Page 89 - JSOM Spring 2026

In medical settings, these systems provide a contactless, non- and how physiology becomes easier or harder to measure—
intrusive means for eldercare and sleep studies since physi- whether by contact sensors or by remote ones, like radar. By
cal sensors may be impractical or uncomfortable. The same combining this field-informed understanding of vital signs
principles can be adapted for surveillance purposes, enabling with situational awareness, SOF medics become important en-
the detection of human presence through walls or in occluded ablers for bio-signature awareness and management.
spaces. 24,25
Actionable Bio-OPSEC Approaches
More generally, Wi-Fi sensing can be used to monitor large
urban environments and detect unusual or unauthorized ac- To operationalize bio-OPSEC, SOF medics can begin by iden-
tivity. In one study, researchers established a passive Wi-Fi tifying the types of biological emissions generated by their
26
tracking system on the Madeira Islands, a medium-sized Eu- team across various mission phases. Potentially collaborating
ropean archipelago, and collected data from 82 Wi-Fi routers with electronic warfare and signals intelligence personnel can
over a period of 4 years. This allowed them to create detailed help baseline exposure risks and identify the most likely de-
27
mobility profiles of individuals and groups, monitor popula- tection vectors in a given operational environment. These in-
tion flows, and infer patterns of presence in specific areas with sights could inform pre-mission planning, including the use of
high spatial and temporal resolution. For SOF teams conduct- countermeasures, like shielding, signal obfuscation, and decoy
27
ing special reconnaissance and other operations in urban envi- devices. Beyond technical countermeasures, behavioral adapta-
ronments, these sensing capabilities may pose a growing risk to tions may reduce biological signature. For instance, holding or
operational stealth. 28 manipulating one’s breath for a short period may help suppress
detectable respiratory patterns during static concealment when
facing surveillance systems that rely solely on chest-movement–
Biological OPSEC
based respiration detection. However, to develop effective
While it is not possible to anticipate all the ways in which protection strategies—for example, against emerging sensing
adversaries will utilize monitoring technologies for future sur- systems capable of detecting both breathing and heartbeat—
veillance, SOF can prepare themselves for the risks and protect medics could cultivate a deeper understanding of the specific
stealth by approaching biological surveillance as a component technologies adversaries may deploy and consider protective
of OPSEC. Biological OPSEC (bio-OPSEC) conceptualizes the measures such as the use of wearable oscillators.
human body as an emitter of detectable and potentially ex-
ploitable signals—ranging from biosensor transmissions and Additionally, medics may wish to address the role of fitness
thermal output to cardiac micro-movements and respiratory and health monitoring devices, if they are not already doing so.
patterns. Building on traditional OPSEC’s emphasis on be- In these cases, it is not the body’s physiological signals that may
havioral control and information concealment, bio-OPSEC reveal an operator’s presence, but the everyday device that col-
focuses on biological signal management, including deliberate lects them. In a pre-mission briefing or informal field setting,
signal manipulation. The future of operational deception an SOF medic might explain to the team that these devices—
29
may include the deliberate spoofing of biological data—such while useful for monitoring vitals and performance—can also
as synthetic heartbeats and simulated breathing patterns— act as beacons and sources of different types of information
adding a new layer of tactical misdirection that builds on for adversaries. 35–39 In mission contexts that demand stealth or
SOF’s long-standing tradition of innovation in deception and where hostile signal intelligence is likely, the medic can assess
stealth. 30,31 which devices—such as heart rate monitors, smart bandages,
or wearable health trackers—can pose unnecessary exposure
This approach to biological surveillance aligns with current risks. They may recommend powering down or isolating these
Special Operations Command (SOCOM) priorities and initia- devices, placing them in RF-blocking pouches, or switching to
tives. SOCOM’s Research & Development solicitations place non-transmitting analog alternatives. In some field settings,
significant emphasis on signature management, aiming to re- medics may coordinate with the team leader to schedule peri-
duce the detectability of operators in denied, austere, or con- odic biosensor use instead of continuous monitoring, thereby
tested environments. 28,32–34 However, while electronic, acoustic, reducing persistent emissions while still maintaining essential
and thermal signatures receive substantial attention, there ap- health oversight.
pears to be no explicit consideration of bio-signatures. This
28
omission reveals a potential gap in existing signature manage- A critical aspect of bio-OPSEC is adopting a forward- looking
ment paradigms—one that bio-OPSEC could fill by recogniz- mindset—anticipating how advances in sensing technologies
ing human-derived biological signals as part of the broader may lead to new vulnerabilities. Electromagnetic emissions
operational emission footprint. from neural or muscular activity exemplify this point. Al-
though these bioelectric signals are typically low in ampli-
SOF medics can play an important role in identifying and mit- tude, they have been detected under controlled laboratory
igating the risks associated with biological surveillance. The conditions. Current state-of-the-art systems, such as optically
physiological processes that medics routinely engage with— pumped magnetometers, require close proximity to the body—
such as breathing, heart rhythms, perfusion, and stress re- typically within centimeters—and often depend on partial
sponses—are what bio-surveillance systems are designed to magnetic shielding or active noise cancellation. 40–43
detect. In prehospital and operational environments, medics
routinely work with rugged monitors and wearables (e.g., pulse However, advances in sensor sensitivity, miniaturization, and
oximeters, chest straps, wrist devices) and know, for instance, interference management are pushing these technologies out of
how factors, such as motion, body position, gear placement, specialized laboratory environments into clinical settings. Bio-
cold extremities, low perfusion, or sweating, can distort read- OPSEC should therefore account not only for present risks but
ings. This experience gives them an intuitive sense of when also the trajectory of emerging surveillance technologies.

Fostering Biological Operational Security | 87