Here are some of the programs schools have implemented and law enforcement’s role within them
With the third anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre upon us, it’s important to consider what steps schools have taken – and should take – to help keep their students safer. Here are some of the programs schools have implemented and what law enforcement’s role within them should be.
Well before the Umpqua Community College (UCC) shooting in Roseburg (Ore.), one of the biggest debates on campus was whether the school should have armed security officers. Since the school had only one unarmed security officer on duty at the time of this incident, we know what the outcome of that discussion was.
Will an armed school security staff keep schoolchildren safe? A private school in California thought so and contracted with a local executive protection firm to bring plainclothes armed guards onto their campus. Unfortunately, they neglected to notify local law enforcement, which found out by accident. If there had been an incident, it might not have ended well if law enforcement thought that the security officers were a threat.
It’s vital that school staff and law enforcement have a common response and crisis management plan. Collaboration and communication are key to avoiding hiccups such as the one mentioned above.
LE Fire Marshals
From Sandy Hook until now, most school shooters have been students and therefore know the building layout, students, and staff. This gives them a tactical advantage over responding officers that must be reduced or eliminated.
In a previous article on my PoliceOne blog, I discussed creating the equivalent of a fire marshal for law enforcement. Just like a fire marshal walks every commercial building in his or her district to evaluate the risks and make recommendations, the LE equivalent should be doing the same.
Fire marshals have books of rules, lists of building exits, know what kind of automatic extinguishing systems are required and where fire extinguishers should be placed in each building, and so on. Firemen also practice constantly with the most realistic live fire scenarios possible.
You can clear a building and address the threat much more quickly if:
- You know the layout of the building and any lurking dangers
- You can get through locked doors without having to breach them
- You have photos of school staff and know if they are armed
- You can communicate with school staff while you are on the move
- You can make contact with the perpetrator if you have a hostage situation
Pre-planning with local school staff can help you understand not only the possible situations you might face, but also how to work with them when seconds count.
Part of the planning process should be building one or more crisis go bags. Like your own bug-out bag, it should contain the items that you will need in a threat situation at a specific school and should be kept at that school where you can get to it quickly when needed. The bag should be a backpack so that it can be grabbed and carried on the run, leaving your hands free for other things.
In 2000, the California Attorney General’s Crime and Violence Prevention Center and the California Department of Education’s Safe Schools and Violence Prevention Office published their go bag guidelines for school administrators, but didn’t include recommendations for law enforcement. Here are the items that should be included in a go bag for responding cops:
- Laminated aerial photos and maps of the school in multiple sizes (a large map for the incident commander and smaller maps for officers on the move). The smaller maps can be accordion-folded if necessary, but they must be able to fit into pockets so that officers can keep their hands free. These maps should be clearly marked to show:
- The location of shut offs for gas, water, electricity, telephone, alarm, sprinkler, and cable TV systems along with the instructions to disable them. Responders may need to access or shut down communications, especially in a hostage situation.
- Hazardous areas such as chemistry labs and locations where pesticides, paints, bottled gasses and other toxic chemicals are stored or used. It will not end well if someone turns on a flashlight or takes a shot in a chem lab if the gas has been turned on.
- Painter’s “blue” tape that can be used for marking.
- Permanent markers in wide and fine point sizes (like Sharpies®) that can be used to write on the maps or anything else. Don’t worry about erasing markings that you make on the map so that you can re-use them. The maps should be used in the hot wash and archived.
- If the school has a CCTV system, a list of camera locations.
- Photos of key staff and school security guards.
- Emergency point of contact lists including school staff who will be working with your staff as part of the Incident Command System.
- Recommend that key school staff have a unique, easy-to-identify marking on their badges so that your staff can identify them by sight. The school does issue ID badges to staff, right? If not, that is another recommendation.
- A phone book listing classrooms, break rooms, offices, the loading dock, and other places where people may gather. Both internal and external numbers should be included.
- An HT on the school’s radio system if they have one. Batteries should be separate and if they are rechargeable should be in a charger close to the bag.
- Master physical keys and card keys that will open every door in the building. If the master keys don’t open everything, then keys should be color-coded to the locks they fit so an officer doesn’t need to fumble through the keys when seconds count. There should be multiple sets on a brightly colored lanyard.
- Knowing the locations where utilities enter the premises can be very important in a fire or hazmat incident. This should include both above and underground utilities.
