus on X (formerly known as Twitter), Qantas counseled several cabin crewmembers who wore Palestinian flag badges on a flight, breaching the airline’s uniform policy.
In July it was reported that a passenger was told that he would be removed from a Delta flight from São Paulo to Chicago if he did not take off his pro-ceasefire T-shirt which had “Not in Our Name” on the front side and “Jews Say Ceasefire Now” on the back. Whilst advocating for peace, the political nature of the slogan clearly caused the crew anxiety.
Another tweet on X from @stopantisemites said, “Your customers on a Boston to West Palm Beach flight yesterday were perplexed to see your flight attendant adorning a flag of Palestine pin.”
In December, an argument took place in Melbourne, Australia, between Jewish and Muslim passengers boarding a Jetstar flight to Sydney. The latter is alleged to have shouted, “Stop killing our babies,” and the former responded, “From Hamas.”
A passenger was photographed on the Paris Metro at Saint-François-Xavier station wearing a shirt emblazoned with the words Anti Juif (Anti Jew). The photograph taken on 10/21 around 5:15-30 p.m. in the Paris metro line 13, Saint-François Xavier station, direction Saint-Denis, according to @s_sebbane’s tweet.
These are the now increasingly frequent challenges aircrew are dealing with many miles from the conflict itself. They may seem petty in comparison to the desperation of those living in the Middle East itself, yet airlines are having to adapt their training programs to enable crew to best manage political divide … be it Israel/Palestine, Trump/Harris, Russia/Ukraine or any other combination.
A year on from October 7 and the region is in a very precarious position. Indeed, so is the world as a whole. The last year has demonstrated innovation in the art of war on all sides, so we need to evolve too and enhance our ability to deliver proactive security. And, if that were not a big enough challenge in itself, we also need to do so whilst exercising political neutrality.
Philip Baum is Visiting Professor of Aviation Security, Coventry University; Managing Director, Green Light Ltd; Chair, DISPAX World 2024 (November 20-21, 2024, Bangkok);, and, Chair, Behavioral Analysis 2025 (June 24-26, 2025, Minneapolis, USA). He is also the former editor of Aviation Security International. He can be contacted at pbaum@avsec.com.
Identifying and detecting the presence of explosive materials or substances using explosive detection systems is not only necessary, they are key pillars of ensuring public safety.
Those who have worked in aviation will likely remember Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab popularly referred to as the “underwear bomber” or “Christmas bomber,” a Nigerian terrorist who attempted to detonate plastic explosives hidden in his underwear. And what about Richard Reid — known as the “shoe bomber” — who tried to detonate his shoes which were filled with explosive material on a flight from Paris to Miami in 2001.
The illicit use of explosives has become an all-too-real event in the modern world. According to Global Terrorism Index (GTI), in 2023, there were approximately 3,350 explosive-related attacks in the world. High-profile terrorist attacks in public transportation-related venues, such as airports, train stations, ports and border control points have highlighted these areas’ vulnerability to explosive attacks.
Explosive detection systems play a crucial role in ensuring public safety by preventing these attacks. An explosive detection technology is a device or system designed to identify and detect the presence of explosive materials or substances, whether they be military, conventional or homemade, thereby avoiding catastrophic and damaging events. According to Selbyville, Del.-based Global Market Insights, the explosive detectors market size was valued at USD 8.95 billion in 2023 and is anticipated to register a CAGR of over 12% between 2024 and 2032.
John Johnson, 908 Devices
“A vigilant guardian,” that is how John Johnson, senior director of strategic marketing and business development at 908 Devices, Boston, describes explosive detection’s role in meticulously screening passengers, luggage and cargo for potential threats. “Its presence serves a dual purpose: not only does it identify dangers, but it also acts as a powerful deterrent, discouraging attempts to smuggle explosives onto transportation systems. The technology’s ability to provide rapid threat identification is crucial, enabling swift responses that minimize disruptions and maintain the smooth flow of travel. Ultimately, these capabilities coalesce to significantly enhance the overall safety of both travelers and transportation personnel.”
Explosives and Transportation Security
Explosive detection technology is vital for transportation security; identifying explosive threats before they reach their transportation targets. “Transportation lies at the heart of the everyday life of people across the world,” says Logan Cunningham, sales and service, US Testing Equipment, Vancouver, Wash. “The importance of transportation networks makes them a prime target and at risk of harm that could cause loss of life, economic impact and destabilization that can come with losing the feeling of security in an integral part of everyday life.”
Logan Cunningham, US Testing Equipment
Cunningham believes it’s the integral nature of transportation to everyday life that causes some of the biggest hurdles to securing these targets from potential explosives threats. He explains, “Modern transportation, regardless of purpose or specific industry, is typically a high-volume and tightly coordinated effort. This brings the requirements for fast, consistent and reliable detection that is economical and easily deployable. Unlike, for instance, military or correctional screening of goods or people, where security typically has the utmost priority and other factors (such as time or efficiency) can be deprioritized, transportation networks are often built on their efficiency (both time and economic) and an explosive detection solution should be able to be reasonably integrated.”
Nicholas E. Ortyl, Leidos
Nicholas E. Ortyl, chief engineer, security enterprise solutions at Leidos, Reston, Va., cites the following key important factors of explosive detection in transportation security:
• Threat Mitigation: Detects explosives at high-risk hubs like airports to prevent attacks.
• Safety: Safeguards travelers and staff by neutralizing threats before they cause harm.
• Regulatory Compliance: Helps meet security standards from government agencies like the TSA and ECAC.
• Operational Continuity: Minimizes false alarms and delays, while enabling high throughput screening environments.
Ortyl cites the following unique aspects for it:
• Varied Environments: Adaptable for different settings (e.g., aircraft, buses, cargo).
