Reposted from Deutsche Welle

German police opened an investigation into a fire which started at Frankfurt's Museum für Moderne Kunst (Museum of Modern Art or MMK) on Monday.

About 70 firefighters and 20 vehicles were at the scene and trying to put out the flames in the "roof area" according to the local fire service.

"The effort to put out the fire is difficult because the copper roof must be opened by hand," Frankfurt firefighters said on Twitter, without providing details.

The deployment lasted for severa hours, they said in a statement on Monday afternoon.

The MMK, which opened in 1991, is considered one of the most important museums in Germany. The building normally houses over 5,000 items, including pictures, photos, sculptures, and video installations.

'Fortunate in misfortune'

With the museum undergoing renovation, however, most of the items were in storage, a spokeswoman said.

Separately, museum chief Susanne Pfeffer described the fire as being "fortunate in [its] misfortune."

Speaking to daily Frankfurter Runschau, she said that "no people were injured and no works of art were damaged."

"We had pretty much no art on display," Pfeffer added.

Passers-by first reported the thick column of smoke rising from the building's roof. No visitors were inside the building at the time.

See Original Post

Reposted from ABC7 News

ABC7 News has learned that the computers of the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco were hacked in a Ransomware attack in May. The museum's system was restored but there are still some unanswered questions. It's a story you'll see only on ABC7 News.

It happened in May when hackers, who demanded a ransom, launched a cyberattack that disabled part or all of the Asian Art Museum's computer system.

A representative of the quasi-city agency confirmed the attack to ABC7 News, saying "everything is now fine" and that the museum never paid the ransom.

San Francisco police were contacted and the city's IT security experts helped get the paralyzed computers working again.

But the museum would not confirm if any of the information in the system was lost in the ransomware attack.

"Ransomware is definitely a problem," said Danny O'Brien with Electronic Frontier Foundation, an international digital rights group.

He believes the Asian Art Museum was not targeted.

"I don't think that there's a shadowy figure out there targeting San Francisco city or its connected institutions," he said. "This is all opportunistic criminals."

The museum also declined to say how much money the hackers wanted or how it was to be paid. O'Brien says most hackers want untraceable currency.

"You know, I want unmarked bills whether that's unmarked bills in good old fashioned cash or whether it's using cryptocurrency or another method," he said.

In the aftermath of the cyberattack, O'Brien says it's important for the museum and all city agencies to revisit their security protocols.

"If you have good backup systems, that's a pretty effective way of preserving the data out of the hands of the criminals," said O'Brien.

San Francisco is now one of almost a dozen cities in the country that's been hit by ransomware attacks. It is fast becoming a digital nightmare for the public sector.

Some cities like Riviera Beach in Florida paid the ransom, which was approved by its city council.

"A ransom amount of approximately 65 bitcoins in cryptocurrency whose value changes daily," said Riveria Beach Councilmember Kashamba Miller-Anderson.

The 65 bitcoins on the day Riveria Beach paid the ransom was the equivalent of $600,000.

This is not the first time San Francisco has been victimized by a breach in its computer system.

In July 2008, San Francisco made national headlines when Department of Technology specialist Terry Childs commandeered the City's computer network, blocking officials
access to the system.

Childs, who was later arrested, would only release the network's password to then Mayor Gavin Newsom.

Childs gave it to Newsom when he went to his jail cell. 

See Original Post

Reposted from 13WMAZ

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration says about two million people report some type of workplace violence each year.

The United States Department of Labor defines workplace violence as any act or threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior that happens at work.

Is workplace violence on the rise?

Captain David Freeland with the Bibb County Sheriff's Office Training Division has worked in law enforcement for about 17 years. He works with deputies and the public to prepare for active shooting situations.

"It's very hard to prevent because, again you don't see it coming," Freeland said. 

On Wednesday night an employee at the YKK AP America, Inc. plant in Dublin ended up in the hospital after police say a coworker shot him.

Feeland says workplace violence can come in many forms, so it is important to always be aware of your surroundings. 

"We want people at work to feel safe too so you have to be kind of on your toes a little bit," Freeland said. 

According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, about 25 percent of workplace violence goes unreported. 

The National Safety Council says assaults are the fourth leading cause of work-related deaths. The council reports between 2014 and 2017, workplace assault that led to nonfatal injuries increased by about 2,400 cases. 