At Columbine, the sprinklers were triggered and no one knew how to turn them off. Hallways quickly filled with water, making it difficult to escape. In some places, water got dangerously close to electrical equipment. The emergency responder might be the only person who can safely gain access to the shut off point.
There is a lot more that LE and school staff can do together well before an incident. Remember, no matter what steps are ultimately taken, collaboration and communication between the school and the local police department is key:
- See if schools in your jurisdiction will allow you to use them for law enforcement and hazmat training.
- Make it easy for an officer standing in a hallway to determine which way they should orient the map of the school by coloring or striping the walls and echoing those on the map. This also makes it easy for LE to communicate their position should they need backup.
- Number all building doors, including entry doors. It’s much easier to call out a number than describe where a door is located. Ensure that numbers are visible whether the doors are open or closed.
- Outline classroom and office walls by painting lines on the roof of the building. Doing this might assist if you need to insert video or listening devices from above.
And if the worst happens, you should already know where these would be located:
- Internal command post
- Staging area for law enforcement and other first responders
- Media staging area well away from the above staging area that can accommodate a large number of vehicles
- Family Center away from any other staging areas where family members can stay informed and pick up their loved ones. You really don’t want family and media to be in the same place at the same time.
This article was originally published on PoliceOne.com. Please add your own recommendations in the comments here or on the original PoliceOne article if you are a law enforcement professional. Stay safe everyone!
Today’s entry is from guest blogger Jeff Knox of the Firearms Coalition and was originally published on the Knox Update blog.
With the events in San Bernardino and Paris fresh in my mind, this entry seemed appropriate. You have to protect yourself rather than expecting someone else to protect you. I have added links to some of Jeff’s references which were not in the original.
Tools of the Trade
Like many Americans, I frequently carry a gun. I’ve done so for over 30 years without ever laying hand to it in need. Professor John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center reports that some 12.8 million people, over 5.2% of the adult U.S. population, are licensed to carry a concealed handgun. In addition to concealed carry license holders in all 50 states, 7 states require no permit at all for concealed carry, and 40 states have few restrictions on carrying as long as the gun is visible. On top of that, as I have reported recently, there appears to be a growing trend among people who routinely carry a firearm to also routinely ignore signs that tell them they can’t. It is a growing form of civil disobedience that puts no one at increased risk of death or injury. As the number of concealed carriers grows, violent crime continues to fall. This doesn’t prove that more guns equals less crime, but it irrefutably proves that more guns do not equate to more crime.
Unless you live in one of the extremely restrictive states like New York, New Jersey, or Massachusetts, any time you are on the street or anywhere that does not have controlled access, with metal detectors and bag searches, etc., there is a fairly high probability that someone nearby is legally carrying a gun. But they are not carrying that gun to protect you.
A popular essay from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, divided humans into three categories: “Sheep,” “Wolves,” and “Sheepdogs.” I would suggest that Lt. Col. Grossman left out an important fourth category: “Porcupines.”
My wife is neither “sheep” nor “sheepdog,” and she certainly is no “wolf.” She is a “porcupine;” harmless and docile if left alone, but ferocious and dangerous if threatened – even more so if her progeny are threatened. She would choose flight over fight every time, if flight is a viable option. But if flight is not an option, she has the tools, training, and mindset to win the fight.
Our nation’s convoluted laws on self-defense and liability also force all but the most dedicated “sheepdogs” into the role of “porcupine” as well, making “porcupines” the most prevalent variety of armed citizen. We won’t passively stand by while the wolves have their way with us or our families, but neither can we take responsibility for protecting the “sheep” from the “wolves.” Certainly most people who carry would take action to help someone in need if there was an opportunity to do so, and there was no obvious alternative, and while many of us would probably prefer to characterize ourselves as “sheepdogs” rather than “porcupines,” the reality is that protecting you, your spouse, and your children is your responsibility, not ours. You should also be aware that protection of you and your family is not the responsibility of the police either. The courts have conclusively ruled that the police have a duty to protect only the public at large, not individuals.
Those of us who have a natural inclination toward being “sheepdogs” have some pretty significant disincentives to acting on those inclinations. Not only is it physically dangerous to intervene in a violent situation, it is a legal minefield that in most cases must be navigated in a matter of seconds. While laws and jurisprudence protect police from prosecution and civil liability, and while some protections exist for individuals acting in defense of themselves and their families, there are few shields for someone acting on behalf of a stranger. Armed citizens who intervene in situations where they or their families are not in imminent danger, place themselves at significant risk of prosecution and civil penalties. We also tend to be keenly aware of the fact that any error involving a firearm can be devastating and permanent.
