No can do.
I think if you're walking down the path of "knowing the totality," then you also need to consider Hutchinson, Maersk, PSA International (the other P&O bidder), and all of the other global port operators who have U.S. interests. That's a tall order, something fit for several years of reasearch by a Wall Street analyst. Good luck.
But where all this (impossible) effort brings you is right back to the beginning, the very simple question of "what difference to our security does it make who operates an American port terminal"?
And the answer is "none", since security is run by TSA and the Coast Guard.
By the way, the consensus we've seen so far from container/shipping experts and professionals, and from Wall Street analysts, is that this is a big yawn. Do you think they're all ignorant as to security considerations? I don't.
Add to the "big yawn" group anyone who has worked in any form of government security/logistics.
The issue is not whether day-to-day, on-the-ground conditions at the ports would change. They presumably wouldn't. The issues are whether we should grant the demonstrably unreliable UAE access to sensitive information and management plans about our key U.S ports, which are plenty insecure enough without adding new risks, and whether the decision process was thorough and free from conflicts of interest.