Increased cable drum storage capacity using adjustable pallet racking
The MacLean Electrical Group has reported that it has increased its cable drum storage capacity by 20 percent, by using a combination of adjustable pallet racking and cantilever racking made from galvanised steel.
The MacLean Electrical Group is a global electrical distribution company specialising in the supply of electrical products, lighting systems and cables for harsh and hazardous environments.
Noskab is the Group’s specialist cable division and supplies cables for onshore and offshore projects. Its purpose-built storage facility in Aberdeen houses a large inventory of specialised electrical products and cables for what is a highly demanding market.
Noskab’s warehouse unit was recently expanded and now provides over 1000 square metres of storage space. The store features 50 bays of adjustable pallet racking which gives 400 pallet positions, plus 100 bays of shortspan shelving for small parts storage. Both the racking and shelving systems were supplied and installed by RediRack’s Authorised Partner in Scotland, Axis.
An unavoidable consequence of the recent warehouse extension was a reduction in the amount yard storage available at the site, so Noskab approached Axis for a solution that would allow them to make more efficient use of their exterior space.
“We needed a quality, hardwearing storage solution that would allow us to store our cable drums in a smaller footprint outside in our yard. We had worked with Axis previously and had no hesitation in calling in their help and expertise,” says MacLean’s finance manager, Alan Freeland.
Because the site is located a stone’s throw from the North Sea, the storage solution had to be capable of withstanding the harshest weather conditions.
Axis therefore recommended a combination of adjustable pallet racking and cantilever racking made from galvanised steel.
A galvanised finish was essential as it doesn’t rust , while RediRack’s bolt free design maximizes the rack structure’s stability .
To further enhance on-site safety, anti-collapse mesh was installed at the rear of the racking to protect operatives from objects that could, potentially, fall due to the high winds that gust across the exposed facility.
The adjustable pallet racking, which features drum cradles, has allowed Noskab to increase cable drum storage capacity by 20 per cent while the Cantilever racking is used to house other products that were not suited to the pallet racking configuration - such as various lengths of electrical cable trays.
By installing RediRack pallet racking Noskab is now able to store 800 pallets in a space that previously held 500.
“After expanding our facility we were left with less room outside, but the Axis solution has provided exactly what we were looking for,” adds Alan Freeland.
RediRack and Axis have been working together in Scotland for more than two decades. Billy Wood, Axis’s sales manager, comments: “We have partnered with RediRack on many major projects over the years, successfully delivering pallet racking solutions for a broad range of companies. We share the same belief in delivering quality storage solutions on time and within budget. There’s a lot more projects for us to work together on in the future!”
Google and NIST Address Supply Chain Cybersecurity
As high-level supply chain attacks hit the news, Google and the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have both developed proposals for how to address software supply chain security. This isn’t a new field, unfortunately. Since supply chains are a critical part of business resilience, criminals have no qualms about targeting its software. That’s why identifying, assessing, and mitigating cyber supply chain risks (C-SCRM) is at the top of Google and NIST’s respective agendas.
High-Profile Supply Chain Attacks
According to Google, no comprehensive end-to-end framework exists to mitigate threats across the software supply chain. [Yet] ‘there is an urgent need for a solution in the face of the eye-opening, multi-billion-dollar attacks in recent months...some of which could have been prevented or made more difficult’.
Here are several of the largest cybersecurity failures in recent months:
- SolarWinds. Alleged Russian hackers slipped malicious code into a routine software update, which they then used as a Trojan horse for a massive cyberattack.
- Codecov. Attackers used automation to collect credentials and raid ‘additional resources’, such as data from other software development vendors.
- Malicious attacks on open-source repositories. Out of 1,000 GitHub accounts, more than one in five contained at least one dependency confusion-related misconfiguration.
As a result of these attacks and Biden’s recent cybersecurity mandate, NIST and Google took action. NIST held a 1,400-person workshop and published 150 papers worth of recommendations from Microsoft, Synopsys, The Linux Foundation, and other software experts; Google will work with popular source, build, and packaging platforms to help companies implement and excel at their SLSA framework.
What Are Their Recommendations?
Here’s a quick recap: NIST has grouped together recommendations to create federal standards; Google has developed an end-to-end framework called Supply Chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA)—pronounced “Salsa”. Both address software procurement and security.
Now, here’s the slightly more in-depth version:
- NIST. The organisation wants more ‘rigorous and predictable’ ways to secure critical software. They suggest that firms use vulnerability disclosure programmes (VDP) and software bills of materials (SBOM), consider simplifying their software and give at least one developer per project security training.
- Google. The company thinks that SLSA will encompass the source-build-publish software workflow. Essentially, the four-level framework helps businesses make informed choices about the security of the software they use, with SLSA 4 representing an ideal end state.
If this all sounds very abstract, consider the recent SolarWinds attack. The attacker compromised the build platform, installed an implant, and injected malicious behaviour during each build. According to Google, higher SLSA levels would have required stronger security controls for the build platform, making it more difficult for the attacker to succeed.
How Do The Proposals Differ?
As Brian Fox, the co-founder and CTO at Sonatype, sees it, NIST and Google have created proposals that complement each other. ‘The NIST [version] is focused on defining minimum requirements for software sold to the government’, he explained, while Google ‘goes [further] and proposes a specific model for scoring the supply chain. NIST is currently focused on the “what”. Google, along with other industry leaders, is grappling with the “how”’.