13WMAZ verified that workplace violence does appear to be on the rise, but the numbers do not tell the full story. 

"They could be reported as just shots fired. It could go out as an active shooter. So a lot of time it might not get reported as workplace violence type shooting versus an aggravated assault," Freeland said. 

Freeland suggests reporting any signs of workplace violence to management at the facility you work at and law enforcement.

"Be mindful of your surroundings and again, don't take anything for granted," Freeland said. 

The National Safety Council says in 2017, workplace assaults resulted in more than 18,000 injuries and 450 deaths. The council reports certain industries, like healthcare and education, are more prone to violence.

See Original Post

Reposted from Security Management

Nearly 55 percent of the global population lives in cities, and by 2050, the United Nations estimates that will rise to 70 percent. With such concentrated populations, natural disasters can wreak havoc—by 2030, disasters will cost cities around the world $214 billion annually in damage, the World Bank reports. 

The risks these cities face on a regular basis—and the potential long-term impact of those risks on citizens’ lives, local economies, and the global landscape—are driving them to invest in more robust emergency preparedness and disaster recovery plans. 

The World Bank Group and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released a guideline in 2018 for citywide resiliency and recovery called the CURE Framework. This framework outlines how culture—which encompasses touchstones like landmarks, temples, and relics, as well as local practices and traditions—affects resiliency. It offers suggestions on how emergency managers can leverage culture to help disaster-affected regions “build back better.” 

“Culture is the foundation upon which cities are built,” says Ahmed Eiweida, lead urban specialist with The World Bank, Singapore. “Cities are not just a collection of buildings, but are the people, their stories, and how they interact with each other through their cultural identity and sense of place.” 

Eiweida was one of the authors of the position paper on the UNESCO and World Bank framework, Culture in City Reconstruction ​and Recovery.

Integrating culture into sustainable urban development and disaster recovery policies helps make cities more inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable, according to the paper. Focusing on the culture of an area also promotes harmony and reconciliation between different groups of people who may have a history of conflict. 

“Emergency managers are increasingly recognizing the benefits of integrating the specific needs of culture and cultural heritage into their wider plans. At the same time, site managers of cultural heritage and tourist sites are recognizing the need to plan and prepare their sites for the hazard scenarios they will face,” Eiweida says. 

“In practice, integrating culture means bringing together professionals from key disciplines at the national and more localized levels in pre-disaster planning,” he adds. “National emergency authorities often have access to key disaster risk data and general plans for resource deployment, while other national ministries may be able to prepare and adapt specific social protection programs or bring other key steps to pre-disaster planning. To better understand and share cultural aspects at the local level, local authorities must be part of the pre-disaster planning for their areas, as they will have better knowledge of their communities’ expectations, existing resources, and key areas of cultural focus.” 

After a 6.8-magnitude earthquake struck Myanmar in 2016, for example, more than 350 monuments at the Bagan cultural heritage site were damaged. Afterward, national officials partnered with cultural authorities, site managers, business leaders, and local community members to develop a new disaster management plan that would safeguard national treasures and promote local culture.  

“Culture-based recovery relies on a recognition that the government alone cannot implement a successful recovery,” Eiweida notes. Successful culture-based recoveries in Colombia, Japan, the Philippines, and elsewhere have demonstrated that “communities, including their local organizations and businesses, must have a leading role in these processes, in order to set out relevant priorities and ensure execution that meets their needs,” he says.

Organizations seeking to prepare for or recover from disasters must also consider culture, both of the organization and the regions in which they operate. The culture of a place has a large impact on business continuity, says Malcolm Reid, CPP, managing director at risk consultancy firm Brison, LLC. 

For example, Japan experiences a variety of natural disasters—such as tsunamis and earthquakes—but there is a culture of preparedness in businesses, communities, and schools. Infrastructure is built for disasters, technology like early warning systems or cellphone alerts are regularly used, and people train often—including sending schoolchildren on field trips to earthquake simulators. 

“By comparison, the Caribbean region has lots of hurricanes,” Reid says, “but the culture of preparedness there is more laissez-faire.” Caribbean nations are very faith-oriented, he adds, and there is the feeling that God will take care of them, so they do not need as much active preparedness. 

Within business, safety has taken the issue of companywide culture seriously. Associate Director of Business Services at Novartis Pharmaceuticals Brendan Monahan notes that every meeting starts with a “safety moment”—a 10- or 30-second segment that identifies who in the room is CPR-certified or how to stay safe in winter weather conditions. 