Violent encounters usually happen quickly, and they can be very confusing. It’s not always clear who is the “good guy” and who is the “bad guy.” Anyone who has ever been through a quality personal defense course has been cautioned to avoid deploying a firearm or engaging an aggressor unless there is no other alternative. In any shooting situation, there are two key problems to deal with. Problem One is survival. Problem Two is dealing with the legal and emotional fallout from solving Problem One. Ending a life can be emotionally devastating, and the legal consequences can destroy bank accounts and quality of life as surely as being gravely wounded. For most of us, there are no legal repercussions for running away. In the real world, this means flight is better than fight. Our training, and often the law, dictates that if we’re enjoying a movie when a homicidal lunatic starts shooting people on the other side of the theater, our first responsibility is to get out and away, especially if our family is with us. If we’re in a college class and we hear gunfire from the next building or a classroom down the hall, we, just like our unarmed classmates or students, should evacuate or “shelter in place,” not head toward the gunfire.
This approach is galling to many gun owners, especially those of us with a natural inclination toward being “sheepdogs.” We would rather fight than run. We would rather put ourselves at risk than allow evil to go unchecked. But regardless of the level of training and skill a person has, the multiple layers of risk that are inherent in any shooting situation stack the deck against playing the hero unless there is no other alternative.
Both sides of the debate over bearing arms have a tendency to relegate armed citizens to the role of “sheepdog,” but that is a role that the law and prudence won’t let us accept, though some of us will try despite the obstacles. For the most part, we are “porcupines.” We are armed for defense of ourselves and our families, not for you and yours. In a worst-case scenario, one of us might be present and save your life in defending our own, but don’t count on it. We don’t carry for you.
This is a blog about spying in the Internet era. While activists would have you believe that it’s all about online personas, there is still a lot of cloak-and-dagger up close and personal spying going on. When Edward Snowden dumped his files, many Western spy agencies had to pull back agents because their covers were blown.
Even more covers may have been blown with the latest hack into the US government’s Office of Personnel Management’ security clearance database, where the Chinese gained access to employees’ 127-page SF-86 security-clearance forms, on which candidates for sensitive jobs have to give an exhaustive account of their past, including foreign contacts. They also got investigational info that includes employees’ extramarital affairs, sexually transmitted diseases and other health matters, as well as the results of polygraph tests. Can you spell “Blackmail?”
What is absolutely hilarious, yet sad at the same time, is that we found out during a hearing held by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the stolen data was not protected by practices like data masking, redaction and encryption. Oops!
But what if breaking in and playing “spot the spy” or determining whom they can target for espionage against us is not the game of the Chinese government? What if the Chinese are more interested in injecting data into the system?
I wrote a Forbes blog about losing your own identity if your biometrics are overwritten. In a nutshell, if someone changes your password to steal an online account, it is not all that hard to regain control of it. But what if someone hacks into a biometrics database and replaces your fingerprints with those of someone else? How do you prove that you are you?
But I am getting ahead of myself. Let’s start at the beginning. Cloak-and-dagger spies need an identity and a back story. That is, James Bond can’t just show up behind enemy lines. Q needs to create a persona, an alias, and fake documents to make it appear as if he is someone who he is not.
An excellent story in the Economist talks about spying in pre-computer days, when intelligence agencies kept files on paper. Access was strictly controlled and making copies was near impossible. That arrangement was cumbersome but made it possible to see exactly who had looked at a file, when, and why. Snowden would not have been able to dump hundreds of thousands of documents without someone noticing.
More importantly, it was no problem for a government to create a person out of thin air, and especially easy to create a fake passport, which would of course be as real as any other passport. Other documents could be inserted into paper files, such as birth and marriage certificates, and fingerprint cards. The spy had to memorize and practice their created backstory until it was perfect, otherwise their cover could be blown.
With everyone’s lives open to the world, it is much harder to create a digital timeline as part of a persona and popping paper cards into paper files won’t cut it any longer. People don’t just appear out of thin air and it is not hard to use your favorite search engine to find out more about someone whether they like it or not. And if you believed that a site had its historical timeline altered, you could always make a trip back in time using the Wayback Machine.