• High Throughput: Each system can complete hundreds of screenings per hour, quickly and accurately.
• Layered Approach: Combines multiple systems and human oversight for comprehensive threat detection.
• Broader Integration: Works with biometrics, surveillance and other systems to enhance security.
• Operational Flexibility: Must be portable, fast, and reliable with minimal disruptions.
Robert Stokes, Agilent Technologies
Robert Stokes PhD, director detection and security, Molecular Spectroscopy at Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, Calif., agrees that transportation settings are among the most demanding environments for threat and explosive detection equipment and technology. “Systems must deliver exceptional detection capability and maintain low false-alarm rates within extremely short processing times. Additionally, detection technologies need to consistently perform over millions of cycles. It is also crucial that any screening technology is user-friendly and produces clear, unambiguous results for security operators to minimize disruptions to screening operations and the flow of commerce.”
The unique environment of transportation systems has shaped explosive detection technology in distinctive ways. “High-throughput screening capabilities are essential to manage the immense volume of passengers and cargo that flow through transportation hubs daily,” Johnson says. “These systems must maintain a delicate balance, delivering accurate results while minimizing false alarms to prevent unnecessary delays that could ripple through the entire transportation network. The technology must also be versatile, capable of detecting a wide spectrum of threat materials, as transportation infrastructure remains a prime target for various types of attacks. Moreover, the portability of modern detection systems allows for flexible deployment across different areas of transportation hubs and even on moving vehicles, creating a dynamic and adaptive security presence.”
The Insight200M is a liquid explosive detection system (LEDs) providing enhanced capability for alarm resolution to detect and identify threats. Agilent Technologies image.
Detecting Homemade Explosives
Detecting homemade explosives (HMEs) poses significant challenges in transportation security due to their unique characteristics and the non-standard nature of the devices. Unlike military-grade explosives with distinct chemical signatures, HMEs often have varied and unpredictable chemical compositions, making them more difficult to identify.
908 Devices’ MX908 leverages high-pressure mass spectrometry (HPMS) for explosives detection. 908 Devices image.
Andy Foland, chief technology officer, security enterprise solutions at Leidos explains, “HMEs can be unstable, varying in sensitivity to heat, shock or friction, which increases the risk during handling for obtaining signature data. This also poses challenges for safely neutralizing threats when detected. Detection systems designed with more consistent formulation in mind can result in high false-alarm rates, or a need to augment signatures or capabilities with new detection modalities.”
“These improvised threats are frequently crafted from common household items, further complicating the detection process as they can be easily mistaken for benign materials,” Johnson says. “The lack of a consistent chemical signature adds another layer of complexity to their detection. Homemade explosives tend to be much more sensitive than military explosives, making them prone to igniting from slight changes in pressure or exposure to an energy source. For this reason, certain technologies that utilize lasers can be dangerous to use when explosives are potentially present.”
Improvised threats are frequently crafted from common household items complicating the detection process as they can be easily mistaken for benign materials, according to Andy Foland, CTO at Leidos. Leidos image.
Cunningham explains that HMEs utilize a range of explosive materials, delivery methods and quantities that can be difficult to detect based on packaging or location if the right technology is not being used to address the threat. “This is also where additional features such as software additions can aid in potential threat identification to aid operators’ inspection.”
CT scan image detecting possible IED. Leidos Image.
Mitigating HMEs requires flexible and advanced detection systems that can account for a wide range of materials, formulations and concealment methods used in their construction. 908 Devices’ MX908 addresses these challenges and is equipped with sophisticated algorithms and broad detection capabilities, and is particularly adept at identifying these diverse threats in transportation settings.
908 Devices’ MX908 leverages high-pressure mass spectrometry (HPMS) for explosives detection. 908 Devices image.
Because of HMEs’ difficult-to-detect common household chemicals, London, England’s Smiths Detection has calibrated its advanced trace-detection technologies to detect a wide range of chemicals, addressing the variability in HME compositions. “This flexibility is vital in identifying these explosives, which often lack consistent ingredients but pose serious threats to transportation security.”
HEIDM Program
Recent HME attacks have further bolstered the need for a strong explosive characterization program, and have served to re-emphasize the benefits of United States Department of Homeland Security’s Homemade Explosives Identification, Detection and Mitigation (HEIDM) Program.
As HME threats are often made of common commercial items, it is a challenge to distinguish true HME threats from the many innocent gels and liquids in personal baggage or cargo. The HEIDM Program is a crosscutting portfolio, meaning the information collected in this program feeds into TSA to benefit several science and technology programs, and has focus areas on:
• Explosive detection characterization.
• Threat assessments and prioritization.
• Tests, tools and methodologies relating to explosives research and risk mitigation.
• The HEIDM Program ensures the explosives community has a clear understanding of homemade and emerging explosive threats to:
• Improve detection technology.
• Develop detection requirements.
• Inhibit the unlawful use and manufacture of HMEs.
• Provide a solid foundation for solutions to counter the threat, such as pre-planning tools for responders and event planners.
Detection Innovations
Technology advances for detecting explosives in both ever-evolving and emerging threats have countered their use and resulting impacts. Innovations have made detection more accurate, efficient and less intrusive, ensuring both security and smooth transportation operations. Cunningham says this has occurred not only in the increased library of detectable substances but also the concentrations (trace particulates) and the ability to discriminate or differentiate between non-target substances and suspected explosive materials.
Portable systems like the IONSCAN 600 provide flexibility for deployment in a variety of transportation settings. Smiths Detection image.