Companies that devote this time to embedding safety in their company culture have seen big improvements in Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reportables, says Monahan, who is also chair of the ASIS International Crisis Management and Business Continuity Council. 

Similarly, embedding business continuity into the culture of the organization takes continuous reinforcement and regular training. 

“Culture is a key enabler for the process,” Reid says. “You cannot have a successful program—with good results—without engaging with culture.” 

While regional differences should be considered for business continuity and recovery, it’s essential to start with a uniform, organization-wide framework and metrics, he says. 

“The end goal doesn’t change, so your measurement of success shouldn’t change,” Reid explains. “But some countries have to address different risks. The organization has standard processes, but each country has slightly different processes and priorities for spending.” 

In an earthquake-prone region, more disaster recovery funding could be allocated to planning for building inspections or engineers, shelters for employees, or a communications plan that would account for disrupted phone lines or lost power. In a region at higher risk for political conflict, such as Venezuela, more funding could be allocated for evacuations or additional guards. 

“Business continuity starts at the top,” Reid says. “It’s the organization’s culture, made up of regional differences.” 

Continuity also depends on agility and trust, says Erik de Vries, CPP, CEO and founder of The Netherlands-based security risk management firm DutchRisk bv. 

“Companies that are globally strongly managed from a central location—that is, the head office decides more or less everything—might struggle to handle a local crisis,” he says. “If local business units or divisions have very limited decision-making authority and they are not used to having substantial empowerment, they will, during crises, also rely much on the head office. That can slow down resilience in the first crucial hours, especially if the head office is in a different time zone.” 

This could result in shutting down production for hours until a decision can be sent from headquarters, either because of a hierarchical business structure or a lack of financial authority to make the call. 

Regional and cultural differences play a role here as well; countries that were historically unaccepting of citizens taking the initiative likely still have those hierarchical tendencies embedded in managers’ minds, resulting in an unwillingness to make independent decisions in a crisis. In some Asian cultures, people tend to automatically say “yes” to their manager instead of “I don’t know” or “no,” which can result in additional confusion during a crisis, de Vries says. 

“Try to learn how people in that area do business, then use that knowledge to train on how to make decisions in a crisis,” he adds. 

Business continuity managers should also ensure that regional locations have access to the appropriate budget (within reason and strict limits) to make crisis-related decisions quickly and effectively, especially regarding evacuation plans for expats. 

“The most important result of customizing crisis or recovery programs is that it shows local crisis or recovery teams that they are trusted and empowered to do what is needed,” de Vries says. 

See Original Post

Reposted from Fallingwater

On July 7, 2019, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee inscribed Fallingwater and seven other Frank Lloyd Wright-designed sites to the UNESCO World Heritage List at a meeting in Baku, Azerbaijan.

The inscription, The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright, to the UNESCO World Heritage List represents the first modern architecture designations in the United States.

Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959) is widely considered to be the greatest American architect of the 20th century. His major works represented in the World Heritage inscription span 54 years of his illustrious career. In addition to Fallingwater, the inscription includes: Unity Temple, Frederick C. Robie House, Taliesin, Hollyhock House, Herbert and Katherine Jacobs House, Taliesin West and Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.

These eight sites have played a prominent role in the development and evolution of modern architecture during the first half of the 20th century and continuing to the present.

UNESCO considers the international importance of a potential World Heritage Site based on its “Outstanding Universal Value,” which in the Wright series is manifested in three attributes. First, it is an architecture responsive to functional and emotional needs, achieved through geometric abstraction and spatial manipulation. Second, the design of the buildings in this series is fundamentally rooted in nature’s forms and principles. Third, the series represents an architecture conceived to be responsive to the evolving American experience, but which is universal in its appeal.

There are more than 1,000 World Heritage sites around the world, and the group of Wright sites is now among only 24 sites in the U.S. Fallingwater is one of only two Pennsylvania World Heritage sites, joining Independence Hall in Philadelphia.

Wright and Fallingwater

Wright’s design of Fallingwater in 1935 was inspired by nature’s forms and principles, where materials, colors and design motifs were all derived from the natural features of the woodland site where it was built. Fallingwater best exemplifies Wright’s philosophy of organic architecture: the harmonious union of art and nature. Owned and operated by the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, Fallingwater opened to the public as a museum in 1964 and is designated as a National Historic Landmark and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Treasure.

