When cities host events like the FIFA World Cup or the Olympic Games, the eyes of the world are watching. Behind the scenes, thousands of workers, athletes, dignitaries, and support teams need secure access to stadiums, transport hubs, and operational facilities. Managing identity, verifying credentials, and protecting critical infrastructure is essential to the safety and success of the event. 

Identity Is The New Perimeter 

Traditional security relied on physical checkpoints and visible badges. TodayÔÇÖs events require more. Identity must be verified digitally and seamlessly, often across dozens of locations and systems. Biometric authentication, mobile credentials, and integrated access platforms are transforming the way global events manage security. 

Our designs identity management systems that balance security, speed, and user experience. We integrate facial recognition, fingerprint scanners, QR-code scanning, and mobile ID technologies into platforms that serve both temporary and long-term security needs. 

Proven Expertise On A Global Scale 

Our team has secured high-profile venues, defense facilities, borders, and transit systems across five continents. We have helped cities manage security for military summits, airport expansions, and international sporting events. At the 2022 FIFA World Cup, we supported safe and secure operations across venues, mobility hubs, and temporary infrastructure. 

We bring deep experience in both biometrics and critical infrastructure protection. That dual focus enables us to secure not only who enters a site, but also how core systems like power, water, and transport are monitored and controlled. 

Three Ways We Protect Events And Infrastructure 

Fast, Secure, and Scalable 

Global events require systems that are temporary, yet fully operational. Our designs identity and infrastructure protection solutions that scale up for peak demand and scale down post-event. Every solution is tailored to the host cityÔÇÖs operational, cultural, and regulatory context. 

Our systems support: 

• Multi-language and international credentialing 
• ADA and accessibility compliance 
• Integration with transportation and emergency services 
• Secure mobile and cloud-based administration 

We also provide mobile enrollment kits that allow for on-site credential creation, ideal for remote venues or fast-changing staff rosters. 

Beyond the Event: A Legacy Of Safety 

What we build for an event can continue serving the city long after the final competition. Biometric access systems can become part of long-term airport or stadium security. Credential management platforms can evolve into permanent tools for city agencies and transportation departments. Infrastructure monitoring systems can continue protecting essential services year-round. 

Cities gain: 

• Modernized access control and ID systems 
• Interoperable tools for emergency response and facility management 
• Upgraded security infrastructure for future events 
• Better visibility into who is where, and when 

A Partner In Smart, Secure Operations 

We are trusted by government agencies, defense organizations, and international event planners to protect the most sensitive environments in the world. We combine security engineering, identity science, and system integration to help cities deliver safe, efficient, and resilient operations. 

We collaborate with: 

• Local and national law enforcement 
• Emergency management agencies 
• Venue operators and private security providers 
• Transportation and infrastructure teams 

Our teams are on the ground before, during, and after the event, ensuring that systems work as designed and adapt as needed. 

Ready To Secure The WorldÔÇÖs Biggest Moments 

Every major event is a high-stakes moment for host cities. We deliver the identity and infrastructure protection systems that help make those moments safe, seamless, and successful. From athletes to fans, from staff to leadership, we make sure the right people get where they need to go ÔÇö and the systems behind the scenes stay protected. 

We’re ready to help cities host the world with confidence. 

The post Securing Access, Protecting Infrastructure: Bringing Identity And Safety To The WorldÔÇÖs Biggest Events┬á appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

We reinforced our position as a global leader in counter-unmanned aircraft systems (CUAS) during NATOÔÇÖs CUAS Industry Day at the NATO Alliance Headquarters in Brussels. The event brought together more than 100 representatives from NATO, Allied Nations, and industry partners to address the growing threats posed by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and explore collaborative paths moving forward. The gathering followed the October 2025 NATO Defense MinistersÔÇÖ decision to expand the AllianceÔÇÖs CUAS  capabilities.

Highlighting U.S. Leadership and Open Architecture Innovation

We were represented by Dave Boyd, Security and Mission Solutions sector CTO and CUAS SME, and Trina Lawrence, senior director of CUAS business development. Their participation at this event reflects our strong performance and ongoing innovation across multiple CUAS programs.

Dave Boyd served as a panelist for ÔÇ£Open Architecture and Standardization,ÔÇØ where he addressed NATOÔÇÖs greatest technical challenge of achieving true interoperability and emphasized the critical role it plays in enabling effective collaboration across the defense systems of sovereign nations.

Drawing from our long history of supporting national and international technology standards, Boyd explained, ÔÇ£While many emerging standards define how data and communications protocols are structured, real interoperability also requires a shared understanding of the semantic meaning behind tasks, commands, and sensor behaviors.ÔÇØ

He highlighted NATOÔÇÖs adoption of the UK-developed SAPIENT standard as a significant step toward enabling two-way communication between sensors and command-and-control (C2) systems. Boyd stated, ÔÇ£For standards to truly accelerate deployment and enhance mission readiness, they must be fully vendor agnostic, enabling nations to mix and match sensors, C2 systems, and effectors without relying on proprietary integration or vendor-specific code.ÔÇØ This open-architecture approach ensures that nations can rapidly deploy, replace, or upgrade components, an essential capability in dynamic battlefield environments.

Proven Performance

ParsonsÔÇÖ invitation to participate in NATOÔÇÖs Industry Day was driven in part by recent standout achievements on high-visibility CUAS programs.

CUAS Operations ÔÇô Southern U.S. Border

Our team of experts continues to deliver proven CUAS solutions, including the recent deployment of DroneArmor, ParsonsÔÇÖ military-grade C2 system, at the U.S. southern border. The Technology Readiness Level 9 (TRLÔÇæ9) capability is providing operators with realÔÇætime situational awareness, actionable intelligence, and precise mitigation capabilities against unauthorized or malicious drone activity, protecting personnel, communities, and critical infrastructure.