Foland says explosive detection has evolved from basic X-ray and metal detectors to advanced systems utilizing AI/ML, radiofrequency (RF) waves, and Ion Mobility Spectrometry (IMS). “Early methods focused on detecting metallic threats, but the use of X-ray, RF, wideband FR complex impedance, Raman spectroscopy, capillary zone electrophoresis and IMS has enabled the identification of non-metallic explosive materials. Modern innovations, such as millimeter-wave imaging, 3D Computed Tomography (CT) scanners, and standoff detection allow for non-invasive, high-accuracy screening of passengers and baggage. AI-driven systems improve detection speed and accuracy, and reduce false alarms, while integrating them with broader security measures can enhance overall situational awareness.”
Rapiscan Systems offers the Itemiser 5X which uses optimized detection libraries and advanced software algorithms to detect explosive traces. Rapiscan image.
“Explosive detection technology has evolved significantly, integrating artificial intelligence into systems like (Smith Detections’) HI-SCAN 6040 CTiX, which automates threat recognition and reduces human error,” says Joachim Petry, business development manager, X-ray diffraction at Smiths Detection. “[We] also offer computed tomography and 3D-imaging solutions for more detailed and reliable screening of luggage and cargo, allowing threats to be identified with minimal manual intervention. Portable systems like the IONSCAN 600 provide flexibility for deployment in a variety of transportation settings. These systems are also non-invasive, relying on trace detection technologies like IMS without the need for physical sampling, enhancing both security and passenger experience. [Our] iCMORE technology integrates AI and deep learning algorithms into our X-ray detection systems. This enables faster decision-making and more accurate threat identification, significantly reducing false alarms and enhancing operational efficiency in busy transport environments.”
Integrating machine learning approaches that enable algorithms to quickly adapt to changes in the threat landscape and the flow of commerce has been very beneficial. Stokes say, “These advancements include enhanced detection capabilities, allowing modern systems to identify a wider range of explosive materials with greater accuracy, and reduced false alarms, as machine learning helps distinguish between actual threats and benign items. Additionally, faster processing times enable rapid screening without compromising security, while improved user interfaces provide clear and unambiguous results for security operators. Furthermore, newer systems are designed to perform consistently over millions of cycles, ensuring long-term reliability in demanding environments. It is critical that any explosive detection technology is robust enough for demanding screening operations and can be safely and effectively utilized by security personnel who may not be hazmat or laboratory trained.”
The people who conduct airport security screenings are the world’s frontline defense against terrorists, smugglers, and other criminals. This is why training them properly is so important — because the quality of their training will determine the quality of their work.
Computer-based training (CBT) is an effective combination of quality, convenience, and cost for training airport security screeners. Three key providers of CBT security training are CASRA, e-Lectio, and Renful Premier Technologies.
Dr. Diana Hardmeier, CASRA
Founded in 2008, CASRA stands for the Center for Adaptive Security Research and Applications. Its roots go back to the Visual Cognition Research Group at the University of Zurich, which was created 25 years ago. “CASRA’s vision is to enable people and technology for a safe and secure world,” said Dr. Diana Hardmeier, CASRA director. “By combining applied research and translating the research findings into software products, we develop a computer-based training and testing solution that continuously reflects current threats and thus trains screeners in a way that is both motivating and efficient.”
Dr. Nimrod Matan, e-Lectio
As part of the ICTS Europe group, e-Lectio provides online training solutions to the security sector worldwide. Their CBT programs are delivered to students worldwide using e-Lectio’s Eagle7 Learning Management System. “By using advanced eLearning technologies, our company offers high-quality, regulation-compliant, online training to the aviation and maritime security sectors,” said Dr. Nimrod Matan, e-Lectio’s commercial director.
Agnes Vaspori, Renful
Renful Premier Technologies (Renful) has been offering security training solutions to the market for over 30 years. “Our computer-based training systems are the result of decades of research and development, guided by aviation security professionals, and developed in collaboration with a highly skilled team, incorporating valuable customer feedback,” said Agnes Vaspori, Renful’s head of product development. “Renful’s success is demonstrated by our ability to serve a wide range of security domains; including airports, civil aviation authorities, customs and border agencies, and police forces.”
Renful’s training serves a wide range of security domains including airports, civil aviation authorities, customs and border agencies and police forces. Renful image.
What They Have to Offer
X-Ray Tutor 4 (XRT4) is the name of CASRA’s screening education program. XRT4 is a comprehensive, computer-based pre-employment selection, training and testing solution for training people in the use of 3D, dual-view and single-view X-ray screening across various fields. This software allows operators to select, train, and test screening security professionals in areas such as cabin baggage screening, hold baggage screening, cargo, mail, staff, air supply, maritime, as well as high-energy and baggage screening at customs.
“XRT4 features customizable user interfaces that mimic different X-ray machines, creating a realistic training and testing environment,” Dr. Hardmeier said. “All common image enhancement functions are integrated to replicate the viewing conditions security officers encounter at checkpoints. The platform’s adaptive learning system presents images tailored to each user’s knowledge and skills, ensuring they are optimally challenged and motivated throughout their training.”
Current users of CASRA’s XRT4 training program include the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA), Securitas Aviation, Swedavia, and Zurich Airport. Overall, XRT4 is used in over 50 countries and at more than 900 airports globally.
At e-Lectio, “We offer Eagle7 online training solutions for all requirements that apply to screeners in the aviation sector,” said Dr. Matan. These include:
• The Eagle7 X-ray training simulator with over 50,000 genuine cabin baggage, hold baggage, cargo and mail, and airport supplies images; and a 3D training simulator with over 4,000 genuine cabin baggage, hold baggage, cargo, and mail images. “The simulators are suitable for initial training, recurrent training, and certification,” he told TSI.
• Comprehensive package of e-learning courses covering all required training in line with EU regulations and beyond.
