Re: A "physical security" question - "cameras" versus "boots on the ground" - best practices

[randy marchany <marchany () VT EDU>]

Since people have been mentioning us (VA Tech) in this discussion, here is
our "Safety and Security Camera Acceptable Use Policy". It is at
http://www.policies.vt.edu/5617.pdf. Take a look and hopefully, it'll spur
some discussion.

-Randy Marchany
VA Tech IT Security Office

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Arthur, Matt <arthur () wustl edu> wrote:

> I really question when the assertion is made that cctv acts as a
> 'deterrent', 'prevents' crime or even 'moves' crime to areas without cctv.
>  Report after report indicates that in cities that have spent tons of dough
> on cctv systems have not shown any significant deterrence, prevention or
> movement of crime elsewhere.  [I did a quick google search and dropped a
> couple of links below.]  Research has shown that cctv can be effective in
> certain environments (rooms like a museum watching something non-mobile and
> in parking garages), but we keep seeing Public Safety saying things like
> cctv and blue light phones make people feel safer as justification.  My
> point in this is that the money spent on these items to make people 'feel'
> safer could/should be used on stuff that actually makes people safer.  I'll
> also include a blog from Bruce Schneier who seems to me to be a real voice
> of common sense in these matters (http://www.schneier.com/essay-225.html).
>
> http://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/
> http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file708_35775.pdf
>
> Matt Arthur
> Washington University in St. Louis
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv
> > [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Woelk
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 12:30 PM
> > To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> > Subject: Re: [SECURITY] A "physical security" question - "cameras" versus
> "boots on the
> > ground" - best practices
> >
> > I asked our Public Safety office for their take on this question. Here's
> their response:
> > On our campus, it's not a matter of either-or, but both. Certain high
> risk areas require
> > cameras as a deterrent; as a resource to mine and cultivate investigative
> information; and as
> > a tool to proactively scan for problems/incidents.
> >
> > In my opinion, cameras can be a force multiplier if utilized
> appropriately. Can we monitor
> > hundreds of cameras simultaneously--of course not. But having the
> option/ability to group
> > various camera segments together and monitor hot spots is value-added
> 'patrol' work.
> > Personnel are needed to provide uniformed visibility campus-wide and to
> respond to
> > emergencies while a dispatcher monitors certain camera segments when a
> particular crime
> > trend develops on campus. This is only one example of how technology and
> human
> > resources can be deployed to deter and detect crime.
> >
> > Ben Woelk
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv
> > [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of Schmidt, Eric Ward
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 12:58 PM
> > To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> > Subject: Re: [SECURITY] A "physical security" question - "cameras" versus
> "boots on the
> > ground" - best practices
> >
> > Michael,
> >
> > An inexpensive but far reaching option for this type of scenario also
> came from the VA
> > Tech incident - staff and faculty awareness training.  The training is
> called Active Shooter
> > Awareness Training and it's analogous to the awareness training we all
> know for fire - stop,
> > drop, and roll.   This awareness training provides staff and faculty
> various things to
> > consider if you're on campus and you think you hear gun shots.
> >
> >
> > Eric Schmidt
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Apr 27, 2011, at 12:26, "SCHALIP, MICHAEL" <mschalip () CNM EDU> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks.....
> > >
> > > Sorry if this is the wrong "group", but - I need some advice.....
> > >
> > > We're struggling with a debate on physical security measures.
>  Following the Virginia
> > Tech incident - our execs decided that we had to respond with increased
> security measures.
> > At some point - the decision was made that we needed to explore "security
> cameras".  Next
> > thing we knew - there was a contractor engaged, cameras were installed at
> one campus (we
> > have 6 across the metro area!), and now - the questions are finally being
> asked - "Are we
> > doing the right thing...??"
> > > Putting in cameras is fine - but then folks are trying to figure out
> "....who's going to be
> > watching the camera feed?"  The other question that was asked was, "What
> is more of a
> > deterrent - a security camera - or taking the cost of 30 cameras and
> hiring another pair of
> > boots to walk around??"
> > > So - I'm asking all of you:  What kind of physical security is
> preferred?  What kind of
> > security measures are used in higher education to provide a reasonable
> level of security?
> > Are folks using more "technology" - or more "warm bodies"??
> > > Looking forward to your wisdom.....
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
> > > MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.