This work to enhance U.S. national security is one example of our ability to rapidly field and sustain advanced CUAS capabilities in operational environments and is becoming a model for broader federal CUAS missions.

Air Base Air Defense

We have played an active role in advancing NATO’s initiatives for air defense and counter-unmanned aircraft systems. Through our Air Base Air Defense (ABAD) contract with U.S. Air Forces in Europe, we recently delivered an advanced early warning capability for NATOÔÇÖs eastern front, designed to detect and counter both UAS and other airborne threats. Leveraging our open architecture, standards-based approach, we have successfully integrated allied nation sensors into a unified common operating picture (COP) for the theater. Our state-of-the-art cross-domain solutions enable seamless data transfer from unclassified and NATO partner networks to the Air Operations Center (AOC), providing comprehensive, theater-wide situational awareness.

At our Ramstein Air Defense Integration Laboratory (RADSIL), we continue to push the envelope by integrating cutting-edge CUAS technologies, including artificial intelligence and machine learningÔÇôenabled autonomy and advanced target identification. Additionally, we are collaborating closely with USAFE to incorporate advanced, low collateral damage mitigation technologies, ensuring effective countermeasures against the rapidly evolving UAS threat.

OSIS (Overseas Systems Integration Support)

For more than 12 years, we have been instrumental in safeguarding personnel, assets, and U.S. interests at over 265+ diplomatic locations worldwide, including embassies, consulates, and other diplomatic facilities. Through the Overseas Security Installation Services (OSIS II) program, our team delivers a comprehensive suite of technical security solutions, seamlessly integrating advanced automated access control, CUAS, state-of-the-art biometric technologies, and operations support. Each solution is meticulously engineered and customized to meet the Department of StateÔÇÖs dynamic and evolving security requirements.

OSIS II exemplifies our capability to execute full-spectrum engineering, open-architecture integration, advanced analytics, on-site operational support, and long-term sustainment for technical security and CUAS systems across the globe. Managing more than 120 simultaneous projects, OSIS II is recognized as one of the worldÔÇÖs largest and most sophisticated diplomatic security and technical security upgrade and installation initiatives, demonstrating our unwavering commitment to protecting critical U.S. missions and adapting to emerging global threats. These combined achievements formed the foundation for Parsons to represent the U.S. industry on the international stage

Driving The Future Of NATO CUAS Cooperation

NATOÔÇÖs CUAS Industry Day was the culmination of a weeklong series of Allied discussions focused on accelerating CUAS capabilities ahead of multiple major integration exercises planned for 2026.

A Growing Global Footprint

As drone threats grow in complexity and scale, NATO and Allied partners are increasingly turning to leaders capable of delivering open architecture, mission-proven, and rapidly deployable CUAS solutions.

Through our CUAS Center of Excellence and decades of work supporting federal clients and international partners, we continue to deliver the innovation, speed, and integration expertise needed to outpace evolving unmanned threats.

Learn more about our advanced CUAS solutions here.

The post Parsons Showcases CUAS Leadership At NATO Industry Day In Brussels appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

Why NERC CIP Programs No Longer Need Separate Workflow And Monitoring Tools

Electric utilities responsible for NERC CIP compliance must solve two different problems. First, they need reliable compliance workflows. Second, they need accurate technical configuration monitoring. Historically, separate tools handled these needs. However, that choice forced teams to absorb the time, cost, and risk of integrations.

That tradeoff was never theoretical. Integration projects often became long-term operational liabilities. They demanded ongoing maintenance, specialized skills, and constant troubleshooting. Unfortunately, those issues tended to surface during audits.

How We Changed The Model

Originally, SigmaFlow was a purpose-built NERC CIP compliance workflow platform. Today, it has evolved into a single solution that addresses both sides of the challenge. It handles compliance workflow and technical configuration data collection powered by the Beacon agent. Therefore, utilities no longer need multiple tools or fragile integrations to run a defensible, audit-ready program.

Why SigmaFlow Looks Different Today

For organizations that have not reviewed SigmaFlow recently, the platform may look very different now. The change reflects years of focused development and direct audit experience.

At its core, NERC CIP compliance involves two distinct yet connected challenges. Programs must manage compliance workflow, and they must collect configuration data from in-scope assets. Together, these tasks define daily reality for utility teams.

Compliance Workflow And Evidence Management

A significant portion of NERC CIP compliance is nontechnical. Utilities must:

This problem space is well known. However, consistent execution is difficult without purpose-built tooling. SigmaFlowÔÇÖs roots are here.

Technical Configuration Data Collection

Standards such as CIP-010 require accurate, repeatable data collection. Teams must collect, normalize, preserve, and present data from in-scope cyber assets. Therefore, they need a technical approach that is reliable and repeatable.

Historically, utilities met this need with tools built for non-NERC use cases. Those systems lived outside the compliance workflow. Consequently, they required integration to supply evidence.

That integration proved to be the weak link. To close the gap, SigmaFlow now includes native monitoring through the Beacon agent. It is purpose built for NERC CIP configuration data collection.

SigmaFlowÔÇÖs Evolution: One Platform, Both Problems Solved

Over the past several years, SigmaFlow expanded beyond workflow alone. The platform now brings workflow and data collection together.

Today, SigmaFlow includes native capabilities to collect configuration data directly from cyber assets, including:

• A lightweight Beacon agent for Windows and Linux, purpose built to collect what NERC CIP requires out of the box
• Agentless SSH-based collection for network devices and virtual infrastructure

This capability widens asset coverage while staying aligned to compliance needs. It does so without drifting into general IT monitoring.

One Platform, One Process

Therefore, utilities no longer need to deploy two tools and build a fragile bridge between them.

Why This Matters: Eliminating Integration As A Long-Term Risk

Teams often view integration as a one-time cost. In reality, it becomes a permanent operational burden:

• Integrations must be maintained through upgrades
• Data models drift over time
• Ownership between teams becomes unclear
• Troubleshooting evidence gaps becomes harder during audits

By unifying workflow and configuration data collection, SigmaFlow removes this burden. Evidence flows directly from monitored assets via the Beacon agent and agentless collectors into the compliance process.