• An advanced learning management system (LMS) with performance analysis and reporting modules. It is designed to provide screeners with a clear detailed picture of their achievements, and to provide supervisors and trainers with a detailed analysis of performance levels on individual and group level, to ensure compliance.
• A pre-recruitment assessment tool for X-ray screeners’ positions, including seven different psychometric tests capturing the skills and capacities required for screeners.
Renful says it uses animation and multimedia to create highly engaging content that keeps learners motivated and enhances retention. Renful image.
As for e-Lectio’s online training courses; they are used by major international airports, national authorities, and security companies. They include airports in Copenhagen, Milan Malpensa, Seattle and Vienna, plus aviation authorities such as AESA (Spain), DJI (Netherlands), the Malta Aviation Security Department, and the Moldovan Civil Aviation Authority.
“Renful offers a diverse range of computer-based training systems tailored for the security market,” Vaspori said. “These systems are designed to enhance the skills and knowledge of security personnel across various sectors.
Some of Renful’s key offerings include:
• The Simfox Simulator for X-ray and CT Image Recognition Training: This is a system that trains security operators in identifying prohibited items within 2D X-ray and 3D CT images, improving their threat recognition ability, detection accuracy, and speed. Simfox is used in over 80 countries by more than 200,000 security screeners.
• E-learning Modules: These are interactive online courses provided on Renful’s Learning Management System, covering a wide range of security topics.
• Competency and Assessment Tools: These are pre-employment testing and performance assessment platforms to evaluate the skills and performance of personnel while carrying out different security functions. The assessments are performed at the recruitment stage and after deployment to ensure officers meet the required security standard.
In order to keep its online students engaged, their “in-house development team uses animation and multimedia to create highly engaging content that keeps learners motivated and enhances retention,” said Vaspori. “This approach, combined with regular updates and customizable training, ensures our courses are both relevant and effective.” Renful’s client list includes London Heathrow and Seoul Incheon Airports, the Australian Department of Home Affairs, the U.S. Department of State, the Civil Aviation Authorities of Romania and Greece, Certis Aviation Security, G4S, I-SEC, Prosegur, Securitas, and SegurIberica.
Staying on Top of Change
Mindful that airport security threats are constant, the three CBT companies interviewed for this article do their best to keep their content current and up to date.
A case in point: “CASRA’s libraries are regularly updated based on a systematic threat assessment (STA), which takes new and emerging threats into account,” Dr. Hardmeier said. “The STA is a key component of a long-term CASRA research project that is funded by the Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation. It systematically scans various public and non-public internet channels, the deep web, social media platforms, radical propaganda, and third-party reports for relevant security information. Once identified, new threat objects are continuously integrated into both training and e-learning, where theoretical knowledge about these objects is also imparted.”
Since XRT4’s training algorithm is adaptive and tailored to each individual screener, new and/or poorly recognized threats are presented more frequently to students to support quicker internalization,” she noted. “This not only shortens learning times but also ensures that screeners are better prepared to recognize and respond to emerging threats.” To further improve screener responses on the job, XRT4’s training library includes a wide range of high-quality X-ray images of several hundred prohibited items in various rotations and configurations, as well as thousands of different containers. All image libraries are fully compliant with EU regulations.
The e-Lectio Eagle7 training simulators also rely on a regularly updated image library. It is populated with genuine images captured on real-life X-ray and CT machines using actual scanned luggage with authentic threat items. “The image library covers a huge array of threat items, following the EU regulation definitions of prohibited articles,” said Dr. Matan. “Our team of experts continuously extends the image library adding hundreds of new images yearly.”
The training workflow used by e-Lectio covers the operation of X-ray machines used for screening, plus the entire range of skills needed to perform this job successfully. These skills include:
• Classifying the image as a threat, no threat, or possible threat that cannot be resolved by X-ray analysis.
• Indicating the type of threat item detected.
• Marking the location of the threat on the image.
• Switching between various views of the image (simulating a dual view machine) and various angles of the luggage (simulating the rotation of the luggage on the belt) to improve analysis and decision-making.
• Comparing cargo images to the airway bill and determining whether they match.
• Clearing EDS (energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy) warnings, when applicable.
• For 3D images, using slicing as well as full control over a 3D image of the luggage such as rotation and zoom in/out.
Renful’s courses offer a detailed, extensive look at the threats facing screening personnel today. For example, “Simfox CT, a computed tomography X-ray simulator, is tailored to meet the operational needs of those working with Cabin Baggage and Check Baggage CT scanners,” Vaspori said. “Simfox CT is equipped with a library of over 6,000 real CT images for initial familiarizaion, certification and upskilling training modules. It is compatible with multiple CT scanner models such as Leidos ClearScan, Smiths Heimann CtiX, Rapiscan 920CT, Leidos MV3D Hold Baggage EDS, ensuring a seamless transition from training to real-world operations.”
e-Lectio’s Eagle7 X-ray simulator is an online training solution, enabling flexibility and scalability in facilitation training in dozens of different locations, while ensuring compliance and quality through reporting and control by the head office. e-Lectio images.
Meanwhile, Renful’s Introduction to Explosives course is designed to equip students with the knowledge and skills needed to understand and manage explosive-related risks. These include the threats posed by improvised explosive devices (IEDs), concealed explosive devices, and other hazards. Participants get to explore detection technologies, historical developments, and advanced training methodologies to enhance their security skills.
Finally, Renful’s Trefox Training Essentials for X-ray course teaches new operators on the fundamentals of X-ray security. “Through engaging audio, text, and video content, learners can grasp essential concepts with ease,” said Vaspori. “Instructors can also leverage ready-made animations and audio content to streamline their teaching process, ensuring effective knowledge transfer.” Trefox can teach conventional X-ray, computed tomography X-ray, and vehicle/ container X-ray techniques.