So let me leave you with this chilling possibility. What if foreign governments are not in our systems solely to get data out of them, but also to write their own data into them? Perhaps they can increase someone’s security clearance, change adjudication data to slander someone else, make a double agent look more valuable to us, remove damaging foreign contact information, or maybe even add someone to the payroll.
Is anyone looking at that possibility by comparing the latest contents to read-only archival copies? I wonder…
Special thanks to my friend Bill Fisher for giving me the idea for this post!
In November of 2014, I wrote an article on PoliceOne about why I believe that law enforcement officers should carry all the time, even when off duty. I wanted to share with all of you the kind of training that I believe should be provided to officers so that they can carry safely while off duty (or working undercover).
This article is based on training that I received from a recent NRA law enforcement instructor development school and could save an officer’s life, keep command and training staff out of prison, and protect communities from paying damages.
First and foremost, officers (and retired officers carrying a firearm under the protection of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act – LEOSA) need to be trained to properly select and handle their undercover or off-duty firearms. Next up is how to interact with uniformed officers who show up on scene to prevent a tragic blue on blue encounter.
The NRA plainly states that, “qualification is not training.” Just because an officer can hit the target during qualification doesn’t mean that he or she is qualified to carry off duty. And if an undercover, off-duty, or retired officer shoots someone or is shot him- or herself by uniformed officers, command and training staff could be guilty of vicarious liability or deliberate indifference.
Run down this checklist and if you cannot answer “yes” to every one of these questions, there may be a ticking time bomb in your jurisdiction.
Do you train your active and retired officers how to…
- clean, store, carry, and protect their off-duty firearms?
- properly select the type of holster to use for specific situations?
- demonstrate that they can safely draw, aim, challenge, fire if required, and re-holster their firearm with speed or with stealth?
- display their law enforcement credentials?
- call for help while they are covering or have already shot someone?
- follow instructions from uniformed officers to prevent blue on blue injury or death?
- know when to take action versus when to be a good witness?
In summary, personnel who cannot demonstrate all of the above might not be good candidates for off-duty carry. And if you have to give an active or retired officer a qualification “pass,” you are doing a disservice to both of you, your command and training staff, and perhaps your community. Read up on Robert Bates, a volunteer deputy for the Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office if you don’t believe me.
I try to be a good C-level executive but am really getting fed up by my cyber security staff. Every time I ask them if we’re going to get hacked like everyone else, they ask me to buy a sandbox for them. I mean, seriously… a sandbox? I’m trying to keep my company safe and they want to build sand castles. What the hey?
Dear Mr. or Ms. CxO,
Before I reply to your question, let me give you a some hacking history.
In the dawn of the personal computer revolution, 15-year-old Rich Skrenta pranked Apple II owners with a self-replicating program called “Elk Cloner.” This program spread itself on floppy disks. If an Apple II booted from an infected floppy disk, Elk Cloner became resident in the computer’s memory and wrote itself to any other floppy disk inserted into the machine.
The cure to Elk Cloner was to read any floppy disk inserted into the machine, look for the program, and delete it. Because there was one version of the program and programmers knew what to look for, it was obvious what to erase from the disk. In other words, the program had a “signature” that was easy to detect so that it could be isolated or erased.
As hobbyists and then criminals started writing more software like this for fun and profit, Norton, McAfee, and dozens of other companies sprung up with software written to detect malicious software (now dubbed malware) by their signatures. Each time a new piece of malware was detected, the anti-malware companies would update their signature list to detect it. But then more sophisticated criminals and governments got into the malware business. Not only did the volume of malware increase, but chameleon-like malware that didn’t have a fixed, detectable signature started to appear.
By the time a company realized that malware was running on its systems, confidential data could be long gone. As I wrote on a Forbes blog, many companies only learned that they were hacked after law enforcement told them that their confidential information was being sold on the black market.
With that out of the way, now I can answer your question. According to Wikipedia, a cyber sandbox is used to isolate and watch untrusted code to see what it is really up to. There are several types of sandboxes, from traditional Type 1 and Type 2 virtualization to a hardware emulation sandbox. To keep this short, I’m not going to go into the differences between virtualization and emulation or why one may be better than the other. I’ll just answer your question in a couple sentences:
Today’s volume and sophistication of malware leave signature-based detection in the dust. The only way to keep up is to understand the expected behavior of approved applications, then look for unexpected actions which may indicate the existence of malware on your systems. And since the only way to see what an application is really doing is to run it in a sandbox, that is why your engineers want you to buy one for them.
