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

[David Treble <dtreble () CC UMANITOBA CA>]

I agree with the others on the need for both cameras and "boots".  We
have close to 500 cameras that are primarily used for investigation,
with some monitoring of active situations when applicable.  We also
implement the blue call boxes and red emerg. call boxes in hallways and
phones in all classrooms.  We are also in the process of testing a
desktop client called "AlertUS".

Not related to CCTV, but To follow up on Eric's comment.  A few months
backs, several administrators and staff attended an excellent 2 day
session with a leading expert in Crisis Response and Violence Threat
Assessment.  The speaker commented that they like to see IT involvement
in these discussions and training because a lot of physical threats
start to manifest in email, IM and social networks.

The organization is Canadian based, but the speaker/trainer has worked
with Secret Service and FBI and may take bookings for US Colleges and
Universities.  Unfortunately the contact email is bouncing, but I called
and left a message asking for a current email and whether they offer the
training for US Universities and Colleges.

http://www.cctatr.com/threat_assess.htm

You may find the following documents useful in getting Administrators
talking about the issue, particularly the Protocol for Dealing with
High-Risk Student Behaviors.

http://www.cctatr.com/articles.htm


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
David Treble    IT Security Coordinator
E3-640 EITC     University of Manitoba
dtreble () cc umanitoba ca -- 204.474.8340
     Follow @uminfosec on Twitter
Ask me about the Infosec Mailing List!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On 11-04-27 11:57 AM, Schmidt, Eric Ward wrote:
> 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.