In recent years, several vehicle-based attacks targeting crowds have taken place globally, where vehicles have been used as weapons. The term “hostile vehicle” refers to a vehicle that is deliberately used to cause harm, often by driving into crowds at busy events. From crowded festivals to major sporting events, these types of attacks have had severe consequences worldwide. In this blog, we will offer insights into the nature of the risk, the role of vehicle mitigation measures, and the factors that determine whether an effective approach can be implemented.
A few years ago, vehicle-based attacks in cities like Marseille, Berlin, Barcelona, and London shocked many and go a lot of media attention. This type of attack seems to be making a comeback. The events of recent months, particularly in Germany and the United States, remain fresh in our minds. The hostile vehicle method is used by religious extremists, as well as both left- and right-wing extremists, with a certain degree of copycat behavior from confused individuals. Attacks like those in Magdeburg (2023), New Orleans (2024), and Mannheim (2025) clearly show that we are no longer only dealing with traditional terrorist threats, but also with atypical profiles of attackers emerging in these incidents.
Due to the increasing use of such attacks and the atypical attacker profiles, it is becoming increasingly difficult for our security services to provide information-driven advice on such risks. Traditionally, we assess the risks at events based on the prioritization Risk = Likelihood x Impact. For such attacks, the tendency in most Western countries has always been “it won’t happen to us”. However, the likelihood of this happening seems to be growing, as evidenced by the settings in which attacks have occurred in neighboring countries. Moreover, the predictability and information position are becoming more complex.
Right after the carnival period, we want to reflect on this issue. Unfortunately, the recent attack in Mannheim was also at a carnival site. For us, a risk-based approach is the reason to carefully implement the necessary mitigation measures for an increasingly defining scenario.
The Threat of Hostile Vehicle Attacks
Vehicle-based attacks are relatively simple way to cause potentially devastating consequences. In Magdeburg (Germany), a suspect drove into a busy city square just before Christmas 2024, resulting in dozens of injuries. In New Orleans (United States), a van plowed through a crowded festival area on 1 January 2025, leading to multiple casualties and a sense of immense fear among the public. On 13 February 2025, a diver accelerated as he approached a protest march in Münich (Germany), resulting in 28 people getting injured and 2 fatalities. And on 3 March 2025, in Mannheim (Germany), a vehicle attack occurred, where a modified vehicle was used to bypass security measures and strike a large crowd. What these incidents have in common is that the attacks were carried out quickly and efficiently, while authorities struggled to intervene before damage was done.
There are several types of hostile vehicle attacks, depending on the vehicle and the tactics used:
- Moving Vehicles (cars, vans, trucks): This is the most common type of attack, where a vehicle is driven through a crowded area. The vehicle is the weapon, and its speed and mass can easily cause significant impact.
- Modified Vehicles: These vehicles are often altered to bypass security measures. This can range from vehicles designed to break through hard barriers, like concrete blocks, to larger vehicles that can cause greater impact.
- Explosives in Vehicles: In some cases, vehicles are used as platforms for explosives. This adds an extra level of threat, as the impact potentially is much greater than a “normal” moving attack.
Photo credits: Crowdguard
The Role of Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM)
Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM) measures are designed to reduce the threat of these attacks by employing physical barriers, technology, and advanced design principles.
HVM can be implemented in various ways:
- Physical Barriers: These are the most direct and visible measures, such as concrete blocks, movable barriers, trees, and large structures that can stop vehicles. In some cases, barriers that rise and fall automatically can be effective.
- Regulating Traffic Flows: Carefully designing traffic circulation around events can reduce the risk of an attack. This can include strict access control, slowing down traffic, closing roads remotely, and placing blockades to keep vehicles away from crowded areas. The strategy aims at building a ring structure of protective measures, starting from a certain distance away from the crowd.
- Technology and Surveillance: Technology plays an increasing role in HVM. Smart cameras, facial recognition, and AI-based systems can identify suspicious vehicles early and warn of potential attacks. Drones, for example, can be used to monitor an area from above.