As a result, programs reduce cost and lower operational risk. Moreover, they become easier to sustain year after year.

A Platform Designed For Audit Reality

SigmaFlow was built from the ground up for NERC CIP. Its architecture reflects lessons from real audits and actual evidence requests. We then added native monitoring components, including the Beacon agent, to extend that design.

Several design choices stand out:

• Audit is built in, not bolted on. Evidence, workflow, and reporting are native to the platform, not stitched together with scripts or external parts.
• Point-in-time reporting from the UI. Teams can generate reports for any point in time directly in the interface. Many legacy platforms need exports, custom scripts, or services.
• Actionable dashboards and charts. Visuals provide immediate visibility into compliance status. Furthermore, teams can drill into evidence and workflow states quickly.

A Modern, Maintainable Platform

SigmaFlow is also newer than many long-established competitors. That modernity shows up in the technology stack.

• Modern, simple architecture. The platform avoids outdated technologies and legacy UI frameworks. It remains maintainable and designed to evolve.
• No bolt-on scripting layer. Core functionality does not depend on external scripts, custom collectors, or one-off integrations to meet NERC CIP use cases.
• Modern skill sets for advanced configuration. Teams use PowerShell and SQL for configuration and extension, not niche or legacy languages.
• Less dependence on heavy professional services. SigmaFlow is designed so internal teams can own daily operation.

Therefore, the platform does not try to be all things to all customers. It remains purpose built for utilities and NERC CIP.

Services That Match The Platform

A Delivery Approach That Reduces Risk

A standout aspect is the approach itself. SigmaFlow builds the solution in our environment first. Then the team transfers the configuration to the customer.

This method lets customers see exactly what they will receive before delivery. Consequently, it reduces surprises, shortens timelines, and lowers risk.

Implementations are offered as fixed-price services by default. Therefore, utilities can budget and plan with fewer unknowns. We accept fixed-price delivery risk because we know the problem space well. Moreover, we have refined a repeatable approach.

Focused Expertise, Backed By Stability

SigmaFlow has spent more than a decade focused on NERC CIP. That singular focus matters with a framework as specific and unforgiving as this one.

More recently, SigmaFlow became part of Parsons, bringing together innovative digital capabilities with more than 80 years of infrastructure experience, global reach, and deep support for critical systems.

The result is a rare balance:

• A small, agile team focused entirely on NERC CIP
• The financial stability and operational backing of a large, established parent company

For utilities, that combination delivers innovation and confidence.

Why Look Again Now

For many utilities, the name SigmaFlow is familiar. However, the capability may be new to them today.

What began as a workflow platform has become a unified NERC CIP execution solution. It eliminates separate workflow and monitoring tools. It reduces integration risk and aligns technology, services, and audit reality in one place. With the Beacon agent, SigmaFlow reaches into your assets and automates data collection. Meanwhile, it keeps workflows and evidence in a single, audit-ready platform.

If you are reassessing your NERC CIP tooling strategy, consider this question. Have you seen what SigmaFlow can do lately? See the platform in action and explore how SigmaFlow simplifies NERC CIP execution. Request a personalized demo today.

Learn more about SigmaFlow here.

The post Have You Seen SigmaFlowÔäó Lately? appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

When boots are on the ground in a crisis, a split-second interruption in communication can be the difference between a first responder hearing ÔÇ£shootÔÇØ when the order was ÔÇ£DonÔÇÖt shoot.ÔÇØ That is why an up-to-date and operationally robust Public Safety Radio System is essential to maintaining the high standards of reliability and quality of service that mission-critical operations demand. At Parsons, our decades of experience in engineering and maintaining these systems have put us in the driver’s seat in the evolution and challenges of radio system networks. Conversations with our customers on their networks tend to start out the same way. So, we wanted to distill our years of expertise into five key lessons to help anyone in the business maintain public safety communications systems and stay up and running.

What makes a Public Safety radio system networks unique? 

The first use of radio for public safety use came from the Detroit Police Department in 1921. It was an experiment by a pioneering commissioner ÔÇô and it was a failure. It was not until 1928 that the basic system became functional and usable, setting in motion the eventual adoption of radio communications by every police department and emergency services organization in the nation. It also set in motion decades of innovation and change in radio technology. Radios became more portable, reliable, and affordable. Systems became more functional and stable. New capabilities emerged such as the ability to carry digital data. Nowadays, these radio networks resemble the large service provider networks of cellular carriers (e.g. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc.) where reliability, quality of service and diverse functionality is critical. And still today, LMR remains the best way to deliver highly reliable, mission critical mobile communications ÔÇô especially in difficult environments. Ultimately, itÔÇÖs the mission of these networks and the requirements surrounding that mission that makes them unique and why land mobile radio remains the primary technology in use. Public safety requires uptime and performance requirements that far exceed those of ordinary mobile service providers ÔÇô and most other network providers as well. As a result, their design, engineering, and support requirements also surpass their cellular service provider brethren. 

Recent Trends in the Radio Communication Industry 

Even though radio communication networks have been around for a century, they continue to evolve and adapt with the changing needs of their users and technological advances. There are two major trends that are worth noting today in the industry. First, if you operate a radio network, you are aware of the convergence of network backhaul and internet protocol (IP) technologies over the past 20 years. The backhaul represents a key component of most LMR systems and is usually where your radio network and your IP network come together. This in turn means that cybersecurity challenges faced by most IP networks are also encountered by radio operators. So as cybersecurity threats continue to increase, radio operators need to further invest in adapting how they protect their network.  