Not only did Wright make his mark on the American landscape, but he also influenced those in his studio and more than 500 Taliesin apprentices. Wright’s work also was published and exhibited widely in the early part of the 20th century and went on to influence world architects, such as the major modernists of Europe. His impact also impressed upon the work of architects in Latin America, Australia and Japan.

World Heritage Nomination Process and Document

The World Heritage nomination effort was spearheaded by Director Emerita of Fallingwater Lynda S. Waggoner who is also a founding board member of the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy, an international organization dedicated to the preservation of all of Wright’s remaining built works and the coordinating entity for the World Heritage nomination.

The Wright serial nomination was in development for nearly 20 years, a coordinated effort between the FLWBC, each of the nominated sites and independent scholars, with a substantial financial commitment realized through subsidies and donations, countless hours donated by staff and volunteers, and the guidance and assistance of the National Park Service. Fallingwater staff also contributed support and expertise in the nomination’s preparation.

The FLWBC will now coordinate the activities of the Frank Lloyd Wright World Heritage Council, chaired by Waggoner, which was established to support the responsible conservation and promotion of the eight World Heritage sites.

See Original Post

Read the press release on the World Heritage Inscription. >
Learn more about or read the nomination. >

Reposted from In Homeland Security

One-third of the attackers who terrorized schools, houses of worship or businesses nationwide last year had a history of serious domestic violence, two-thirds had mental health issues, and nearly all had made threatening or concerning communications that worried others before they struck, according to a U.S. Secret Service report on mass attacks.

The Secret Service studied 27 incidents where a total of 91 people were killed and 107 more injured in public spaces in 2018. Among them: the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, were 17 people were killed and 17 others injured, and the fatal attack at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh.

The report analyzed the timing, weapons, locations and stressors of the attacker, plus events that led up to the incident, in an effort to better understand how such attacks unfold and how to prevent them. Members of the Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center, which did the study, briefed police, public safety and school officials at a seminar Tuesday.

“We want the community to know prevention is everyone’s responsibility,” said Lina Alathari, the center’s chief. “Not just law enforcement.”

Other incidents examined included a man who drove a truck into a Planned Parenthood clinic in New Jersey, injuring three, and a man who killed two at a law firm, and then one at a psychologist’s office in June. Criteria for the study included an incident where three or more people were injured in a public place.

Most attackers were male, ranging in age from 15 to 64. The domestic violence history often included serious violence. While 67% had mental health issues, only 44% had a diagnosis or known treatment for the issue.

Most of the attacks occurred midweek. Only one was on a Saturday. As for motive, more than half of the attackers had a grievance against a spouse or family member, or a personal or workplace dispute. Also, 22% had no known motive. In nearly half the cases, the attacker apparently selected the target in advance.

Alathari and her colleagues want communities to be aware of concerning behavior and these trends so officials have something to look out for.

The Secret Service center is tasked with researching, training and sharing information on the prevention of targeted violence, using the agency’s knowledge gleaned from years of watching possible targets that may or may not be out to assassinate the president.

Alathari said her team is working on a new report on school shootings and how to prevent them, and investigating averted attacks to try to figure out why someone didn’t follow through.

“There is not a single solution,” Alathari said. “The more that we’re out there, training, the more we’re out there with the community … the more we share information … I think it will help really alleviate and hopefully prevent even one incident from happening. One is too many.”

See Original Post

Reposted from Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc.

Avoiding complacency can be a challenge for any organization. This is why Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. has made Vigilance one of its primary values. Complacency usually begins with small events that can, over time, snowball and lead to major problems that can inhibit an organization’s mission and goals. For security professionals, it can open the door and increase the likelihood of becoming a softer target for terrorist activity.

Causes of Complacency

New hires are usually eager and proactive in their positions, but complacency can set in over time as individuals become more comfortable in their duties. There is no single cause or reason for complacency. However, there are several specific signs, outlined below, that signal complacency creeping in employees. Individuals who observe such complacency, regardless of their position within the organization, are obligated to address it with the appropriate manager.

