PORRITTINC
( LAYTON, UT )
POSITION PAPER · EDGE THREAT

Protecting
critical energy
infrastructure.

Substations, pipelines, and plant perimeters share a problem: long boundaries, sparse staffing, and consequences measured in regional outages rather than stolen copper.

← Back to Edge Threat Detection

POSITION PAPER · TECHNICAL OPINION

This is a technical position paper stating Porritt Inc.'s engineering view. It is not a peer-reviewed publication and does not report experimental results. Where it forecasts capability, it is stating design intent rather than achieved performance.

Position
THREAT PICTURE

Physical attack is rising

Publicly reported attacks on electrical infrastructure have increased. The assets are dispersed, lightly staffed, and individually significant to grid stability.

WHY CAMERAS FAIL

Coverage versus attention

Camera coverage without attention is forensic, not preventive. Footage explains what happened; it rarely prevents it.

OUR POSITION

Detect early, cue a human

Milliwatt sensing makes perimeter-wide coverage economically possible. Fusion reduces it to alerts a small team can actually act on.

SAME SITES

Already under supervision

These are the facilities our balance-of-plant stack already supervises. Threat detection becomes one more plant system on the same operator picture.

Objectives
PERIMETER
Coverage objective
FUSED
Alert model
HUMAN
On the trigger
R&D
Capability vision
Position summary

We believe perimeter protection for energy infrastructure is limited by attention economics rather than sensor availability. Reducing alert volume matters more than adding cameras.

Discuss the approach.

Teaming and technical discussion welcome.

CONTACT TIMOTHY → Back to Edge Threat Detection →