A second trend worth noting is the shift towards Software Defined Networks (SDNs). A SDN leverages either software-based controllers or application programming interfaces (APIs) to communicate with hardware infrastructure and direct traffic through the network. As opposed to legacy networksÔÇöwhich use dedicated hardware for point-to-point connectionsÔÇö an SDN can create and control virtual networks via software components. SDNs present a new model for performance monitoring and management and represent a new challenge to identifying and troubleshooting issues in a mission critical network. 

5 Lessons Learned In Maintaining Public Safety Radio Networks 

We have been involved in design, engineering, implementing, and maintaining backhaul networks for decades and we have learned a lot along the way. The following are five key lessons Parsons has learned that you can apply to your own operational processes. 

1. Weak spots occur in the transport between elements (sites or devices)

For starters, the physical elements of radios and radio towers are hardly ever the source of your pain points. That is because radios are comparable to tanksÔÇöthey are nearly indestructible, and it is a rare occasion that one would ever break. Therefore, the weak spots are really found in the transport between elements (such as microwave or fiber). For example, errors can be introduced whenever microwaves are affected by the weather, the trees, or even buses in transit. These sorts of variables have a direct impact on wireless communication systems, though weather is often a primary culprit. With that in mind, itÔÇÖs safe to say weaknesses in communication stem from the intangible transport of information, rather than the physical components you use to facilitate this process. 

Key Takeaway: Instead of purchasing new repeaters radio sets, look to upgrade or add redundancy to the transport equipment in your network. 

2. You can never have too much redundancy 

A golden rule in building radio networks is that you can never have too many points of failures.. Multiple paths are a key tenet of highly available networks – and even though multiple paths are always designed into these networks, they are often under-engineered. Yes, two paths are technically ÔÇÿmulti-pathÔÇÖ, but the tradeoff here will often impact reliability and performance at some point. Most often we see operators avoiding the complexity associated with multiple paths concerned that it will trigger problems or be too difficult to and maintain. In practice, however, this is rarely the case and having more options within the routing infrastructure is a stabilizing factor. 

Key takeaway: Do not shy away from adding some complexity in search of more stability and reliability. 

3. Quality of Service is everything 

ItÔÇÖs tough to overstate the importance of Quality of Service (QoS). To put it lightly, QoS is everything. A strong QoS is one that prioritizes voice traffic and allows public safety radio system backhaul networks to be multifunctional. With these features in tow, the Quality of Service for radio networks will no doubt exceed that of other network backhaul technology. A focus on quality can deliver highly consistent and reliable results, as well as reducing the chance of inaccuracies or disruptions that might crop up along your network. In addition, Quality of Service is essential in providing an excellent experience for each customer. 

Key takeaway: Make sure you benchmark, measure and work to improve your QoS. 

4. Highly redundant, multipath networks often hide issues 

The idea that highly redundant networks often hide issues may seem contradictory to the notion that you can never have too much redundancy. And yet, this is the paradox that exists within most public safety radio networks, since both sentiments are inherently true. Because LMR networks work so well, when a transient failure occurs you might not even notice the issue right away. 

Surfacing problems is difficult because the systems are designed to fail-over and recover so fast via the high redundancy, and that when something goes wrong, those errors do not really surface to the radio system operator or owner. All those amazing benefits that redundancy has to offer will also trigger a substantial issueÔÇöin that when you do have problems resulting from the weather (etc.), they are typically not visible to the LMR operator. But thatÔÇÖs exactly where Quality of Service comes back into play. Engineering good backhaul networks with prioritized voice LMR voice traffic allows the abundant capacity to not only be multifunctional, but to carry out other services and systems across the same networks, as well. 

Key takeaway: Even though you may not be alerted to problems does not mean your network is not experiencing important errors that you cannot see 

5. Tracking down backhaul issues that show themselves in the radio system network is notoriously difficult 

Tracking down backhaul issues that have surfaced in the LMR network is a major challenge. This difficulty stems from the fact that the tools monitoring these backhaul systems are not correlated to the LMR network in any way. And manually trying to link cause/effect between the system is almost impossible. Making this more difficult is the typical backhaul network manager software is not designed for a radio technician. As an example, the VendorÔÇÖs standard system monitoring software generates a ÔÇ£degraded sitelinkÔÇØ message (excessive jitter) at 3:05 am. Radio techs see the error and want to see where it happened. You would need backhaul monitoring that tracked the same data from the backhauls perspective and keep a timestamp to correlate the LMR with the Backhaul errors. 

Key takeaway: Look for tools that make it easier to correlate these issues on both sides of the network. Hint: only Parsons offers a solution to this problem. 

Wrapping up 

As you are thinking through all the requirements and responsibilities of building an LMR backhaul network, keep in mind that you need to build one with the same technology that is driving large scale carriers. This means creating a highly available network that has fast recovery, and that respects the seriousness (and urgency) of your data. More specifically, you will want to establish a network that prioritizes your public safety traffic, provides QoS, and is still adaptable to transport non-LMR systems.  

LetÔÇÖs face it: most network management tools that monitor the backhaul of public safety systems are expensive and difficult to use. But what is worse, is that these operational difficulties result in more time to resolve issues than is acceptable for critical communication networks. A faster and more functional path forward is needed, to be sure. Fortunately, Parsons has designed an innovative platform that exceeds the capabilities of these other tools and helps you to operate much more efficiently. 

The post Mastering Land Mobile Radio (LMR) Backhaul Networks: Essential Lessons From Decades Of Experience  appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Land Mobile Radio (LMR) systems are critical communications networks used by public safety agencies that provide a dedicated means of connecting first responders in real-time where every second counts during emergency situations.

A reliable backhaul network is crucial for ensuring always-available communications between first responders, improving situational awareness, and ultimately saving lives. Maintaining these backhaul networks for LMR communications requires proactive monitoring of Quality of Service (QoS) as well as rapid fault detection allowing for quicker resolution of issues.

