Q & A May/June 2008 – Survey: Mixed Results for Physical, Cyber Safety

Kirby

Physical security improved at public schools throughout the United States in 2007, while cyber safety declined, according to a survey of more than 400 public school district information technology and security directors released in May.

The survey sponsored by CDW Government Inc., a company that offers information technology products to the school and government markets, revealed that nearly 70 percent of the surveyed districts use security cameras and 29 percent reported a positive impact on security as a result of the camera installations. More than half of respondents use mass notification systems during emergencies.

Budget constraints continue to be a common problem, but more school officials are implementing control measures to ensure that unauthorized users cannot access networks.

“School districts both large and small are embracing advanced technology tools and techniques to make school a safer place for our children,” says Bob Kirby, senior director K-12 at CDW Government. “Cyber- and physical-safety tools — from network access control to security cameras — are allowing administrators to see into and lock down their networks and school buildings, but schools continue to be frustrated by budget and staff constraints, particularly in their IT security programs.”

Kirby, who leads CDW Government’s sales and account mangers, spoke with School Construction News about the Survey’s findings during a phone interview.

Q: Was there anything that surprised you with the report?

A: This is the second year that we have done the survey and I think last year we were surprised when we found that most of our audience that responded felt more comfortable with cyber security than they felt with physical security. This year it is the opposite. We have made some advances in physical security, but we seem to have taken a step back with cyber security.

We survey just over 400 IT professionals and security professionals. Last year, they felt comfortable based on the technology that was out there, but there were also some risks that were emerging. What we are seeing is a convergence, where we have physical and IT security falling into the realm of the IT professional at a school or school district. They are now responsible for IP video cameras and voice over IP systems that are part of mass notifications systems. They are finding themselves accountable for things they weren’t accountable for before.

The physical threats seemed to be kind of a known factor. They are not predicable, but you can at least know how to protect yourself. Some of the cyber security threats are more difficult to protect against because the landscape keeps changing.

Q: Is that convergence of responsibility welcomed by IT professionals, or is it seen as a big challenge?

A: It’s a challenge; there is no question about it. A lot of districts look at the school first and have IT as a supporting department. In the commercial world, IT is very much a strategic department within a company. Schools have been a little bit slower to adopt technology so you don’t have as many resources dedicated to IT at schools and districts as you do in the commercial space.

I think once you have established an IT practice within an organization it is welcomed. It is just leveraging or adding on to existing infrastructure, but when you don’t have the expertise in house, it is probably not welcomed because they probably have a hard time supporting the current technology, let alone adding more to the mix.

Q: Is the learning curve and new technology the greatest factor for the 25 percent decrease with cyber safety?

A: That is definitely a big part of it. As schools get more vested in supporting technology, they are learning what else they have to do. For example, if a school installs a robust e-mail system, it has to learn how to support content filtering and to monitor bullying. They have to be conscious of laws that are in place to protect children.

The other part of it is the fact that the landscape changes. The survey last year revealed that students are technically savvy and they look for ways to get around security measures that have been put in place. Its relatively easy for students to go online at home to find the technologies that they need to work around security measures that have been put in place by a school. Because of that, the landscape changes and it makes it more difficult over time to continue to manage.

Q: I imagine a lot of students think it is a game to overcome security protocols.

A: Absolutely. That came out loud and clear in our survey and a lot of times students don’t really understand the consequences of their actions. It’s a game to them to see if they can beat the system, but they don’t realize that if they hack into a system that has private information, they are potentially liable for the handling of that sensitive information. It could be a very serious offense.

Q: Are social networking sites having much of an affect on the cyber-safety issue?

A: They do, and that is something that schools have been talking about for years. At first, it put a lot of fear into schools because a lot of them didn’t know how to control it. A lot of schools simply locked out access to the Web sites, but on the flip side, some students and administrators viewed that as being overly protective or oppressive. It prevented them from gaining access to things that could be good resources in the learning process.

There is a balance that they have to achieve so they don’t appear overly oppressive. There seems to be some settling because people are becoming more familiar with social-networking sites and there is greater awareness. People are being more watchful instead of just shutting them down.

Q: You mentioned IP cameras, which can allow police to monitor a campus from an off-site location. Are those cameras becoming more widespread?

A: We are seeing more everyday. As schools and local and county governments adopt the technology, there is natural potential for them to hook up. Districts should consider the cameras. They can improve response time and give a better view into the school. Schools also have better security because they are more tightly linked with the authorities.

Q: What were some of the factors associated with the 40 percent improvement in physical safety?

A: IP cameras and mass notifications systems. Mass notification systems can be tied into VoIP systems and other systems that allow schools better communication with students, administration and faculty, and parents. We see an acceleration with those types of technologies being implemented in schools.

Q: Do you think that is due to the response from the Virginia Tech shootings and other recent incidents?

A: I actually think it is a trend that has been there for years. When we talked to our customers last year, they said they really started thinking about it after Columbine. The incidents after that reinforced the trend that has already been there and just accelerated it a little bit.

Q: So you haven’t seen any major reactionary decisions?

A: No, we haven’t really seen any knee-jerk reactions. It was a trend that was already there and it’s kind of the nature of IT. Once you put in the basic infrastructure, you start to bolt on new technologies when you have a backbone to build on. There is a natural progression, and if anything, those types of events just raise the awareness and accelerate something that probably would have happened naturally.

Q: What else will happen during the natural progression? What do you think your report will say a year from now?

A: I think you are going to start to see that the norm will be IP-based video cameras at new schools, and more retrofitting projects at schools will include new technology. Schools recognize that just the mere existence of cameras can have a very positive impact on security. Mass notification and VoIP will also become the norm, but they will be a bigger investment because they are tied to a pretty sophisticated phone-switch solution.

Q: Is there one component that you think is most important for a campus that has never really considered IT technologies for school safety?

A: I would lump it all under physical access control and network access control. As schools become more secure, you are not going to have open access and there will be security doors and ID cards to monitor who is coming and going. The flipside to that is schools need to adopt network access control so they are not allowing non-district hardware that is not secure to access the network.

Q: Why are lapses in access control more prevalent in urban and rural schools?

A: Because most schools are funded by local property taxes, we find that suburban schools have fewer budgetary constraints than large urban schools and remote rural schools.
Large urban schools have large budgets but they also have a large number of schools, a lot of old legacy buildings and infrastructure to support. That creates a drain on resources. Rural schools just don’t have the budget and that becomes a major barrier in adopting the technologies.