As of 1 January 2026, all fences and gates have been removed from the Catalogue of Security Equipment (CSE).

The NPSA no longer tests fences and gates against the Manual Forced Entry Standard (MFES), and any fences and gates that previously carried an MFES rating have now been taken out of the catalogue entirely.

Fencing and gates were a well-established part of protecting the UK’s critical national infrastructure (CNI) and other high-risk sites, so removing them marks a real shift for security consultants, specifiers and facilities managers.

Previously, a product’s inclusion in the CSE was a quick, trusted shortcut for specifiers –  “it’s on the list, so it’s approved.” Without that catalogue entry, specifiers now have to make performance-led decisions, where independently verified testing data (LPS 1175), rather than a catalogue listing, determines whether a product suits a given site.

On the face of it, this change may appear to be a technical adjustment in the way products are assessed, but in reality it has created uncertainty for specifiers and security professionals tasked with protecting the UK’s critical infrastructure and high-risk assets.

Does perimeter security guidance still apply after the CSE changes?

It’s easy to read the CSE changes as NPSA stepping back from fencing and gates altogether, but that’s not really what’s happening. What’s shifted is the product list, not the underlying thinking behind good perimeter security.

NPSA’s guidance on security fences and gates still sets out perimeter security as a critical first line of defence, describing it as the first and most visible part of a site’s security. The advice to run an Operational Requirements process before choosing a solution remains in place, as does the principle that whatever Forced Entry Standard a site chooses should be proportionate to the actual threat it faces, rather than picked off a generic checklist.

In other words, fences still need to be integrated with similarly rated gates, operated within proper procedures, and matched to a genuine assessment of threat. Only the mechanism for proving a product is suitable has changed.

With the shortcut of a government-approved listing removed, the responsibility shifts back onto specifiers to verify performance independently, through data such as LPS 1175 certification, rather than relying on the reassurance of an official label. The change is really about how compliance gets evidenced, not about whether the underlying advice on protecting critical sites still holds.

What replaces the CSE for fence and gate specification?

With the CSE no longer listing fences and gates, the crucial question for specifiers is what to point to instead. The clearest answer is LPS 1175, developed by the Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB).

Issue 8 rates products against a matrix of tool sets (graded A through H, reflecting escalating threat levels) and delay times (ranging from 1 to 20 minutes), giving specifiers a way to match a product to the real threat a site faces.

Every rating is backed by physical testing carried out by independent, LPCB-accredited testers, with ongoing audits to confirm that products in production still match what was originally tested. That audit is really the substitute for what the CSE used to offer: independently verified, continuously checked evidence rather than a static catalogue entry.

Alongside LPS 1175, there are two other resources worth noting: Secured by Design and Red Book Live.

Secured by Design is the official UK police initiative focused on “designing out crime,” accrediting fencing and gates that have achieved LPS 1175 certification, and awarding them Police Preferred Specification status.

Red Book Live is a live, searchable directory of LPS 1175-certified products and their suppliers. With the CSE gone, this maintained listing lets specifiers check a product’s current certification status without relying on a manufacturer’s own claims.

Together, these three resources go a fair way toward replacing what the CSE used to provide.

Do gates need the same LPS 1175 rating as fences?

A fence is only as strong as its weakest gate. Sites regularly invest in a well-specified, highly-rated fence line and then treat the gate as an afterthought, choosing something more convenient or cheaper.

For example, a C5-rated fence paired with an A1-rated gate won’t provide strong enough protection. The result is a perimeter that looks strong but isn’t, since an intruder will always go for the point of least resistance.

Even if it’s easy to overlook, gates should be specified to the same LPS 1175 rating as the fencing either side of them, including matching toolkit resistance and delay time, not just a similar aesthetic or a “good enough” security grade.

This is one of the reasons independent testing matters more now that the CSE is no longer a guidepost. Where a catalogue listing might once have nudged people toward products designed and rated as part of a single system, the responsibility now sits with the specifier to check that a gate carries a genuinely equivalent rating to its fence line, rather than assuming compatibility.

Read our guide on how to choose the right security gate for your premises →

Fully rated and evidence-backed – from fence to gate

For anyone working through this transition and looking for a ready-tested option, our TYTAN range is the ideal solution. TYTAN SR gates are certified to LPS 1175 standard, with Security Ratings from SR1 (A1) through to SR3 (C5), covering sliding, bi-folding and automatic pedestrian gate formats.

That range of ratings means a gate can be matched to the actual threat level a site faces, whether that’s a lower-risk commercial entrance or a higher-risk industrial or infrastructure application, rather than defaulting to a single generic option.

TYTAN gates already carry recognised, independently verified LPS 1175 certification, so they’re straightforward to slot into a perimeter specification alongside similarly rated fencing, without the added step of having to source and verify separate test data from scratch.

For sites currently reassessing their perimeter approach following the CSE changes, get in touch with our access management experts today.