LMR systems have rigorous requirements for parameters such as latency, jitter, and packet loss. These systems also have extremely fast convergence requirements, which present unique challenges for monitoring and maintenance.

In my previous article, we discussed the purpose of the network backhaul in LMR communications and reviewed the transition of traditional Time-Division Multiplexing (TDM) backhaul to Internet Protocol (IP) backhaul methods. In this article, weÔÇÖll further explore the issues and challenges that radio operators commonly face while maintaining the backhaul supporting their LMR networks, and how monitoring is a critical yet difficult component of maintaining reliable communications.

Degraded Site Links

In the context of network backhaul, site links refer to the connections between radio sites and a centralized radio core or master site. When a site link is degraded, it may result in reduced data rates, increased latency, and reduced voice quality.

A degraded site link can be caused by several factors, including weather conditions (such as heavy rainfall or snow), equipment malfunctions, or interference from other radio frequencies. Degraded site links can have a ripple effect on the rest of the network, causing congestion and reduced performance across the entire network.

One of the primary challenges associated with degraded site links is that they can be difficult to detect and diagnose. The exact cause of the degradation may not be immediately apparent, and it can be challenging to isolate the specific link or equipment that is causing the issue.

To address this issue, network administrators need to implement robust network monitoring and maintenance practices to detect and remediate these degradations quickly. This requires real-time monitoring and reporting on the networkÔÇÖs performance of both the LMR and the backhaul. They also must have backup systems in place to ensure continuity of communication in the event of link degradation.

Adaptive Modulation Inconsistency

Adaptive modulation is a technique commonly used on site links to adjust the modulation scheme and bandwidth of transmitted data based on the quality of the point-to-point wireless link. It allows for better spectral efficiency and increased data rates over wireless links, however adaptive modulation also brings additional challenges to LMR systems.

One of the primary challenges with adaptive modulation is maintaining a consistent QoS while changing the modulation scheme. When the wireless link experiences interference or variations in signal strength, the system may switch to a lower modulation scheme to maintain a reliable link. However, this can result in a decrease in data rate and voice quality. Conversely, switching to a higher modulation scheme when the link improves can increase the data rate but may result in more errors and reduced reliability.

Finally, adaptive modulation may also be affected by the environment, such as weather and atmospheric conditions, which can impact the quality of the wireless link. These environmental impacts can be transitory, and therefore may result in frequent modulation adjustments.

]Overall, the challenges associated with adaptive modulation require network administrators to carefully monitor the wireless link conditions, select the appropriate modulation scheme based on the signal strength, and optimize the network configuration to maintain a consistent quality of service. Building a backhaul network that prioritizes LMR traffic at the highest level will maximize uptime as adaptive modulation is employed.

Equipment Failure

Equipment failures are another common problem network administrators face, and they can significantly impact the functionality and performance of the network. Equipment failures can be caused by a variety of factors, including power outages, component failures, and physical damage.

Power outages can occur due to weather events, grid failures, or other reasons. They can cause equipment to shut down or fail, resulting in network downtime and disruption to communications. To mitigate the impact of power outages, network administrators can utilize backup power systems, such as generators or battery backups, however, these systems are often costly to implement.

Component failures can occur from wear and tear (aging equipment) or manufacturing defects. Components such as power supplies, transmitters, and receivers can fail, leading to reduced performance or complete failure of the network. Network administrators need to implement regular maintenance practices, including equipment inspections, to identify and replace faulty components before they cause disruptions to the network.

Finally, physical damage to equipment can be caused by environmental factors like weather, vandalism, or accidents. Physical damage can impact the functionality of the equipment, leading to reduced performance or complete failure. Network administrators need to ensure that equipment is located in secure locations and protected from potential physical damage.
No matter the cause of the equipment failure, itÔÇÖs important that network administrators are able to quickly identify the network issue and the failed component. Regular testing and monitoring of the networkÔÇÖs performance can also help identify potential issues before they cause disruptions to communications. Having spare equipment on hand is a must for every component in the network.

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity is a critical consideration for network backhaul. They are vulnerable to cyberattacks that can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of network communications. This is especially true in IP backhaul with remote access functionality, as they utilize standard communication protocols and are often connected to the wider internet. This makes them more vulnerable to cyber-attacks than a legacy backhaul that may have had the ability to utilize air gapping (i.e. physical isolation) from other networks.

The issue of cybersecurity in network backhaul is complex and continuously evolving. As such, we will further explore this topic in a subsequent post (stay tuned)!

Monitoring Network Backhauls

One common theme throughout these challenges is the importance of monitoring and identifying the sources of issues in a timely (and ideally proactive) manner. Monitoring network backhaul in LMR systems can be a difficult task due to several factors, including:

1. Performance metrics: LMR networks must maintain rigorous performance requirements, such as latency, jitter, and packet loss, that must be met for reliable communication. LMR OEM monitoring tools may have difficulty accurately measuring and reporting on these performance metrics in real-time to identify potential issues before they affect communication quality.
2. Unique network architecture/protocols: LMR network architecture can be unique and complex, with multiple interconnected network elements such as base stations, repeaters, and routers. Additionally, the LMR Network backhaul often uses specialized configurations and routing schemes. This can make it challenging for traditional network monitoring technologies to monitor packet loss and identify the root cause of network issues.
3. Limited data points: Traditional network monitoring technologies typically rely on metrics such as network traffic, bandwidth utilization, and error rates to detect and diagnose network issues. In LMR systems, these metrics are not sufficient to identify root cause, which can occur at different points in the communication chain and may not be readily visible through standard network monitoring tools.

Addressing The Challenges In Network Backhaul

As weÔÇÖve discussed, Network backhaul plays a crucial role in ensuring that LMR systems function reliably and efficiently, and that there are a number of challenges that make monitoring them difficult.