When was the last time that you heard a little girl make that statement? For that matter, when was then last time that you heard any child make that statement? In many urban areas, including the nearby cities of Oakland and Richmond California, law enforcement officers are the enemy. It’s not my job to get into the politics of why this is so – and that discussion could fill an encyclopedia’s worth of volumes.
What I would like to talk about is how you can make a law enforcement career seem pretty cool to the “iPhone and Android generation.” If you haven’t yet heard of S.T.E.M. (or STEM), now is the time to learn about it. STEM stands for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics – educational areas where the United States is falling behind the rest of the world and industries where women, Latinos, and African-Americans are at the end of the pack.
Many technology companies, such as Oracle, Honda, and Toyota, along with dozens of public organizations offer STEM grants to communities throughout the United States.
But you don’t need to fire up your own program because for the past 31 years, the Science Olympiad has led a revolution in science education.
This organization has a nationwide network of science teachers, advisors, judges, and parents who take advantage of a pre-packaged set of documentation, video training, and rules for a wide range of real-time live-fire science competitions in three divisions from grades K-12
Unlike static science fairs with tri-fold cardboard popups and baking soda volcanoes, Science Olympiad competitors need to solve real-life problems while the clock is ticking.
Forensics at Science Olympiad
One of my favorite competitions, and one that I have judged a number of times, is Forensics, where two students from each team first need to determine if a crime was committed and then “whodunit.” Tests include lifting prints (and explaining how to lift them from various surfaces), reading blood spatters to determine their trajectory, matching DNA and spectrometer plots, and determining the origin of various fibers and hairs. This is science that is much more fun than a cardboard tri-fold and which teaches real-world problem solving.
If I showed you photos of the events that I have judged over the years, what will pop out is that over 90% of the competitors are East-Asian or Indian with a smattering of Whites, a handful of African-Americans, and very few Latinos. What also will surprise you is that over 60% of the participants in my events are female.
In my day job consulting on disaster recovery services to enterprises, I have a mantra of, “Crawl, Walk, Run.” If you already have a local Science Olympiad group that your department can join, that’s great. But if not, you can start as small and as local as you like.
In my own California county of San Mateo, the Office of Education has a robust STEM program, with a specific program targeted at girls. San Mateo County Sheriff Greg Munks is committed to diversity in his ranks and is proud to have women at every level of command, from correctional officers to deputy sheriff, sergeant, lieutenant, captain and finally, assistant sheriff (one of whom is Trisha Sanchez, pictured to the left). His organizations’ support of the STEM program includes staff and materials for teaching these young ladies what being a deputy sheriff is all about.
Through a partnership between the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Activities League and the advertising technology company Rocket Fuel, 50 third- through sixth grade girls, half from schools in East Palo Alto and half from Garfield Community School in Menlo Park spent the eighth day of 13 STEM sessions learning about being a woman in law enforcement.
Deputy Rosemerry Blankswade and Assistant Sheriff Trisha Sanchez discussed examples of some of the different specialties and tasks the young ladies could pursue including working as a K-9 handler, motorcycle officer, detective, a crime lab technician, lifting latent prints and pulling DNA samples, or even using a radar gun on patrol.
The session ended with the assistant sheriff and deputy encouraging the girls to stay in school and excel in their studies, swearing them in as honorary sheriff’s deputies and inviting them to join the Sheriff’s Explorer Program when they turn 14.
Does your department have an Explorer program? Do you reach out to children before gangs can get to them? Do you work with your local community leaders to help keep kids in school and encourage them to excel in their studies? Please let me know in the comments.
A quarter century ago, I got into the disaster recovery business by accident. I was walking through my company’s loading dock and found a huge fireproof safe. When I asked what was in it, I was told, “Reel-to-reel backup tapes of all of the software that we develop and sell to our customers, and our accounting records.” Since I was the company’s IT security guy (we didn’t have CISOs back then), I commented to my manager that if an earthquake rendered the safe unreachable, we could be out of business. My manager encouraged me to outline a strategy and budget for disaster recovery, but my plan was subsequently shelved due to the expense. That was in April of 1989.
Six months later, on October 17th, 1989, the Loma Prieta earthquake rocked northern California, measuring 6.9 on the Richter scale. Immediately following the quake, I was called into the CFO’s office and asked if I could start implementation of my disaster recovery plan and how long it would take for us to be protected.
The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake provides a cautionary tale for business. Is your disaster recovery strategy prepared for a natural disaster?
