Security Design Lab
Physical security simulation
Physical security analysis

Know how your
security system
performs.

Security Design Lab builds a working model of your facility and security system, then runs the analysis your team needs — coverage mapping, design validation, vulnerability assessment, or response planning. Decisions based on evidence, not fragmented drawings.

From facility files to defensible findings in hours, not weeks.

Portfolio audits · Design reviews · Vulnerability assessments · Response planning

When the security decision matters, test it first.
SDL supports four decisions where working from drawings and documents alone leaves too much untested.
01 / Coverage analysis
Map camera coverage gaps

Give us the floor plan, the camera feeds, camera list, or VMS export. We tell you where you cannot see.

  • Upload floor plan and camera data — SDL maps what cameras actually see
  • Identifies blind spots and uncovered zones across the facility
  • Produces a per-facility remediation plan with prioritized recommendations
  • Fully remote — no site visit required, repeatable as systems change
02 / Design validation
Validate a design

Validate whether the proposed security system performs as intended before construction, retrofit, or budget approval.

  • Compare cameras, sensors, barriers, access points, and response assumptions in one view
  • Check whether device placement and detection zones comply with company or industry standards
  • Identify what performs and what falls short before anything is built or approved
  • Show exactly what is gained or lost when scope is reduced or value engineered out
03 / Vulnerability assessment
Assess an existing site

Find the routes, blind spots, and response gaps an adversary would exploit before a live test or incident exposes them.

  • Identify weak entries, exposed paths, and single points of failure across the facility
  • Check whether installed systems meet company or industry security standards
  • Find response gaps before a live test or incident exposes them
  • Prioritize upgrades or operational changes based on actual findings
04 / Response planning
Test a response plan

Evaluate high consequence scenarios that are too costly, disruptive, or unsafe to rehearse live.

  • Evaluate lockdowns, active threats, vehicle approaches, evacuation, and crowd movement
  • Test plans under changing assumptions without disrupting operations or staff
  • Show exactly where response breaks down and under what conditions
  • Build evidence for leadership decisions on resource allocation and protocol changes
Physical security decisions are still made from fragmented evidence.
Camera coverage sits in one drawing. Barrier ratings sit in another. Guard response assumptions sit in a plan. Risk sits in a spreadsheet. But real security depends on how those pieces perform together.
Can the threat be detected early enough?

Camera placement, detection range, and sensor coverage each exist in separate documents. No single view shows whether detection happens in time to matter.

Does the barrier buy enough time?

Delay elements are rated in isolation. Whether they actually buy enough time depends on what follows — and that calculation rarely exists anywhere in the documentation.

Can response arrive before the asset is reached?

Guard posts, patrol routes, and response assumptions are planned separately from the threat paths they are designed to intercept.

What changes when scope is reduced?

When budgets are cut or designs are value engineered, the effect on actual performance is rarely assessed before decisions are final.

Turn security assumptions into decision support.
The deliverable is not a simulation. It is the evidence a senior buyer needs to approve, defend, or act on a security decision.
Analysis findings

Detection time, delay time, response time, fastest adversary route, weakest entry point, and whether the critical asset is reached. Measurable, scenario-based outcomes.

Design comparisons

Side-by-side evaluation of layout options, device configurations, staffing assumptions, and scope reductions. See exactly what is gained or lost with each tradeoff.

Coverage gaps and recommendations

Blind spots, exposed approaches, delayed detections, weak access points, and response gaps, with per-facility recommendations on where to act first. Repeatable across a portfolio.

Executive-ready evidence

Visual scenarios and summary outputs that help boards, CFOs, operators, clients, and public sector stakeholders understand the security tradeoff and support the decision.

From facility files
to defensible findings.
Start with Revit, CAD, or existing drawings. Choose how you want to work with SDL, then expand to see what happens next.
Managed service +
We run the analysis

SDL builds the facility model and runs the analysis. You get coverage findings, design comparisons, or assessment results without standing up a platform.

What we need from you
  • Facility files: Revit, CAD, PDF floor plans, or sketches
  • Security system inventory or as-built documentation, if available
  • The decision, scenario, or question you want to test
  • Any constraints: budget scope, regulatory requirements, timeline
Self-service platform +
You run the analysis

Direct access to the SDL platform for qualified teams running ongoing physical security analysis across projects and facilities.

The workflow
  • Import the facility from Revit, CAD, Rhino, or 2D drawings
  • Place cameras, sensors, barriers, guard posts, and response assumptions
  • Analyze coverage, threat paths, detection zones, lockdowns, or evacuation routes
  • Compare findings and export evidence for reviews, approvals, or client delivery
01
Import
Import the facility

Start from your existing files. Every wall, door, sight line, and elevation, navigable in 3D.

Revit · CAD · Rhino · 2D drawings
02
Add
Add the security system

Place cameras, sensors, barriers, doors, guard posts, patrols, and response assumptions, each with configurable specs.

03
Run
Run the analysis

Trace threat paths, access routes, detection zones, response timing, lockdowns, evacuation, or crowd movement across the facility model.

04
Compare
Compare outcomes

See detection timing, delay timing, response timing, blind spots, path vulnerabilities, and design option tradeoffs side by side.

05
Export
Export the evidence

Create visuals and outputs that support design reviews, site assessments, internal approvals, executive communication, and implementation planning.

Not another drawing.
Not another checklist.

Drawings show where devices go.

SDL shows how the system performs.

Standards tell you what to install.

SDL shows where the design falls short.

Risk assessments describe exposure.

SDL shows where and how it happens.

Tabletops discuss response.

SDL maps how response actually unfolds across the facility.
Pressure test your facility.

Tell us about the facility and the decision. We work from your existing files.

Thanks. We’ll be in touch shortly.
What to bring

You don’t need perfect documentation. Most engagements start from what already exists.

  • Facility files: Revit, CAD, PDF floor plans, or sketches
  • Security system inventory or as-built documentation, if available
  • The decision, scenario, or question you want to test
  • Any relevant constraints: budget scope, timeline, compliance requirements