Certifications Available
To deliver maximum value from their training courses to students and employers, the three CBT companies in this article all provide options for certifying successful completion of their courses.
CASRA’s XRT4 offers students the option of taking certification tests that are based on scientific criteria. These tests are used by various Civil Aviation Authorities worldwide and are fully compliant with EU regulations.
Successful e-Lectio Eagle7 students achieve all types of certifications required by EU regulations, for screening jobs related to cabin baggage, hold baggage, airport supplies, and cargo/mail; both in 2D (single and/or dual view) and EDS CT in 3D. “In fact, several CAAs throughout Europe either directly use or have approved Eagle7 for certifying screeners according to chapter 11 of the EU regulation 2015-1998,” Dr. Matan said.
Renful issues a Certificate of Completion to individuals who successfully complete any of their e-learning courses. In addition, “Simfox is used as the national screener certification platform by regulators in 14 countries and is an approved system in most European countries for recurrent training under EU Regulation 2015/1998),” said Vaspori. “Simfox is trusted for both initial certification and ongoing training, ensuring compliance with aviation security standards.”
Convenient to Take
The logic behind CBT courses is that they are available for students to pursue at their convenience, at whatever time and location(s) work best for them.
All three CBT companies hit the mark on this requirement. CASRA’s XRT4 is a web-based solution that can be accessed via any internet browser without requiring additional plugins. e-Lectio’s Eagle7 is also 100% web based and can be accessed through any web browser on any device. So are Renful’s courses, which can be accessed from anywhere with an internet connection, and viewed on computers, tablets, and smartphones.
As for the price to take these courses? “The cost of CASRA’s training programs varies depending on the specific course and the number of participants,” Dr. Hardmeier said. “We offer customized pricing packages for organizations and large groups. For more detailed pricing information, we recommend contacting CASRA directly.”
“Eagle7 is offered as SaaS (software as a service) with three main pricing models,” said e-Lectio’s Dr. Matan. These are:
• License fee per registered user, with no limit on the number of training hours or number of concurrent users.
• License fee per concurrent user (seat), with no limit on the number of training hours or the number of registered users.
• Fee per training hour (hour bank), with no limit on the number of registered or concurrent users.
Over at Renful, “The license models available include perpetual, annual subscription, and pay-per-use,” Vaspori said. “We work closely with customers to fully understand their needs and offer the most cost-effective solution that delivers the best value for their investment. For detailed pricing information, contact us directly or visit our website.”
Numerous Benefits to CBT
Clearly, the screening training provided by CASRA, e-Lectio, and Renful comes with a price tag attached. So why is it worthwhile for airports (and other transportation facilities) to pay for it?
Well, to put it bluntly, the benefits of CBT for airport security screeners are numerous and tangible.
“Numerous scientific studies have proven that CASRA’s courses significantly improve the competency of security personnel to detect threats more accurately and efficiently, thereby enhancing overall security in aviation environments,” said Dr. Hardmeier. “Employers benefit from having better-trained staff who can reduce security risks, comply with international security standards, and ensure regulatory compliance. The integrated reporting system also allows administrators to easily monitor progress and compliance. Detailed feedback on training sessions ensures continuous improvement and high levels of competency.”
The training by e-Lectio ensures full compliance with EU regulations on airport security screening, Dr. Matan said. The Eagle7 system also gives trainers full control of all training parameters, including:
• Number of images per threat type.
• Number of images per difficulty level.
• Angles of threats included in the tests.
• Type of images included in the test (single/dual view, with/without EDS markings).
• Time limit.
• Scoring method.
• The training workflow to be used (with/without marking threat location, with/without comparing images to airway bill, and so forth).
“Eagle7 is a comprehensive training solution from pre-recruitment, through initial training and recurrent training, up until certification and recertification,” he told TSI. “It supports continuous performance analysis highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each screener, so that the training program can be personalized to address individual needs, either automatically, or manually, by the trainer.”
Finally, Renful’s students acquire practical, up-to-date skills and knowledge that make them more effective in their roles, enhancing their ability to face real-world security challenges. “This improved competence leads to better job performance, enabling screeners to carry out their duties more efficiently, which ultimately benefits their employers,” said Vaspori. “For employers, having a better-trained workforce means improved compliance with industry regulations and standards, reducing the risk of non-compliance. Additionally, our courses provide a cost-effective way to train staff, minimizing downtime while maximizing return on investment. The flexibility of remote learning allows employees to complete their training at their own pace, ensuring that productivity is maintained while they enhance their skills.”
The Bottom Line
Computer-based training for airport security screeners is an effective way to create a skilled, knowledgeable, and reliable workforce, on a schedule and with training location that work best for everybody. And it’s not just about compliance. Ultimately, it’s about the safety of all concerned, workers and passengers, moving through the facility.
On Sept. 18, 2024, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantrell, chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, stated cyberattacks on the U.S. aviation industry were up 74% since 2020 during a hearing on aviation cybersecurity threats. The attacks are coming from many directions.
Dr. Jeff Hall, NCC Group
“In the past year, airlines and airports have faced challenges with cloud vulnerabilities and the plethora of shared aviation data,” says Dr. Jeff Hall, principal security consultant and North America aerospace lead for security consultant NCC Group. “With a surge in ransomware attacks targeting airlines and airports, the TSA cybersecurity mandate imposed new requirements for airports and airlines to improve their cybersecurity resiliency. Lastly, Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks targeting airports have become more frequent.”
Philippe Morio, ICAO
Legacy systems and outdated technology also remain under attack. “Many aviation systems, especially those in air traffic control and aircraft operations, are based on legacy technologies that are difficult to secure and update, making them prime targets for cyberattacks,” said Philippe Morio, cybersecurity expert for the International Civil Aviation Organization.