The plan started with taking tapes offsite, working to ensure that a backup system could take over in a pinch, documenting data flows, building call trees, and exercising everything. “Crawl, walk, run,” as I like to say. Later that year, I received certificate #117 as a Certified Disaster Recovery Professional and the rest, as they say, is history.
We escaped disaster that time and were able to consider the earthquake a timely warning. Another company was not so lucky. In 1984, Laury Ostrow created Chi Pants, a new kind of pants with an extra square of fabric for added comfort and movement. His client list included A-list celebrities and his pants were so popular that the Santa Cruz mayor TWICE proclaimed Chi Pants’ Day.
When the Loma Prieta earthquake struck, their primary building was destroyed and their accounting records irretrievably lost. While Ostrow found other space to get some of his 85 employees back to work, he couldn’t get his production line to resume.
In the aftermath of the earthquake, the workers at Chi Pants’ manufacturing factory stopped showing up. If Ostrow wanted Chi Pants to be sewed, he needed to pay a substantial premium for using supervisors at the sewing machines…but only if Chi Pants paid their outstanding invoices to the manufacturer first. Unfortunately, without their accounting records, Chi Pants had no way to invoice many of their customers and thereby get the cash needed to foot the bill. And it’s no surprise that Chi Pants’ customers didn’t volunteer that they owed Chi Pants money.
Chi Pants was forced to borrow from private lenders, but many of the new products they had developed for the Christmas season were never made. As you can imagine, Christmas that year in Santa Cruz – a region devastated by the quake – wasn’t very merry anyway. Chi Pants’ lost roughly $1 million, could not get out from under its debts, and subsequently folded in 1991.
I wish I could have saved Chi Pants and the other companies that Loma Prieta put out of business…I wish I could have put their records in a fireproof safe and shipped it to a secure offsite location along with those of my own company. But I couldn’t. What I can do, however, is to spread the word far and wide: after a disaster, it’s often the little things that can bring a company down. For example, Chi Pants still had a way to make their wares and a place to sell them, but a little thing like accounting records prevented them from accessing the working capital they so desperately needed to survive.
The story of Chi Pants’ history and their earthquake-driven demise can be seen on this video. It’s quite the cautionary tale, however, so beware – you just might go running down the hall to find out more about your company’s business resiliency capabilities.
Finally, I want to leave all companies with a thought, in honor of 2014 being the 25th anniversary of the Loma Prieta earthquake: Will you trust your company’s survival to fickle Lady Luck, or will you be confident because your organization and its supply chain have business continuity planning programs in place?
This article was originally published on the Forbes Sungard AS Voice blog.
I missed a very important component of active shooter response in the series that I wrote. Luckily, Jan Glarum from A Better Emergency consulting can fill in the blanks. This article was originally published on his own blog.
In a perfect world police are there to handle criminal acts, fire fighters available to perform rescues, and EMS personnel close at hand to apply life-saving interventions. Unfortunately, that is not always the world we live in.
We need to have the conversation on how best to address the “planned” response to the aftermath of a violent criminal act. The data tells us it could occur anywhere — at work, out in public, a recreational facility, sporting event, place of worship or healthcare facility. Unless it occurs at a police, fire, or EMS station, the first people on scene will be members of the community. Why don’t we train them so their reaction is not random but based on tasks designed to positively influence survival?
There are a number of mitigation strategies organizations and facilities should undertake in cooperation with their local police and emergency management agencies. This can include training their staff in how to respond to this type of situation — a program similar to people learning CPR. Lets call it community-based hemorrhage control for lack of a better term. Science tells us that the people whose lives are saved at the next attack will be by someone who can apply a tourniquet within minutes of injury.
Consider this case study from the Boston Marathon bombing. A 34-year-old man was brought to an emergency department at a hospital suffering from multiple traumatic injuries which included a complete amputation of his leg below his right knee. A tourniquet had been applied to the right upper leg by prehospital providers but was not adequately tightened to control the bleeding. At the hospital the tourniquet was tightened, and a second, military-style tourniquet was added which stopped the bleeding.
Tourniquets work and the risk of complications from aggressive and unnecessary use is outweighed by the risk of not controlling bleeding in situations like these. The public is trained in CPR. We see Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) in most large buildings and venues, all designed to help save lives from heart attacks. Granted, more people die of sudden cardiac arrest than bleeding to death from a gunshot wound or blast injury from an Improvised explosive Devices (IEDs, but there is a need for this training.