To overcome these challenges, specialized monitoring tools and techniques may be required that are specifically designed for LMR systems. These tools may include software, hardware, and protocols that are tailored to the unique characteristics of LMR systems and can provide comprehensive monitoring and analysis of network backhaul performance.

WeÔÇÖve built Cyberzcape NMS to help network administrators and radio operators of critical LMR infrastructure solve their biggest stability challenge: identifying and resolving issues that are tied to your backhaul.

The post Common Challenges With LMR Backhaul appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Land Mobile Radio (LMR) systems are critical in public safety organizations. Reliable and clear communications are necessary for groups such as firefighters, medical personnel, and rescue teams to operate effectively.

Advances in technology and gaps found in traditional LMR systems have spurred the process of modernizing these systems. For example, LMR system providers and microwave transport providers have led the move to discontinue traditional Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) telecommunication services and standardize the use of Internet Protocol (IP) for voice and data communications.

As a result of initiatives such as these, LMR systems have begun a transition towards packetization, which involves using IP instead of traditional TDM technology. This shift has led to the need for IP backhauls capable of supporting mission-critical networks. These backhauls prioritize packet quality over quantity and emphasize Quality of Service (QoS), latency, and jitter control in their design.

In this article, weÔÇÖll explore the purpose of the network backhaul in LMR communications, review TDM and IP networks, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the backhaul transition.

The Basics Of LMR And Backhaul

Land Mobile Radio (LMR) systems are a standard communication technology utilized by organizations that require instantaneous communication between personnel that are mobile and geographically dispersed. LMR Is typically used by public organizations such as emergency medical personnel, fire departments, and police, though private organizations also use LMR for activities such as construction and operations.

In the context of a communication network, a backhaul refers to the link between the core network and sub-networks existing on the network edge. The backhaul is responsible for the transportation of data between access points. As such, the backhaul is a critical component in QoS and network performance.

Historically, the network backhaul has been based on TDM services. TDM requires specialized equipment but has been a robust and reliable technology. However, there is a concentrated push to IP-based network backhauls to enable several key advantages.

To understand the benefits and concerns of transitioning the LMR backhaul, itÔÇÖs important to understand the differences between the traditional TDM and modern IP technologies.

Traditional Time-Division Multiplexing

TDM has been the primary technology behind the backhaul for LMR systems for a few decades. TDM uses time to separate data streams from a transmitter into segments with very short durations. Each individual data stream can then be reassembled at the receiver based on the timing.

TDM in LMR communications is a proven technology, having been used extensively for public safety organizations. In fact, TDM was first developed in the late 1800s, with Bell Labs further developing the technology in the 1960s. Using TDM as a backhaul for LMR requires specialized equipment, and acts as a relatively independent network once operating. This comes with advantages, such as a lack of external interference and cybersecurity risks. However, this also means that the failure of a single piece of equipment could bring the entire network down.

Packetization Using Internet Protocol

At a high level, IP communications in LMR means transmitting radio communications over an IP connection. This is sometimes referred to as Radio over Internet Protocol (RoIP). RoIP is similar to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) communications utilized widely in businesses and by individuals today, but with radio-specific communication functionality built in, such as half-duplex mode, push-to-talk, and digital-to-analog converting capabilities.

Though there are many topologies that can be used in IP communications, Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) is the topology of choice for LMR backhauls because it offers inherent fault tolerance and fast convergence.

Compared to TDM, IP backhauls are a relatively new concept, with implementations starting in the late 1990s. Due to advantages including lower capital costs, MPLS has been quickly gaining popularity in the communications industry.

Advantages Of Changing To The IP Backhaul

Considering the traditional reliance of LMR systems on TDM technology, why is there a push to move to IP backhauls? Utilizing IP backhaul has some significant potential advantages over the traditional TDM approach.

The advantages of IP over TDM may include:

• Higher Capacity ÔÇô available bandwidth is greater
• Flexibility ÔÇô Utilize unused bandwidth for non-LMR purposes
• Lower Setup And Operational Costs ÔÇô TDM requires expensive/specialized equipment to implement properly, whereas an IP backhaul would allow users to select from a wide variety of less expensive equipment or software applications.
• Higher Reliability ÔÇô TDM systems have single points of failure (i.e. specialized equipment) that could render the system virtually useless in the event of a disaster or equipment failure. Utilizing an IP backhaul allows for more redundancy. In the event that the main communication pathway goes down, it is relatively simple to redirect communication through another IP network path.
• Low-Latency ÔÇô Mission-critical information flows, especially in emergency situations, must be transmitted in real-time with no delay. Low latency is required from all network equipment and interacting with and all the way through the transport network.
• Enhanced Diagnostics, Faster Remediation ÔÇô By virtue of the greater ability to capture the quality of service parameters, pinpointing failures is available in real-time. This makes restoration possible much more quickly.
• Future-Ready While Supporting Legacy ÔÇô During the migration phase, backhaul networks will need to be flexible to support simultaneously TDM and Ethernet in the migration phase. Over time, they will need to migrate smoothly to all-Ethernet with support for remaining TDM services.

Concerns With The Backhaul Change

As with any technology change, there are challenges and concerns with moving to IP-based network backhauls. Though these concerns are not insurmountable, they are potentially significant and require serious consideration when planning a backhaul migration. These challenges may include:

• QoS Issues ÔÇô Anyone who has been on a VoIP call and had connectivity issues knows that internet communications are not always perfect. Dropped packets or network slowdown can lead to latency and connectivity issues. Though these issues may be a minor inconvenience for personal use, they can cause failures in a public safety LMR network.
• Network Management Complexity ÔÇô Most network monitoring tools are designed for complex IP networks, but not specifically designed with LMR in mind. LMR operators require simple, concise, and actionable information to maintain critical communications. Combined with operator skillset gaps, most ÔÇ£off-the-shelfÔÇØ monitoring tools wonÔÇÖt work for LMR operations.
• Network Troubleshooting/Operations ÔÇô Shifting from specialized radio equipment to IP-based networks brings a significant change in communications operations technology. Traditional radio operators may not have the network engineering background necessary to troubleshoot communications issues. Organizations may need to invest significantly in training and hiring specialized personnel to support the backhaul transition.
• Cybersecurity ÔÇô Perhaps one of the greatest risks facing a shift to the IP backhaul is the issue of cybersecurity. Any data transmitted using an open protocol like IP faces the risk of cybersecurity threats, and radio communications would be no exception. Traditional radio networks had the advantage of utilizing ÔÇ£air gappingÔÇØ, which ensures network security through physical isolation from unsecured networks. However, the use of IP-based networks removes the ability to rely on air gapping as a sufficient cybersecurity measure. As such, more robust cybersecurity protection will be a critical requirement for LMR systems using IP backhauls.