And as supply chains and third-party inclusion expand, cyber hackers are using these targets to find weak spots to attack the aviation industry. “The aviation sector heavily relies on a complex supply chain, including third-party software and service providers,” Morio said. “Attacks on these suppliers, like software supply chain breaches, can have significant downstream effects on airlines and airports.”
A Closer Look
When breaking down the various cyberattacks, the number of vulnerabilities is staggering. But knowing where these weak spots are is crucial to defending them.
As more computing systems rely on the cloud for storage, the more vulnerable they become to cyberattacks. “Cloud environments hosting MBDE (model-based design environment) platforms provide flexibility and scalability but expose critical vulnerabilities in storage, identity management, APIs, networking and backup systems,” Hall said.
Shared aviation data involves many departments as well as third-party providers. This includes ATC systems, supply chain data, airport operations data, aircraft systems, aircraft maintenance data, airline data, frequent flyer and loyalty programs, flight and crew scheduling systems, drone communication networks and weather and navigational data (GPS spoofing and jamming).
GPS spoofing and jamming of weather and navigational data is not widespread across the globe — yet. Hot spots include conflict zones such as the Sinai Peninsula as well as non-conflict zones such as China and Myanmar. Large-scale events such as the Olympics also see a spike in GPS spoofing and jamming at the local level.
“GPS satellites are 12,000 miles up in the sky, GPS spoofers are only 10 miles away from the airplane, so the RF signals that you receive from the satellites are a lot weaker than what’s on the ground,” David Woodcock, principal applications engineer with customer and product support at Honeywell Aerospace, told an Oct. 8 webinar. “Jammers and spoofers overpower the GPS receivers on the aircraft. With regard to GPS spoofing on weather radar, ground returns may be interpreted as weather and vice versa. Incorrect GPS altitude can cause excessive bleed-through or incorrect radar horizon. You’re either too close to everything or everything is too far away.”
In addition, cyber hackers are leveraging artificial intelligence in their attacks. “Artificial intelligence is used for offensive and defensive cybersecurity in the aviation industry,” Hall said. “Criminals are using AI for sophisticated attacks involving phishing and social engineering. In 2019, criminals used an AI-generated voice deepfake to impersonate the CEO of a U.K.-based energy firm and tricked a senior executive into transferring $243,000 to a fraudulent account. In 2023, security researchers found that cybercriminals can exploit AI-powered chatbots like ChatGPT to automate phishing and Business Email Compromise (BEC) attacks.”
Simply put, cyber hackers are using every tool at their disposal to attack the aviation industry.
Fighting Back
Just as cyberattacks are taking many forms, thwarting cyberattacks takes a multi-pronged approach as well.
Lawrence Baker, NCC Group
“The TSA cybersecurity requirements introduced in 2023 focus on network segmentation, access control, continuous monitoring and patching vulnerabilities,” said Lawrence Baker, managing consultant and aerospace technical lead for NCC Group Transport Practice. “Airlines and airports are implementing robust cloud security frameworks and encrypting shared aviation data. Airlines are focusing on solutions to reduce the impact of ransomware attacks, such as backup and disaster recovery measures, system redundancy, and more resilient operational strategies to ensure the continued operation of critical services while under attack. Vulnerability scanning, monitoring and automated defenses are used to protect against DDoS attacks.”
Bringing all of these segments in the aviation industry together in a cohesive manner is required across the industry to tighten cybersecurity. “Collaboration in aviation cybersecurity involves building partnerships across sectors,” Morio said. “Regulatory frameworks, such as ICAO and EASA (European Union Aviation Safety Agency) standards, govern compliance and promote cybersecurity governance within the industry. Information sharing is crucial for exchanging threat intelligence and best practices among stakeholders. Data collaboration enhances situational awareness, while resource sharing pools expertise and tools to strengthen defenses. Together, these elements create a proactive approach to addressing cybersecurity challenges in aviation.”
Members of the aviation industry also are using AI to defend against cyberattacks. “The application of AI for cybersecurity defensive purposes is moving at a rapid pace, as are the commercial offerings using this type of technology,” Baker said. “AI can be used for threat detection and predictive analytics by analyzing traffic in real-time, identifying patterns that may signal a cyberattack, and using machine learning models to learn from previous attacks and detect anomalies.”
Nat Iyengar, Jet Aviation/NBAA
Efforts to stop GPS spoofing and jamming are ongoing, but involve different players, which slows the process. Some solutions are as simple as avoiding areas where GPS spoofing and jamming are prevalent. “The routing you use into the Middle Eastern areas is very important,” Nat Iyengar, National Business Aviation Association International Operations Committee chair and captain at Jet Aviation Business Jets (Hong Kong) Ltd., told an Oct. 8 webinar. “Many come across Egypt and clip the corner of Jordan; you’re guaranteed to get spoofed there. The further south you can stay of the Sinai Peninsula, the better.”
Keep in mind, too, that GPS spoofing and jamming can come from the air and the ground. “Everyone is reporting spoofing when they’re airborne, but beware there are certain areas where that signal may be corrupted on the ground,” Iyengar said. “Be disciplined and check your position information to make sure your IRS isn’t initialized with a bad position.”
Original equipment manufacturers are working to combat GPS spoofing and jamming, but it’s a slow process. “For the OEMs, what they are planning for the future, they have quite a long runway to get those,” Steve Thorpe, director of standards and training and senior captain for Merck Sharp & Dohme, told an Oct. 8 webinar. “They have to do all the testing, do the certifications, get it into the OEMs and get it all approved. Whereas the folks doing the spoofing, if they want to change what they’re doing, it’ll take a week and they’re doing something different. So our hands are tied with the response.”