- Security Staff Training: Security personnel must be well-trained in responding to a hostile vehicle attack. They must be able to quickly identify a potential situation, react appropriately to threats and, when possible, lead people to safety during an incident.
Who is Responsible for Implementing HVM?
For events and crowded places, the responsibility for implementing a HVM strategy can never be the responsibility of just one stakeholder. These complex and costly measures require integrated, multi-agency collaboration and long-term planning:
- Local Governments and Urban Planners: Municipalities and city planners can integrate safety measures into the infrastructural design of their cities. This ranges from taking HVM into account during the redesign of public spaces, to establishing the right temporary infrastructure around events.
- Event Organizers: Event organizers, from concerts to sports matches, can work with local authorities to develop their own hostile vehicle mitigation plans. This includes placing physical barriers on their site, training their staff, and implementing technology to detect suspicious vehicles.
- Security and Tech Companies: These companies often provide the specific HVM technologies and physical infrastructure, such as automatic barriers and AI-driven security systems.
Photo credits: Crowdguard
When Do You Achieve Success?
The effectiveness of HVM measures can be measured by various criteria, though they don’t always need to have been used in an actual attack. Under the motto “prevention is better than cure,” spotting HVM measures around an event can contribute to eliminating the “Window of Opportunity” as perceived by a potential attacker. A successful approach can furthermore be judged taking the following into account.
- Number of Incidents: One of the main metrics is, of course, the number of incidents successfully prevented by the implemented measures. This can be hard to determine.
- Response Speed: How quickly can security systems react when a threat emerges? This can be measured by monitoring the time between detection and action, even with a live test.
- Loss of Life and Damage: The extent of damage and the number of casualties can serve as indicators of the effectiveness of preventive measures. We can try to learn from attacks that have happened, but again that is hard because often there probably were no HVM measures in place.
- Public Confidence: The effectiveness of safety measures can also be measured by how the public feels about the safety of events. An increased sense of safety can contribute to greater acceptance of HVM measures.
- Minimizing Disruption: Every blockade inevitably causes some level of inconvenience to the surrounding area. Effective measures should be quickly deployable and removable and can be repositioned as the dynamics of the event change. It’s also crucial to inform the surrounding area well and offer solutions for limited accessibility to their living and working environments.
Integration into Traffic and Urban Planning
HVM measures must be integrated from the start of city planning projects and in the sketch phase of designing event sites. This requires an approach where security, traffic flows, and the design of public spaces are closely connected. Adjusting traffic plans, for example by closing key roads to vehicles during events, can be an effective way to prevent vehicles from reaching the crowd. Creating safety rings around events, with limited access and enhanced security, can provide an additional layer of protection.
Long-Term Vision for HVM
The long-term vision for HVM must focus on continuous innovation. As technology evolves, HVM measures must evolve with it. This includes the integration of autonomous vehicles and the use of artificial intelligence for automated detection of suspicious vehicles. We must also keep learning from the incidents that occur, meaning we need to regularly evaluate, test, and adjust to adapt to new threats. In the future, cities and event locations are expected to increasingly use intelligent infrastructure and connected technologies to improve safety. This will not only increase the effectiveness of HVM measures but also enhance the overall experience of cities and events, while ensuring that safety is maintained.
Conclusion
The threat of hostile vehicle attacks is real and is only growing as the world becomes more digital and interconnected. Intelligence-driven detection and prevention strategies could get less reliable when the motives of attackers become less predictable. It is the responsibility of governments, organizations, and solution providers to collaborate on effective HVM solutions that both ensure public safety and enhance the experience of events and urban life. Through early warnings, thoughtful infrastructure, and innovative technology, we can limit the impact of these attacks and protect the safety of our citizens and visitors.
An effective approach to HVM requires an integrated approach where technology, security, and awareness come together to ensure public safety. The primary focus must be on prevention, but we also need to be able to respond quickly and appropriately when an attack does take place. Only through collective responsibility and continuous advancements in security techniques can we build a safer future for events.