I’m advocating all citizens learn how to improve survival in active shooter situations and to use hemorrhage control kits that are placed in venues alongside AEDs.
Like it or not, members of the public will be first on scene of the next sick attack by a gunman or the detonation of an IED. Why not offer training designed to change the outcomes of the wounded? Naturally there is risk to any type of action in the face of this type of attack and education is the best way to give them the ability to make the best risk-reward decision.
Jan and I look forward to your comments and discussions in how we prepare to handle these emergencies.
The year is 2015. You walk into your bank to make a withdrawal, hold your smartphone to the terminal with one hand, and put the fingers of your other hand on the small green-glowing window.
A buzzer sounds and the words “IDENTITY REJECTED” flash onto the screen. A security guard appears from nowhere.
You begin the first of many long, frustrating protestations. You are who you say you are, but you can’t prove it.
Your identity has been snatched.
The Not-Too-Distant Future
I am interested in the problems – and dangers – of proving your identity through your biometrics (i.e., retinal scans, fingerprints, etc.) because of a problem that I have. Namely, my fingerprints are unreadable. The ridges are badly broken and my hands lack the oils and moisture necessary for live scan fingerprinting to work.
For well over a century, fingerprinting has been the accepted verifiable method of personal identification. Fingerprints are used for all sorts of things, such as getting a driver’s license, applying for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) pre-check program, getting a background check, and buying a gun.
Minor Annoyances For Some
Having unreadable fingerprints has had its share of annoyances. For instance, as a volunteer for my local sheriff’s office, I had to go through a law enforcement background check, as I did for the other licenses I need to do my job. In every case, I go through the same process. Submit prints, get rejected in 30 days, submit a second set of prints, get rejected in 30 days, and then perform a “no-fingerprint” search. So it takes three months after my initial submission before the background check can proceed.
And since I travel frequently, I have a Clear card which gets me to the front of the TSA lines in several airports. Clear uses both live scan fingerprints and a retinal scan. They managed to get a few prints from me, but because they couldn’t pull enough to meet the TSA’s standards, they had to apply to the TSA for a waiver and I select the retinal scan at the airport. Lucky for me, the U.S./Canada Nexus trusted traveler system uses iris scans.
Okay, so all of the above are a pain, but I don’t need to go through background checks or apply for a Clear card every day, and the retina scan works to get me through airport security.
The reason I am much more concerned about my fingertips today than I was, say, a decade ago, is that with the introduction of Apple pay, fingerprints just moved into the mainstream. Another example is Alaska Airlines using biometrics, or “e-thumb” technology, to allow passengers to access some of its airport lounges. They plan to be the first U.S. carrier to employ biometrics for boarding passes and inflight purchases. I am so screwed if this happens. But maybe so are you – although in a different way. Let me explain.
Identity Snatchers For All
With Apple biometrics technology, your fingerprints are stored in a secure area on your iPhone or iPad and are checked locally. This is called “multi-factor authentication.” Your device is something that you have, and your fingerprints are something that you are. Clear also checks local versions of your prints and retina scan on the smart card that you insert into their reader (you have the card and you are your fingerprints/retinas). That’s good.
But other companies, such as Global Entry and Nexus, use a central database to check your biometrics against the set that you initially submitted. That’s bad.
- If someone steals your phone, you can deactivate it.
- If your password is compromised, you change it.
- If someone steals your driver’s license or passport, you get a marked replacement and a note is placed in your file so that law enforcement or customs knows to be suspicious when it is presented to them.
But what happens when someone copies your fingerprint or makes a contact lens with a copy of your iris? If someone steals your biometrics, they may be able to prove that they’re you.
You’ve probably seen or heard about Hollywood sci-fi movies where eyeballs are plucked out of skulls, fingers are cut off, or even whole hands severed to access biometric systems (sorry for the disgusting imagery). Well, with today’s technology, identity snatchers don’t have to go to these physical extremes (which, thankfully, don’t work anyway). They can simply replace the data about your biometrics with data about their biometrics in the central databases of companies who do not use multi-factor authentication. Presto-change-o, they can now prove that they are you!
Encryption, Inspection, And Good Old-Fashioned Control
One way to prevent theft of biometrics would be to not supply them in raw form to anyone, but rather use an encrypted form – what is referred to as “cancellable” biometrics. Off-board hardware processors are used to hash and encrypt the biometric at the point of collection (the capture station), perhaps embedding the time and capture station ID. The keys used for hashing, encryption, and decryption would then be changed on a regular basis and if Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) is being used, the encrypting keys can be destroyed so that a hacker cannot encrypt replacement biometrics without the change being obvious.