Business jet manufacturers are working to combat cybersecurity concerns, but it is up to the individual operator to be proactive in combating GPS spoofing and jamming according to members of the NBAA International Operations Committee. Gulfstream image.
As such, it’s up to the individual operator to be proactive in combating GPS spoofing and jamming. “Each operator has to develop their own procedures and understanding of how they’re going to react to terminal area or crew EGPWS warnings,” Iyengar said. “That’s not something an OEM is ever going to come out with guidance and tell you how to do it. That’s something you’re going to have to do yourself.”
When creating that plan, aviation and security personnel need to prioritize specific elements rather than trying to plug all the leaks at once. “They should prioritize network segmentation and access control, continuous monitoring and threat detection, regular patching, and vulnerability management,” Hall said.
This allows them to develop a cyber resilience strategy and establish protocols for damage tolerance and recovery, ensuring that systems can switch to backups or failover to continue functioning during an incident. “Incident response and recovery to restore systems quickly and safely to ensure the continuity of services, training and awareness to reduce human error — which remains one of the weakest links in cybersecurity — and coordination between industry and government agencies like the TSA and CISA are crucial, along with sharing information about new threats and vulnerabilities,” Hall said.
There are still many moving pieces to a cohesive cybersecurity approach as cybersecurity evolves to prevent future attacks. “Cybersecurity is likely to evolve in the near future to prevent attacks through increased integration of AI and machine learning, cyber resilience and redundancy, increased collaboration between government and industry, strengthened cloud security and data protection, incorporated blockchain technology, and using zero trust architectures,” Baker said. “Government regulation and adopting industry standards will improve cybersecurity, but the adoption rate is hard to predict as it depends on lawmakers’ actions. Currently, Europe’s legislation for aviation cybersecurity is further advanced than that of the U.S., for example.”
Maintaining collective awareness and working together to thwart cyberattacks is crucial in the fight against cyberattacks. “Collective efforts will empower us to leverage diverse insights and resources, enhancing our ability to navigate the complexities of today’s security landscape,” Morio said. “Together, we can build a more resilient framework to meet these challenges head-on.”
Now more than ever, effective perimeter fencing is a must for the transportation industry. Threats from thieves, trespassers and unwitting members of the public wandering into danger areas is a serious issue for land, air and sea transport firms/facilities.
Providing effective fencing is what companies such as Jacksons Fencing (www.jacksons-security.co.uk) and RBtec Perimeter Security Systems (www.rbtec.com) are all about. Based in Stowting Common, U.K., Jacksons Fencing has been securing properties since 1947. RBtec has been keeping perimeters safe since 1986, and is headquartered in North Bergen, New Jersey.
Nick Bishenden
“Jacksons Fencing is one of the U.K.’s leading security fencing manufacturers and installers,” said Nick Bishenden, the company’s senior manager. “The transportation facilities sector is a key sector that we work in and have helped revolutionize how to increase security using fencing.”
Dori Ribak
“RBtec provides a perimeter security system for any transportation system; airport, trains, bus depots and such,” said Dori Ribak, the company’s vice president of marketing. “We offer a variety of solutions: We are not a one-size-fits-all company.”
In the following virtual roundtable, TSI asked Bishenden and Ribak about what’s new and different in perimeter fencing. Here is what they told us.
TSI: What advances have been made in perimeter fencing for transportation facilities?
Nick Bishenden: Over the past decade, “smart fencing” technology has evolved significantly. Initially, these systems relied on basic vibration detection sensors attached to fences, which were prone to false alarms. Today, however, we have moved to more sophisticated solutions, such as fully monitored high and low voltage electrified perimeter intrusion detection systems (PIDS), which are now commonly used. These advances have greatly enhanced site security by providing more reliable intrusion detection.
Acoustic fencing is often preferred for its additional benefits in the sector. Acoustic fencing is compatible with PIDS systems and offers several advantages over traditional metal security fences. It not only reduces noise and provides privacy but also minimizes light pollution.
Additionally, acoustic fences are designed without foot or handholds, making them more difficult to climb. This results in longer attack times compared to metal-style fences. Moreover, they are more aesthetically pleasing, which can be a significant factor for sites concerned with their appearance.
This type of fencing is ideal for transport infrastructure that often generates significant environmental noise and has strict requirements for security and privacy.
Dori Ribak: RBtec uses different technologies for different perimeter fencing applications.
For instance, we have small fence sensor kits called IRONCLAD, that are designed for smaller sites, meaning the perimeter is short. They would apply to train depots or small transportation support sites, such as a radar station or something like that, that are not necessarily inside the airport perimeter.
As for large sites? To protect their perimeters, we have a fiber optic system called RaySense AI DAS. RaySense is a distributed acoustic sensing sensor that can monitor up to 60 miles’ worth of perimeter. This means that we can theoretically cover a whole airport with one unit.
RaySense comes in a couple of versions. We have a small version that is up to six miles for smaller parameters and from six miles to 60 miles for the larger.
Then there’s LIDAR. With LIDAR, we can know the depth of the scenery and how far from the sensor the intruder is and which direction they’re walking in. For instance, using a real-time LIDAR image of a train platform, we can see the train and the platform where people are standing. This allows you to detect if someone is jumping or falling, by crossing a line and triggering an alarm.
As far as AI and its use in perimeter security, we employ AI to detect certain frequencies and vibrations. We train the system to know that if this vibration comes in a certain frequency, it’s an intrusion — versus low frequency vibrations due to wind or rain, which are false alarms.
TSI: Are you using AI solely for detection purposes?