One cause for complacency is when an employee does not understand an organization’s goals or mission. It is important to ensure that everyone is informed of the specifics of the site plan, especially newly hired employees and supervisors. This knowledge and awareness constitutes the foundation for contentment and helps to avoid a careless attitude. Most sites do not necessarily experience major crises or events on a regular basis. This lack of activity can lead to an employee “going through the motions” and failing to develop or maintain proficiency in the skills needed to excel in the position. The lack of need to perform effectively in emergent situations can lead to a deterioration of abilities. This, combined with an employee not participating in refresher training to maintain skill levels, can create a dragging effect upon a company’s mission with undesired consequences.

The last major cause of complacency occurs when employees do not receive feedback and retraining when needed. If employees do not know that they are not performing their job responsibilities correctly or in the prescribed manner, then they will not understand what to improve or modify. Those who are advised of a deficit in performance but neglect to address it or pursue a training intervention for it are at risk for complacency.

Combating Complacency

The number one method to stop complacency creep rests in skills proficiency. Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. is committed to ensuring that all employees are properly trained in both the company and client mission goals. This is accomplished through all levels of operations, and is specifically addressed at the branch level. Branch and Account Managers are constantly checking to ensure that Securitas is being proactive in addressing officers’ training and client concerns.

Conclusion

There are multiple ways for employees to address their training and skills on an ongoing basis. Every employee should take it upon themselves to understand the site plan, goals, and mission of the organization. Encourage them to speak up and ask questions when they are uncertain about something. Lack of knowledge should not be an excuse for poor job performance. Employees need to be adaptable to ensure that any challenges can be surmounted and the mission accomplished. This might include scheduling, cross training when possible, flexibility in temporary assignments, and completing required or necessary training as requested by the company. This allows an individual to maintain and increase their knowledge and skills in specific areas. All employees need to be vigilant against complacency, especially given the potential for criminal, active shooter and terrorist activity. This can be addressed at all levels of the company through ongoing training, skills evaluation and an environment that encourages open communication.

Stay Informed, Stay Vigilant

Certain kinds of activities on the site can indicate terrorist plans are in the works, especially when they occur at or near high-profile sites or places where large numbers of people gather. The FBI urges citizens to keep an eye out for precursor conduct, such as those listed below, and to report it immediately.

• Surveillance: Anyone who may be recording or engaged in monitoring activities, taking notes, using cameras, maps, binoculars or other observation equipment at the facility

• Deploying Assets: Abandoned vehicles, stockpiling of suspicious materials, or persons being deployed near the facility

• Suspicious Persons: Anyone who does not appear to belong in the workplace, neighborhood, business establishment, or near the facility

• Suspicious Questioning: Anyone attempting to gain information in person, by phone, mail, email or other communication method regarding the facility or its personnel

• Acquiring Supplies: Anyone attempting to improperly acquire explosives, weapons, ammunitions, dangerous chemicals, uniforms, badges, flight manuals, access cards or identification for the facility, or to legally obtain items that could be used in a terrorist act under suspicious circumstances

• Dry Runs: Behavior that appears to be preparation for terrorist activity, such as mapping out routes, playing out scenarios with other people, monitoring key facilities or other suspicious activities

• Tests of Security: Any attempt to penetrate or test physical security or procedures at a facility or event. Recognizing and reporting precursor activities can interrupt potential terrorist events and other threats before they occur. The FBI encourages citizens to contact local police, the FBI or the nearest Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) to report suspicious activity or behavior. If there is an emergency or immediate threat, call 911.

For more information on this and other security related topics, visit the

Securitas Safety Awareness Knowledge Center at:
http://www.securitasinc.com/en/knowledge-center/security-and-safety-awareness-tips

Reposted from Marketplace

Every year in America, more than 300 people go to work and never make it home because of a workplace shooting. In 2017, the number of people intentionally shot dead at work was 351, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported. The year before, that number was 394.

As gun control bills continue to die in Congress and mass shootings dominate headlines, employers have started to take notice and entire industries have been created around workplace shootings, from active shooter insurance policies to workplace violence experts.

And according to those experts, most employers are not doing enough to prepare for potential workplace violence incidents.

They say there is more to workplace violence prevention than just preparing for the worst-case scenario; that many employers tack on active shooter training to their fire drills instead of devoting it the time and attention it requires.

Adequate training

If your workplace violence training material is just one page long, it’s not going to cut it, warns Dick Sem, president of security and workplace violence consultancy, Sem Security Management.

Earlier this year, he and a number of other experts spent two days in San Antonio at the Workplace Violence Prevention Symposium 2019, where about 200 human resource and security professionals were in attendance.

