Drones flying over airports, critical infrastructure and major events: what was considered an exceptional occurrence just a few years ago has long since become a recurring news story. In Munich, Copenhagen and Alicante, amongst other places, sightings have already led to airspace closures, delays and flight cancellations. During the 2026 FIFA World Cup, US authorities reported that, by 16 July, more than 700 drones had been seized or intercepted around stadiums and fan zones. Perimeter security is thus facing a new reality – and must rise to the challenge.
However, drones should not be viewed solely as a risk in the context of security. In various applications of perimeter security, they represent a useful tool for threat mitigation. “Drones offer significant advantages when deployed strategically as part of a security strategy,” emphasises Julian Ederleh of Exabotix, a manufacturer of professional drone systems based in Bad Lauterberg in the Harz Mountains.
As an active tool for security personnel, drones carry out patrol flights, verify alarms, assist with situational awareness and inspect areas that are difficult to access. Acting as ‘flying eyes’, they complement the existing security infrastructure and can be linked to cameras, perimeter sensors or access control systems. When integrated into control centres or video management systems, the live data provides an additional mobile source of information in the event of an alarm. “Particularly on large industrial sites, they quickly provide an overview and deliver important information in real time. Last but not least, drones often have a deterrent effect due to their visible presence,” says Ederleh.
Automated patrols instead of on-site operations
Increasing automation is providing further relief and support for security personnel. The extent to which this has now progressed is demonstrated by so-called BVLOS (Beyond Visual Line of Sight) applications, in which the drone can operate automatically outside the pilot’s direct line of sight. “Unmanned systems stationed on-site in drone hangars can automatically set off on patrol flights, for example to fly along the outer perimeter of industrial sites and transmit visual data to a control centre,” explains Dr Gerald Wissel, Chairman of the Board of UAV DACH – European Association for Unmanned Aviation. When a sensor is triggered, a drone takes off automatically, flies to the affected area and provides an up-to-date situational picture within a very short time.
“This makes it possible to determine immediately whether it is a false alarm or a genuine incident. If the latter is the case, it is possible to assess in advance how many intruders there are, whether they may be armed, and how many police officers are required on site,” explains Wissel.
Wissel describes this trend towards decentralised, centrally monitored systems as one of the key prerequisites for the economically sustainable use of unmanned aerial systems in perimeter security. In Wissel’s view, such an operation can be implemented smoothly and safely, both technically and organisationally.
For this model to become more widespread and cost-effective, Wissel believes that the regulatory framework for so-called 1:n operation needs to be further refined. In this scenario, a single operator in a control centre monitors the flight of several drones simultaneously and intervenes only in the event of complications – a principle which, according to Wissel, has long been standard practice in manned aviation.
CRITIS umbrella law: Drones complement physical security
Beyond individual company premises, a particularly sensitive category of protected sites is coming under the spotlight of statutory regulation: critical infrastructure. Sabotage, espionage, terrorism and hybrid attacks can disrupt energy facilities, transport networks, telecommunications or the water supply. Threats to critical infrastructure are on the rise, both nationally and internationally. The legislature responded to this by introducing the CRITIS umbrella law in March 2026. As a result, critical infrastructure – such as electricity and gas networks, railway lines and telecommunications facilities including data cables and mobile phone masts – has increasingly become the focus of threat analyses.
At the same time, Dr Gerald Wissel points out that, due to their sheer size, such facilities cannot be protected using conventional methods. “Drones open up entirely new possibilities here for addressing hazardous situations and initiating the optimal protective measures – or, where necessary, repair work – as quickly as possible,” he says, and Ederleh adds: “They enable rapid visual inspections following alarm notifications or unusual incidents and provide up-to-date aerial images of large areas. Furthermore, they are suitable for inspecting areas that are difficult to access or involve particular risks.” Drones are therefore a new tool that can shorten response times and, in the best-case scenario, prevent or at least minimise damage to critical infrastructure.
Wissel highlights a key regulatory element to illustrate just how closely air defence and private operations are linked: in order to make full use of the lower airspace whilst protecting it from unauthorised use, the relevant authorities must know at all times which manned and unmanned systems are currently in the air. This would require, at the very least, a nationwide air situation picture for the lower airspace up to an altitude of 550 feet, as well as mandatory electronic identification of all participants using ADS-L (Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Light) technology. Wissel sums up the benefits of this approach: “In this way, we kill two birds with one stone: we protect critical infrastructure and other sensitive areas by making illegal drone operations significantly more difficult. And we enable the equal integration of legal systems into a digitalised airspace,” says Wissel.
Legally compliant operation
To ensure that the use of drones in day-to-day operations is carried out in a legally compliant manner, other key framework conditions – such as data protection – come into play. In this regard, Ederleh advises relying on systems that guarantee transparent and traceable data processing. Furthermore, trained staff, clear processes for routine and emergency flights, internal communication and, depending on the specific application, appropriate signage on the premises are important.
Admittedly, there are some exemptions regarding drone operations for public authorities and organisations with security responsibilities, such as the police. However, private-sector operators are generally subject to the same legal requirements as for other civil drone applications. They cannot automatically benefit from special provisions, such as those that apply in some cases to public authorities and organisations with security responsibilities. This also applies to the physical defence against uncooperative drones. “The key point here is that the state holds the monopoly on the use of force,” says Wissel.
Drones: a security tool or a security risk?
The increasing use of drones in perimeter security highlights the potential this technology offers for surveillance, reconnaissance and the protection of critical infrastructure. At the same time, as unmanned aerial vehicles become more widespread, so too does the challenge of detecting and classifying unauthorised or unwanted drone flights at an early stage. This is because the very same technology that supports security personnel in their work can also be misused for espionage, sabotage or other security-related purposes. An effective security strategy must therefore take both aspects into account: the professional use of drones as a tool for defenders and protection against drones as a potential threat. The article “When drones fly over the perimeter” by Alice Vicentini examines the requirements this places on companies and operators of critical infrastructure.
