A security professional has reviewed a recent site assessment and has noted that a server room on the second floor of a building has Heating, Ventilation, and Air
Conditioning (HVAC) intakes on the ground level that have ultraviolet light fi lters installed, Aero-K Fire suppression in the server room, and pre-action fire suppression on floors above the server room. Which of the following changes can the security professional recommend to reduce risk associated with these conditions?
To mitigate risk, the HVAC intake should be elevated to reduce the possibility of contaminants or malicious substances entering from ground level. Additionally, converting the server room fire suppression system to a pre-action system is advisable as it ensures that the suppression system only activates when fire detection mechanisms are triggered, thus preventing accidental discharges that could cause water damage to sensitive equipment.
Agree with D
D is correct
I have no idea what I just read...I asked ChatGPT and it said B. I hope this question doesn't show up on my test lol
I think its a because the floors above the server room are pre-action which means water, last I checked water bad for server rooms, so the other information is garbage in the answer.
Why not B? Elevating the HVAC intake by constructing a plenum or external shaft over it will help prevent any potential malicious actor or intruder from introducing harmful materials, such as flammable liquids or gases, into the HVAC system from outside. This will improve the security of the server room by reducing the risk of unauthorized access to the HVAC system. In addition, converting the server room fire suppression to a pre-action system will help minimize the potential damage caused by accidental activation of the fire suppression system
I got B as well
Leaning towards B - By elevating the HVAC intake through constructing a plenum or external shaft, the risk associated with it can be reduced as it will be less susceptible to tampering and malicious activities. A pre-action fire suppression system on the server room would help mitigate the risk of accidental discharges from the suppression system as it only discharges water when there is a fire alarm or detection from the smoke detector.
D seems like a better answer.
A is the correct answer and here is why: https://www.hvac.com/expert-advice/hvac-uv-lights-do-they-work-and-are-they-worth-it/ "An ultraviolet (UV) light emits powerful rays of energy that kill bacteria, fungi, and viruses. They are commonly used in both home and commercial spaces." https://www.colocationamerica.com/blog/different-fire-supression-systems-in-data-centers "With this being said, dry pipe fire sprinkler systems are one of the best options for data centers and other operations housing electronic equipment."
Answer D) Apply additional physical security around the HVAC intakes and update upper floor fire suppression to FM-200 A is wrong because even though the pipe is dry at the moment, it still works with water. B is wrong because a pre-action system just has a few more protections in place to prevent an accidental release of water, but it still works with water C is wrong cause the ultraviolet light filters kill germs and have nothing to do with anything
and FM-200 is considered "safe" for humans so it shouldn't matter if it circulates in the HVAC to other areas as the HVAC may not be dedicated to the server room. (it should be though)
secondly to it being safe for humans, fm200 doesnt leave a residue and is safe for electronics.. so if it's deployed that should minimize any cleanup, repair, and replacement of material.
A is correct answer
B. Elevate the HVAC intake by constructing a plenum or external shaft over it and convert the server room fire suppression to a pre-action system Here's why: Elevating the HVAC Intake: By constructing a plenum or external shaft over the HVAC intake, you can raise it above ground level. This helps protect against potential contaminants or threats that may be introduced at ground level, such as smoke, debris, or intentional sabotage. Converting to Pre-Action Fire Suppression: Pre-action fire suppression systems require the activation of a detection system (like smoke detectors) before water is released. This helps prevent accidental discharge and water damage in sensitive areas like server rooms. Pre-action systems are commonly used in areas housing critical equipment
I'm leaning toward B instead of D because I cannot find anything online about how FM-200 is preferred over Aero-K
D. Apply additional physical security around the HVAC intakes and update the upper floor fire suppression to FM-200. This option addresses the security concerns related to the HVAC intakes by adding physical security measures. It also enhances the fire suppression system on the upper floors with FM-200, which is a clean agent fire suppression system commonly used for protecting critical IT equipment like servers. Option D provides a balanced approach that addresses both security and fire suppression requirements in the context of a server room's protection.
B is the answer. The change that can reduce risk from the described server room conditions is to elevate the HVAC intake and convert the server room to a pre-action fire suppression system, option B. Raising the intake mitigates ground-level contaminants and floods. Pre-action only releases suppressant when smoke is detected, avoiding accidental discharge. By relocating the intake and tailoring server room suppression sensitivity, threats from water, contaminants, and false discharges are directly addressed. The other options either reduce protections or do not directly resolve the cited server room vulnerabilities -Removing the UV filters eliminates that contamination control. Dry pipes have slow water flow. -Additional UV and FM-200 provide minimal added protection considering costs. -Physical security does not address the noted risks.
https://www.vfpfire.com/systems-dry-pipe.php Recommend D as A dry will still dump water which you are trying to mitigate
changed my mind with to switch to fm-200
the question and answer doesnt make sense. UV-C lighting systems are not an exotic, new technology. They have been used extensively since the mid-1990s to significantly improve HVAC airflow and heat-exchange efficiency, which can reduce energy use by up to 35 percent. UV-C by itself doesn’t save energy; rather, it restores cooling capacity and airflow to increase the potential for energy savings. https://www.esmagazine.com/articles/99118-ultraviolet-energy-an-important-addition-to-the-data-center-cooling-equation. So it doesnt make sense to remove the Ultraviolet filter as it helps maintain the consistency of the HVAC performance.
Gas suppression systems operate to starve the fire of oxygen. In the past, Halon was the choice for gas suppression systems; however, Halon leaves residue and depletes the ozone layer. Aero-K: Uses an aerosol of microscopic potassium compounds in a carrier gas released from small canisters mounted on walls near the ceiling. The Aero-K generators are not pressurized until fire is detected. The Aero-K system uses multiple fire detectors and will not release until a fire is “confirmed” by two or more detectors (limiting accidental discharge). The gas is noncorrosive, so it does not damage metals or other materials. It does not harm electronic devices or media. More important, Aero-K is nontoxic and does not injure personnel. FM-200: Is a colorless, liquefied compressed gas. It is stored as a liquid and dispensed into the hazard as a colorless, electrically nonconductive vapor that is clear and does not obscure vision. It leaves no residue and has acceptable toxicity for use in occupied spaces at design concentration. FM-200 does not displace oxygen and, therefore, is safe for use in occupied
so, you chose "D", then?
It looks to me that Aero0K doesn't have any bad effect towards human, same as FM-200. So, why everyone prefer chnging answer to D, when part of the answer doesn't make any sense.