Scheduled scans of the database could look for clues that biometrics may have been compromised and the records would be flagged for further inspection. If an offline biometric capture station log is available, the hashed place and time in the biometric can be compared to the log and a discrepancy should be apparent.
But in my opinion, the best place to store a biometric is in something that I personally control, such as a smartcard or my smart phone. While a central database would validate that the smart card or smart phone belongs to me, it wouldn’t actually have my biometric data stored anywhere. I would be able to file a report if I believed that my information had been compromised in any way; any activity could then be cancelled or suspended until it was investigated. On the other hand, if someone compromises my biometrics in a centralized database, there is little that I can do to prove that I am me and not who my biometrics “prove” that I am.
If you like being “you” – and you’d rather not share that distinction with anyone else – the new world of biometrics is definitely worth thinking about.
This article was originally published on the Forbes Sungard AS Voice blog.
The name Colleen Hufford may not mean anything to you. For whatever reason, this story disappeared from the news pretty quickly – perhaps because it didn’t involve naked celebrities, schoolchildren, or an assault rifle.
In case you missed it, a recently suspended worker at a Vaughan Foods processing plant came from behind the 54-year-old Hufford with a large bladed knife that he brought from home, and sliced her head off. But before he could do the same to 43-year-old Traci Johnson, the company’s chief operating officer, Mark Vaughan, shot him, stopping the attack.
The September 24, 2014 incident apparently was triggered when the murderer was suspended after Johnson initiated a complaint against him. And this wasn’t the first time the murdered became violent. Police records show that he had a history of violence. He was convicted in January 2011 of multiple felony drug offenses, assault and battery on a police officer and escape from detention. Because of the way that Huffard was murdered, the local police called in the FBI to assist in the investigation.
Dawn Perlmutter, director of the Symbol Intelligence Group wrote up an analysis of the actual event and believes that this was not an act of pure workplace violence but is a textbook case of Individual Extremist Religion Inspired Homicide. But the driving force behind the murder and attempted murder is immaterial to my interest in the case.
You see, if the company’s COO hadn’t shot the murderer, the killings would have continued. Oklahoma County Sheriff John Whetsel agrees, saying “There is every reason to believe that the lives of untold others were saved who would have been targeted by the suspect if it hadn’t been for Vaughan’s actions” – and this is what interests me.
In most instances, shooters have taken their own lives, been shot by police, or surrendered when forced with a confrontation by law enforcement. According to New York City Police Department (NYPD) statistics, 46 percent of active shooter incidents are ended by the application of force by police or security, 40 percent end in the shooter’s suicide, 14 percent of the time the shooter surrenders or, in less than 1 percent of cases, the violence ends with the attacker fleeing.
In a previous blog entry, I talked about sheepdogs and the mindset and training needed to kill someone who is intent on causing great bodily harm to you, your friends and loved ones, or even your co-workers, before they kill you or someone else. The point is that Mark Vaughan saved Traci Johnson’s life by shooting someone actively trying to kill her.
Now it turns out that Mr. Vaughn has been a reserve deputy with the Oklahoma County sheriff’s office since 2010. Deputy Vaughan is a card-carrying sheepdog. And as a law enforcement officer, federal law allows him to carry a gun when off duty.
In that same blog, I ask how many active or retired peace officers are working at your organization, but cannot carry a firearm due to company policy? Is there a specific reason for that policy or is it because a sheep in the executive staff is afraid of guns?
People like Deputy Vaughan have the mindset and the training to be sheepdogs and you should offer them every opportunity to protect their coworkers by allowing them to carry while at work.
But not every sheepdog is a law enforcement officer. Citizens from all walks of life can become a sheepdog with the proper mindset and training, and many states will issue a permit to carry a concealed firearm to any law-abiding citizen that applies and passes the required training.
Would your workplace firearms policy have prevented someone like Deputy Vaughan from protecting other employees from a murderer? What about employees who have had extensive firearms training but are not law enforcement officers? Can they protect your sheep against wolves like the one that murdered Colleen Hufford?
With the increased fighting against ISIS and the knowledge that the White House-targeted Khorasan cell was plotting an “imminent” attack against the United States or Europe, wouldn’t this be a good time to ensure that you have enough trained sheepdogs guarding your flock?