“One of the most essential things you can do for your people is train them,” Sem told attendees.

Industry-wide, the belief is that workplace violence prevention must start long before an incident has a chance to occur. Employers at the symposium were encouraged to reach out to risk assessment experts who can come up with customized training, work with local enforcement agencies to get a risk assessment and work on response time and plan escape routes.

External risks

As Sem walked up on the stage in Austin, the title of his presentation was displayed in large red letters on the screen in the corner. “Culture and Complacency: Overcoming the ‘It Won’t Happen Here’ Mentality on Workplace Violence.” He says he hears that a lot, the “we never thought it would happen here” bit, especially after shootings.

Sem says that one of the reasons why companies don’t have a thorough workplace violence prevention training is because they don’t believe that workplace violence is a problem in their offices. However, as numbers collected by the Department of Labor show, workplace violence goes beyond the staff. Statistics show that disgruntled customers can pose a risk, too.

In 2018, a woman killed three people at YouTube headquarters after she became frustrated with company’s policies. Other workplace violence incidents can involve staff’s family members and be related to personal problems or domestic violence. 

From 2011 to 2015, about 2,173 people were killed at work. About a third of them, 721, were killed by a robber. Relatives or domestic partners were responsible for 160 deaths, while customers or clients were responsible for 247. Coworkers killed 312 people. 

While not all of these deaths could have been prevented, Sem says there are some things companies can do to keep these incidents to a minimum.

“When I talk about the 30-plus shootings and stabbings that I was brought into, plus other incidents of violence, I find that about half of those were random acts of violence,” he said. “In other words, it was an event that no one could anticipate. But the other half of those events, there were early indicators. There were some warnings signs that were not managed, that were not reported.”

Workplace harassment  

About 75% of workplace harassment goes unreported, according to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

That number worries Catherine Mattice Zundel, an expert on workplace bullying and president of Civility Partners. She is often called in to work directly with workplace bullies to change their behaviors. But most of the time she is called in after an incident has occurred.

The number of unreported incidents of harassment shows that there is still a large lack of trust between employees and employers, Zundel says.

“Many organizations do employee engagement surveys, that’s a hot topic right now in HR,” she said. “But those surveys will never tell you whether or not whether is bullying or harassment. The questions just aren’t geared in that direction.”

Sometimes people don’t report being bullied because it’s not viewed the same as harassment and most companies do not have a workplace bullying policy. Zundel defines bullying as an abusive behavior at work that created a power imbalance between bully and the target.

Sometimes bullying can escalate into violence, from either the bully or the victim trying to get revenge. To prevent the situation from getting that far, employees must feel comfortable reporting any inappropriate behavior.

“You have to create a culture of respect and dignity and understand that if you do not respond to a complaint of workplace bullying, employees probably won’t tell you about illegal behavior either because they can see that behavior doesn’t matter,” Zundel said. “Your reaction to complaints like that really dictates whether they trust you.”

Wayne Maxey, an executive trainer and consultant at workplace violence prevention agency Workplace Guardians, agrees.

“The culture is important because we want people to report and we want them to report early,” he said. “The culture an organization develops or fosters can help or hinder that. If there’s a culture that employees know if I go to H.R., or I report on the anonymous line, that they’re going to take me seriously, and that they’re going to investigate properly and respond appropriately — they’re more likely to report.”

The golden rule

Another way to help keep abusive behaviors to a minimum in workplace is to cultivate a culture of civility, says Sem.

“I find that civil and respectful workplace is a safe workplace,” he said. According to Sem, managers should lead by the golden rule: treat others the way you want to be treated. “Your employees are like children, they learn by example. If the example you present to them is confrontational and aggressive, they are going to be confrontational and aggressive. I see that all the time.”

This is especially true when it comes to terminations. When firing people, do it kindly and try to skip the perp walk if possible – no guard standing over the terminated employee as they pack up their stuff, said Sem. Also, to make sure there is no lingering resentment, a work friend should check in with the person in questions within a few days, he added.  

See Original Post

Reposted from NBC News

Las Vegas police learned from the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history to secure high-rise buildings overseeing open-air crowds and train more officers with rifles to stop a shooter in an elevated position, Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said Wednesday.

Among 93 recommendations in a newly released department "after-action review" are requirements to plan ahead with neighboring police, fire, hospital and coroner officials; to let responding officers remove reflective vests so they're less of a target to a shooter; and to ensure more paramedics and trauma kits are available at large-scale events.

