Security is taken seriously in the premises of APM Terminals in the Maasvlakte 2 area of the port of Rotterdam. The everyday flow of trucks and containers in and out of this infrastructure is heavily regulated. Specific time slots are assigned by an online booking system, through which customs and identification documentation are revised. Upon arrival, drivers must register and have their fingerprints taken. Then they must go through no less than four unmanned checkpoints and an OCR and radioactive material scan on their way to the container loading and unloading area, as both instructional videos and furtive footage available in YouTube show. A keycard, several codes, and biometrical data are needed to open these gates. On top of that, concrete barricades, chain-link fencing, and CCTV cameras encircle the terminal to prevent unauthorized access. Despite the security efforts, on Tuesday, June 27, 2017, a non-human intruder, the so-called NotPetya malware, effortlessly forced the terminal to cease its normal operations for twelve days. Pushing towards full automation in the new terminals of the port of Rotterdam seemed like the right solution for both authorities and companies. However, that solution comes together with new problems, like the threat of mass unemployment, or the one that concerns this article: the vulnerability of these systems to cyber attacks. Whereas plans for addressing cyber security have been put in place, they seem to exclude three of the game-changing issues that make of the securing automated infrastructures and smart cities a wicked problem – one that has a large and uncertain range of causes and solutions, none of the latter being absolutely right and all of them prone to creating new problems.
|Title of host publication||Volume 51. augmented technology|
|Publication status||Published - 2017|