Safes are effective tools for protecting high-value or sensitive assets. However, what happens when you need to transport the assets from A to B? This has been a historic challenge for organisations involved in transporting sensitive or high value goods, and namely the Cash and Valuables in Transit (CVIT) industry, for many years.

While most countries’ CVIT sectors’ answer to this question would be armed security officers, who can deter offenders and respond with lethal force if attacked, the solution has always been more complicated in countries where firearm use is prohibited. When CVIT security couriers are not armed, and must carry cash or valuables in publicly accessible locations, between the relative safety of their security vehicle and secure premises, they are naturally at their most vulnerable. This soon became apparent in the UK in the CVIT sector’s early days, and later as CVIT vehicles became increasingly hardened and difficult for attackers to successfully rob. Consequently, by 2005, most armed robbery gangs chose to attack security couriers while transferring cash across the pavement.

Security cases, sometimes incorporating active countermeasures, were developed by inventors early on to address this issue and find an effective means of deterring robberies. By the late 1950s and early 1960s, a number of different types of ‘hardened’ bags, boxes and briefcases had been conceived.

One of the earliest and most innovative examples was the ‘Robbery Stop’ anti-bandit bag, invented in Offenbach, Germany in c.1958 by Harry Timm. This device consisted of a smoke and dye canister attached to a cord and wrist strap, that could be installed to a bag used for carrying cash or valuables. If the bag was snatched, the device would be initiated, triggering the canister that would stain everything it came into contact with a red dye, including banknotes. This design, and different variations thereof, was quickly replicated by several inventors in England, and advertised as an anti-bandit solution.

The portable security containers developed over this period ranged from simple briefcases fitted with multiple locks and metal reinforcement, to cash boxes that could be attached to the courier’s wrist by a chain, with the other end linked to either a high-volume alarm to draw attention, a smoke canister or an indelible dye pack to stain both the banknotes and the robber, a powerful spring to eject the contents of the bag, or even an electric-shock delivery system. The aim was clearly to deter and hinder criminals to such an extent that the benefits of robbing the victim were outweighed by the risks associated with the containers’ countermeasures.

One of the most unusual inventions was an anti-theft case by Englishman John Fisher in c.1961. Fisher’s reinforced case had three active security measures that would come into play in the event of a snatch theft: the case’s handle would automatically trap the thief’s hand, three 1.2-metre-long metal prongs would automatically extend from the sides and base of the case, and a loud alarm would sound. The idea was to reduce the risk of injury to the courier by letting the offender take the bag, and then let the active measures make it difficult for the offender to flee the crime scene without being apprehended.

Despite the wide range of different security solutions developed for, or applied to, security cases, very few were widely adopted, likely due to the cost and lack of evidence as to their effectiveness.

The common debate with such security technology is whether it reduces the risk of robbery by acting as an effective deterrent, or whether it actually increases the likelihood of a robbery by attracting more attention to the courier than it otherwise would do and indicates that the benefits of targeting the courier are high. It is a difficult question to answer without substantial data, but it is an uncontroversial suggestion that every threat actor is different and will have a differing level of intent, capability and culture which will inform his or her assessment of whether the risk is worth the potential reward. However, some security firms swear by operating covertly, relying on the ability to remain undetected by threat actors, while others prefer to advertise their defences in the hope that it will provide sufficient deterrence or delay.

Regardless of the approach, the technology in portable security containers has come a long way: from heavy wooden chests fitted latches and padlocks, to today’s intelligent, GPS-tracked cash boxes. One of the most effective deterrents have included the integration of Intelligent Banknote Neutralisation Systems (IBNS) into cash boxes. IBNS render stolen banknotes unusual, thereby removing the benefit of the crime. Additionally, forensic taggants are increasingly used to enable offenders to be linked to a robbery and therefore more easily prosecuted.