"We hope we never have to use these procedures that we are putting in place," said Lombardo, who characterized the report as "our textbook on our response" to the October 2017 massacre that killed 58 people at an open-air music festival on the Las Vegas Strip. He said it's now required reading for every Las Vegas police officer above the rank of sergeant.

Lombardo noted that report authors Capt. Kelly McMahill and Detective Stephanie Ward studied other mass casualty incidents around the country, and said he hoped the Las Vegas report would help others prepare.

The 158-page document acknowledged communications snags similar to those described in a separate August 2018 "after-action report" by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Clark County Fire Department and Las Vegas police.

That 61-page document said communications were overwhelmed by 911 calls, the number of victims, and by false reports of active shooters at other Las Vegas Strip hotel-casinos and nearby McCarran International Airport.

Lombardo, the elected head of some 5,000 officers, said the new report focuses on internal department "preparedness, response and recovery."

It comes almost a year after Las Vegas police closed the criminal investigation with a 187-page criminal investigation report and nearly six months after the FBI issued a three-page summary of its behavioral analysis of gunman Stephen Paddock.

Paddock, 64, a former accountant and high-stakes video poker player with homes in Reno and the southern Nevada resort community of Mesquite, killed himself before officers reached his hotel room.

The FBI said Paddock sought notoriety but that investigators found no "single or clear motivating factor" for the shooting.

Investigators said Paddock planned meticulously and acted alone amassing an arsenal of assault-style weapons before opening fire from a 32nd-floor suite at the Mandalay Bay resort into a crowd of 22,000 country music fans below. Authorities said more than 850 people were wounded or injured fleeing the gunfire.

Lombardo noted the NFL's Oakland Raiders plan to move to Las Vegas and begin play in 2020 at a 65,000-seat Las Vegas Stadium being built just off the Las Vegas Strip.

He said policing changes will apply to scheduled events drawing at least 15,000 people, and the report listed more than 17 such events: New Year's Eve fireworks on the Strip; conventions including the Consumer Electronics gadget show at the Las Vegas Convention Center; NASCAR races at Las Vegas Speedway; the Las Vegas Rock 'n' Roll Marathon; uncounted hotel "day club" pool parties; and 41 NHL Vegas Golden Knights hockey home games per year at T-Mobile Arena.

Lombardo noted that Las Vegas police already make presentations about what the department experienced in October 2017 to law enforcement officials in the U.S. and abroad. He said the department has already implemented 40% of the new report's recommendations.

The release comes a week after Las Vegas police confirmed the firing in March of a veteran officer who froze in a hotel hallway one floor below while Paddock rained rapid gunfire into the concert crowd below.

Lombardo said an unspecified number of other officers received lesser discipline for turning off or failing to activate body-worn video cameras, and one for accidentally firing a three-round burst of gunfire inside Paddock's suite.

Police union executive director Steve Grammas said the dismissed officer, Cordell Hendrex, was one of two officers disciplined following departmental reviews of their actions during the shooting. The union is fighting to get Hendrex reinstated.

Grammas said the only other officer he knew of who had been disciplined for actions during the shooting got his job back after an arbitrator reviewed his firing.

Grammas declined to identify that officer, but said he had at least seven years on the job.

The Las Vegas Police Protective Association official said the officer had been accused of making comments the department deemed unbecoming and of telling a woman to keep moving away from the scene of the shooting instead of investigating her complaint that she had been a victim of a crime.

See Original Post

Reposted from Security Infowatch

Given the myriad cyber threats facing organizations today from criminals, nation-states and hacktivists, it should come as little surprise that senior-level executives are placing a larger emphasis on bolstering cybersecurity over physical security. However, the results of a recent survey conducted by the Center for Cyber and Homeland Security (CCHS) at Auburn University in conjunction with the International Security Management Association (ISMA) provides new insights into the resources that C-suite leaders are considering putting behind the mitigation of cybersecurity risks as well as how CSOs and CISOs view their roles and the evolving technology landscape.   

As the study is quick to point out, the fact that cybersecurity is prioritized by management teams is not a reflection of organizations seeing diminished physical threats or a poor job of security practitioners in articulating the value of their departments to the company but rather it is indicative of the maturity level of physical security within most enterprises and their effectiveness at countering risk. According to ISMA Research Committee Member and former Boston Scientific CSO Lynn Mattice, the maturity level of corporate security programs – traditionally comprised of physical security, personnel security, information asset protection, security risk identification and mitigation, as well as business continuity/emergency response programs – is such that most CEOs have been in a position to see that these programs are professionally run and provide effective risk mitigation and resilience. 

