The Case for Published Standards in Secure Construction
The market cannot scale secure construction through custom narratives alone. It needs published standards, common terms, performance tiers and inspection practices that allow owners to specify protection without inventing a private language every time.
Secure construction is too important to rely on private terminology, inconsistent specifications and vendor-driven claims. The market needs published standards that give owners, designers, insurers and contractors a common language.
Today, an owner seeking a more secure building envelope may encounter a confusing mix of ballistic ratings, forced-entry claims, blast references, antiterrorism guidance, cybersecurity frameworks, perimeter products, shielded rooms and proprietary assemblies. Some of these are valid. Some are incomplete. Few are integrated.
Standards create a market
Clear standards do three things. They define performance. They reduce procurement ambiguity. They allow professionals to compare options without relying on sales language. That is how fire, structural, seismic and energy performance became normal parts of design practice.
Security needs the same maturity. The goal is not to make every facility high-security. The goal is to make security requirements legible and enforceable where risk justifies them.
What standards should cover
- Security basis-of-design documentation.
- Protective envelope performance tiers.
- Forced-entry delay for doors, walls, roofs and penetrations.
- Ballistic and fragment-resistance requirements where applicable.
- Electromagnetic security tiers for sensitive facilities.
- Continuity requirements for power, communications and controls.
- Inspection, maintenance and post-event repair protocols.
- Material substitution controls for tested assemblies.
Avoid the trap of overreach
Standards should be risk-based. A small office building does not need the same requirements as an emergency operations center or substation. Overbroad mandates create resistance and unnecessary cost. Tiered standards allow owners to select a defensible level of protection based on asset value, threat, occupancy, mission and consequence.
The immediate path
Until mature standards emerge, owners should write project-specific security performance criteria. Those criteria should cite recognized sources where applicable, define residual risk and require documentation for assemblies that are claimed to provide protection. The industry should move away from vague “secure facility” language and toward verifiable performance.
Recommended citation
Certanet, “The Case for Published Standards in Secure Construction,” 2026.