Stay tuned for the next blog post on this topic! WeÔÇÖll dive further into the common issues encountered in an IP communications system, and how you can identify them.

The post Understanding Your LMR Backhaul appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Over the last two decades, the rapid advancement of technology has presented challenges for cybersecurity. As the world becomes more and more interconnected, the frequency of major cyber-attacks has increased, and the impacts of these attacks have grown. Much of the focus for cyber-attacks has been on the DoD and the impact on the military and government. We are a leading supplier of cybersecurity and operation technology security for the US government and many intelligence communities, but cyber-attacks arenÔÇÖt specific to government agencies. With that, we are branching out to provide Critical Infrastructure with the same level of cybersecurity we provide the US government.

The impact cyberattacks have on Critical Infrastructure impacts the global economy. Additionally, it impacts public and national security through industries like aviation, mass transportation, medical care, construction, and electricity, water, finances, food, and agriculture; the list of how a cyber-attack can impact our daily lives is extensive.

Our teamÔÇÖs real-world experience ensures we arenÔÇÖt just speaking about theory, best practices, tools, challenges, and risk-we really do live them every day on the cyber battlefield. One of the keys to becoming an integral part of any organizationÔÇÖs cyber defense is that our Chief Information Officer runs our cyber engagements by leveraging our global IT operational capabilities. 

One of the things weÔÇÖve learned is incorporating a shared ownership mindset with our customers as we develop programmatic, risk-based solutions to continuously improve the cybersecurity posture against a dynamic and ever-changing threat. Our holistic Cyber IT and OT programs incorporate a phased approach to baseline cybersecurity and functionality goals and standards, assess current networks, and identify potential vulnerabilities and design, and implement mitigations to improve a networkÔÇÖs security posture continuously and programmatically.  In many cases, IT supports Operational Technology. While IT uses computers to create, process, store, and exchange electronic data and information, OT is hardware and software that detects or causes a change, through the direct monitoring and/or control of industrial [physical process] equipment, assets, processes, and events.

Based on the industry best practices that align with our customerÔÇÖs security requirements, we work with customers to tailor this process to their needs. Meetings are conducted to address issues, develop reviews, prepare for the risk management process, and determine the baseline.

Our approach to Critical Asset Protection includes a cybersecurity Compliance Analysis based on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) risk management framework (RMF) for cybersecurity as well as a reliability and resilience assessment based on design/build specifications for critical infrastructure.  If the customer has not applied a formal RMF to all systems, our team can provide a reference set of security controls and implementations, based on guidance in NIST Special Publications 800-53 and 800-171, which we apply as the basis of a Cybersecurity Assessment.  We also refer to UFC 4-010-06 Cybersecurity of Facility-Related Control Systems as this standard is widely used in US critical installations. This approach is used to determine and develop a risk-based baseline that represents the security goal for the networks and systems analyzed.

Cybersecurity history has shown that it is unlikely that all attacks can be avoided. Therefore, if attacked, we are well-positioned to apply best practices: quickly identify the attack, immediately respond by applying a carefully crafted incident response plan, recover to full operation as soon as practical, and adjust normal operations to add mitigations to the type of attack experienced. We understand that many customers effectively operate 24 hours a day, 365/366 days a year, but to operate in this fashion, our customers must also be resilient. Our risk-based approach helps establish the organization, policies, procedures, tools, and techniques to achieve success in cybersecurity operations.

The post Protecting Our Nation’s Infrastructure Cybersecurity appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

Our world is one of connections. Many of our connections, particularly in the world of pandemics, are virtual. FaceTime, Zoom, email, text ÔÇô connections made possible by technology ÔÇô are also at risk of cyberattack.

As gateways to cities, airports are critical connectors of people and communities. And airports and airlines, just like people, rely on connections made possible by technology to control security, keep passengers comfortable, refueling planes, and make sure baggage gets where it needs to go (most of the time!).

With those connections in mind, the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) has introduced new cybersecurity mandates to airport and airline operators to improve cybersecurity incident reporting and increase the cyber security of connected air systems.

TSA defines a cybersecurity incident as:

An event that, without lawful authority, jeopardizes, disrupts or otherwise impacts, or is reasonably likely to jeopardize, disrupt or otherwise impact, the integrity, confidentiality, or availability of computers, information or communications systems or networks, physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by computers or information systems, or information resident on the system. This definition includes an event that is under investigation or evaluation by the airport operator as a possible cybersecurity incident without final determination of the eventÔÇÖs root cause or nature (such as malicious, suspicious, benign).

What do airport security coordinators and airport directors need to consider as they work to prevent incidents while being prepared if they happen? With combined decades of experience anticipating and neutralizing cyber threats, our cyber experts offered some advice to airports and airlines working to comply with the new TSA requirements.

1. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) offers an excellent starting point with its Cybersecurity Framework. Designed to help organizations better understand their risks and improve their security, the framework includes five key points ÔÇô identify risks, assets, and environment; protect data, control access, train employees, and maintain equipment; detect anomalies and events with continuous security monitoring; respond with communications, analysis, mitigation, and improvements; and recover by learning from the incident and improving systems moving forward.
2. As with anything, start from one: identify. Ask yourself and your team some questions ÔÇô and if you donÔÇÖt know the answers, start by finding them.
   • Do you know if there is a cybersecurity person at your airport? If there is, do you know who? WhenÔÇÖs the last time you sat down for a chat?
   • Are cyber ops integrated into your emergency management plans? If you donÔÇÖt have an incident response plan (IRP) yet, thatÔÇÖs a good place to start.
   • Who manages IT and OT systems or networks at your airport? What security technologies do you have in place to monitor and report cybersecurity incidents?

Do you need help managing cybersecurity at your airport? Our team has aviation and cyber experts at the ready to help you understand your needs and design a system unique to your airport.

The post Strengthening Cyber Protections For Airports And Airlines appeared first on Parsons Corporation.

We are living in an age of accelerated digital transformation. This high-tech progression is wonderful for maintaining human connections and increasing efficiency and sustainability as people continue working, networking, and celebrating remotely.

However, this digital transformation also significantly increases our reliance on technology and data, creating opportunities for greater cyberattacks ÔÇô with critical infrastructure being the most vulnerable. This ever-evolving advancement calls for higher proactive efforts to protect critical infrastructure systems like water processing, energy networks, and fuel pipelines. Cyberattacks on national infrastructure threaten economic security and infrastructure assets and impact public safety and health.

The biggest challenge is that 85% of critical infrastructure is privately owned. There is no enforcement, incentivization, or penalization for not being cyber secure. This is very concerning since most of these privately-owned companies deliver vital services to the public.

In February 2021, a hacker was able to access the water supply and change the toxicity level of the drinking water at a facility that treats water for about 15,000 people near Tampa, Florida. This cyber-attack happened not once but twice. The potential consequences of a successful attack of this nature could have been catastrophic and potentially life-threatening to the local community.

In May 2021, the Colonial Pipeline, the largest refined products pipeline in the U.S., which delivers almost half of the diesel and gasoline consumed on the East Coast, was forced to shut down due to a cyber-attack. ÔÇ£Depending on the duration, the supply shock could leave the region with widespread fuel shortages,ÔÇØ said Michael Tran, RBC CapitalÔÇÖs director of Global Energy Strategy.

The question is ÔÇô how vulnerable are we as a society in the face of critical infrastructure cyber-attacks?

The gas and water sectors are just two of many critical infrastructure industries at risk. A prolonged and widespread cyber-attack on the energy sector would cause repercussions to other essential industries, including medical, public transportation, banking services, and even the logistics like food supply chains.

Cybersecurity must become a priority for the critical infrastructure industry. Improving the cybersecurity of our infrastructure addresses the fortification of our national security and the continued health of our communities.

Cyber threats and ransomware attacks have spiked in the past five years, especially throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, due to more services moving parts of their business online. However, unlike in the past, these cyber threats appear to be more directed at destruction rather than criminal activity for monetary profit. This is no surprise with geopolitical tensions rising and hackers having additional access to evolving technology.

Historically weÔÇÖve looked at cyber threats/hackers as binary. When defending against them, we must be right all the time, but the hacker only needs to be right once. This new way of thinking, also known as zero trust, assumes that hackers will always get in, and we must learn to operate securely in a hostile or compromised environment. ItÔÇÖs like building a commercial ship: you design it to work even if the hull has been breached.

The Department of Defense (DoD) mandates strong cybersecurity practices and information sharing. However, that requirement does not currently exist within critical infrastructure. The critical infrastructure industry must follow the DoD model for minimum security standards and be regularly held accountable through auditing and enforcement.

The cyber threat is not new, but it is rapidly evolving, and the industry must accept that legacy security models are no longer adequate. We must adapt. ItÔÇÖs important to explore the hindrances that define the current state of affairs.

Reliance on industry to self-perform security without proper incentive and directive has resulted in inactivity. In addition, the private sectorÔÇÖs access to the tools needed to identify and prevent these attacks is limited by legal and administrative constraints. Lastly, the governmentÔÇÖs capabilities are dispersed across various agencies and departments, which adds to the complexity of the current environment.

In March 2020, a U.S. Information Technology company, SolarWinds, was targeted by a cyberattack that went undetected for several months. SolarWinds provides services to government agencies such as DHS, DOE, NNSA, NASA, some areas of the Pentagon, and the U.S. Treasury. Major organizations like Microsoft, Cisco, and Intel were also attacked in this hack that no one saw the attack coming. Consequently, it went undetected for many months. The very nature of this attack caused immense time, effort, and resources to secure networks again.

In response, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is investigating these attacks to bolster cyber protection. In May 2020, the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB) was created to determine the fallout of the SolarWinds attack on government agencies and how Critical Infrastructure industries must protect their networks from growing vulnerabilities. 

The CSRB comprises fifteen cyber leaders from government and Critical Infrastructure. According to Katie Moussouris, founder of Luta Security and one of the members of CSRB, ÔÇ£It [is] instrumental [to] strengthen our resilience in the face of cyber incidents that affect public and private sectors with increasing frequency.ÔÇØ

One positive area that came from this massive attack is the renewed need for the U.S. government and Critical Infrastructure industries to pull together their resources and fight attacks happening now and in the future. By pooling resources together, changes in cybersecurity create new ways to get out in front of cyberattacks. As the clich├® goes, it isnÔÇÖt a matter of if. ItÔÇÖs a matter of when. 

Any investments in modernizing critical infrastructure must make cybersecurity mandatory, especially as the U.S. administration continues to roll out the new infrastructure bill passed in late 2021. There will never be enough money to secure our infrastructure fully, but increased accountability and partnership will help. Unfortunately, we donÔÇÖt have a choice. The threat is real, and it is here.

The post Critical InfrastructureÔÇÖs Massive Cyber Risk appeared first on Parsons Corporation.