Dori Ribak: No. AI has played a huge role in allowing us to set up perimeter fences quickly, instead of having to manually adjust them on a section-by-section basis. Take an airport installation: Using AI, instead of needing a three- to six-week calibration process, we can do it in less than a week.
AI-enabled perimeter fencing is playing a huge role in making those systems more accessible, more reliable and more cost effective, to be honest. If you don’t have to sit down and engineer for a month to calibrate the system, then the overall solution is cheaper as well.
TSI: Overall, how do transportation sites use these kinds of advanced perimeter fencing solutions to protect their premises?
Nick Bishenden: Transportation facilities rarely use these systems in isolation. Instead, they are typically integrated into a comprehensive security strategy that includes perimeter fencing, gate systems, automated gates, and turnstiles. This multi-layered approach significantly strengthens overall security.
TSI: How well have these advances been accepted by the global transportation industry as a whole?
Nick Bishenden: Recent advances have significantly improved site security by providing more reliable perimeter intrusion detection systems (PIDS). Overall, PIDS have greatly benefited the transport sector. Not only do they act as a deterrent to opportunistic attacks, but they also offer a robust barrier for high-security sites, allowing instant CCTV recording and manned security to swiftly respond to breaches within minutes.
Transport hubs and storage facilities have leveraged PIDS to reduce costs and decrease the need for on-site security personnel. In the event of a breach, CCTV can focus on the attack and a remote team can be notified and dispatched to the location, often arriving faster than traditional security guards, who might only be alerted once an intruder has already entered a building or vehicle.
Dori Ribak: Oh, the industry response so far has been amazing. With RaySense, once we introduced the new AI unit, we have had record sales with that system since it came out. AI makes it easy to install, makes it cheaper, and more accessible as a general idea.
TSI: All told, what positive results are being delivered by these advanced fencing products? And what is coming next?
Nick Bishenden: They have significantly enhanced the security of the sector by not only reducing attacks and vandalism but also minimizing damage and theft when sites are targeted.
Security remains a top priority, which means advances in technology and fencing to improve security are inevitable. The future of fencing goes beyond just providing security; we are already seeing this with innovations like our acoustic barriers. Following the successful launch of our solar fence panel range, we envision fences that offer multiple solutions. Imagine a fence that not only enhances the aesthetics of a transport site but also reduces noise and light pollution, provides robust security, and generates solar energy. This is the future of perimeter fencing — multifunctional, sustainable, and innovative.
This being said, in the U.K., “smart fencing” and technology is important but specifying the correct fence for an application is still a problem. Standards such as LPS 1175 have helped but more work is needed to educate architects and specifiers to create a 3D approach where PIDS, the physical fencing, gates, automation, and the likes of Vehicle Access Control Points (VACPs) are specified and all work together to create a layered security approach.
In a press conference on Monday, 28 October 2024, Dominican Republic President Luis Abinader stated that their government does not contemplate allowing regular flights to Haiti “in the near future”.
“We do not plan to change the airspace regulations with Haiti until conditions there are different,” he said while addressing the ongoing security concerns with their neighboring country.
Resolution No. 46-2024, issued by the Civil Aviation Board (JAC) on March 5, 2024, immediately suspended all passenger and cargo operations to and from Haiti.
Haitian Prime Minister Gary Conille reportedly refused to attend the inaugural of President Luis Abinader in August as a protest of the closed airspace.
The decision to close the airspace was prompted by the escalating instability in Haiti, which is currently facing a severe socioeconomic and security crisis, resulting in mass migration and heightened regional concerns, reports say. For now, Abinader says the flight policies will remain unchanged until security is restored in Haiti.
SkySafe and Fortem Technologies introduced a fully integrated solution for drone detection and mitigation aimed at addressing the escalating risk of unauthorized drone incursions. This groundbreaking partnership merges the distinct capabilities of each company, resulting in a powerful, multi-layered airspace security system that is seamless, highly effective, and versatile across a range of applications.
This integrated solution offers unparalleled airspace security by combining SkySafe’s passive RF detection technology with Fortem’s radar-based tracking and mitigation tools, delivering unmatched situational awareness and rapid response capabilities. The platform enables real-time drone detection, identification, tracking, and mitigation with exceptional accuracy and reliability.
Other features of this comprehensive drone detection and mitigation solution include:
RF and Radar-Based Detection: By harnessing the strengths of both RF and radar technologies, the solution provides exceptional detection accuracy and coverage, effectively identifying drones across varying distances and environments.Automated Mitigation: The system includes seamlessly integrated, automated mitigation options that neutralize unauthorized drones in restricted airspaces through controlled safe low/no collateral effect interception and safe landing protocols.Real-Time Intelligence and Control: Featuring an intuitive, centralized interface, operators gain real-time control and monitoring capabilities, enhanced by AI-powered threat assessment tools for swift response.Scalable and Configurable: Built for flexibility, the platform can be tailored to specific operational needs and scaled as airspace security demands evolve.
Designed to safeguard critical infrastructure, public venues, airports, and other sensitive locations, this new system caters to evolving security needs across defense, government, and commercial sectors.”We’re thrilled to partner with Fortem Technologies to deliver this comprehensive drone detection and mitigation solution to the market,” said Melissa Swisher, chief revenue officer at SkySafe. “Our collaboration unites the best in RF and radar-based detection and mitigation, offering our customers unparalleled security.””This partnership with SkySafe allows us to combine our radar and RF technologies, creating a multi-layered approach that significantly enhances detection and mitigation capabilities,” said Matt Quinn, Senior Vice President, North America at Fortem Technologies. “Our clients will benefit from the highest standard of airspace protection available.”This fully integrated solution marks a significant advancement in airspace security, providing organizations with a reliable, versatile, and highly effective response to unauthorized drone activity.