“The CSO population has had decades of visibility with the C-suite and boards to educate leaders and mature security processes to a level where most CEO’s have confidence that their ‘physical security’ posture in general is mature and capable, with experienced CSO leaders who understand the internal and external threats being directed against their enterprises on a daily basis,” Mattice explains. “In light of the dramatic increases in nation-state-sponsored, -instigated or -supported economic espionage focused at stealing vast amounts of intellectual property and other vital intellectual capital from a vast array of enterprises, CSO’s are again being called upon to help executives and boards better understand the risks they face in today’s complex global economy.”

This was especially true in the years following the 9/11 attacks where security executives were regularly called upon to brief senior leaders and boards of directors on the terror threat landscape. 

“The difficult lessons learned from that event were widely shared and resulted in CSOs and corporations placing significant emphasis on enhanced personnel screening, improved physical security, comprehensive travel security measures, strengthening of business continuity programs to ensure resiliency, improved crisis management training and employee mass notification procedures,” Mattice adds.  

On the other hand, cybersecurity is still a relatively new and evolving function within a majority of organizations today and, given the impact that data breaches and cyber-attacks have had on companies across industries in recent years, there’s a clear desire on the part of CEOs and the C-suite, as a whole, to avoid becoming the next victim. 

In fact, the survey, which recorded responses from 136 participants that included a mix of CEOs, CSOs and CISOs, found that CEOs across the board are overwhelming prioritizing cybersecurity as it relates to broad importance/emphasis (86%), budget (83%), personnel allocation (83%), and overall strategy (86%). When asked what was the most important driver for placing their strategic emphasis on cybersecurity, the majority of CEOs (75%) reported findings of internal risk assessments as the primary driver, followed by prioritization by the board (50%), nature of industry and business operations (50%), history of prior security incidents (25%), and relevant background of members of senior leadership teams (12.5%).

“While the role of CISO is not brand new, the challenges being faced by this group of professionals evolve at a rapid pace,” Mattice says. “The relentless nation-state, organized crime, gangs, insider and cyber-hacktivists attacks directed against corporations come at a dizzying rate. At the same time as companies are trying to embrace the digital age, they must also mitigate the risks associated with a complex cyber-environment that is ever-changing and extremely difficult to protect and secure.”

Budget Priorities

With security being historically seen as a cost center within most organizations, the ability to receive increased budget allocation for technology upgrades and various other initiatives has always been an uphill battle for security executives. This could become an even bigger challenge in the future as organizations finds themselves attempting to balance both physical and cybersecurity priorities.

While all CEOs who responded to the survey said they envisioned increasing budgets for cybersecurity initiatives, only 29% predicted that there would be similar budget increases for physical security. However, of those who said they didn’t foresee steadily increasing physical security budgets for their organizations over the next five years, over half selected “protecting physical assets and operations” as the most important priority for their CSO over the next one to two years.

At first glance, it would appear that the predicted budget allocations of these CEOs are not aligned with their security priorities, however; the study noted that because all of them believe they maintain a coordinated or unified incident response plan, increasing cybersecurity budgets may not be seen as actually taking away from physical security.

The CSO Perspective

Unsurprisingly, a majority of the CSOs surveyed (85%) felt that their senior leaders prioritize cybersecurity over physical security, due primarily to their companies experiencing more cyber incidents than physical security incidents in the recent past.

In contrast with CEOs, however; nearly 60% of CSOs said they envisioned growing security budgets over the next five years. In addition, about 70% of CSOs reported having a unified incident response plan that is a coordinated effort between both physical and cybersecurity.

Of the technologies and innovations that CSOs expect to have a “very significant impact” on their jobs over the next five years, the majority of respondents (63%) believe advancements in insider threat detection will affect their duties the most, followed by employee use of mobile devices (46%), counterfeiting/product diversion/interception/prevention (24%), and robots replacing security officers (20%).

What CISOs Think

Like their CSO counterparts, the majority of CISOs believe that senior leaders in their organizations prioritize cybersecurity over physical security, which 44% attribute to recent cyber incidents.

And while many previous studies have found a lack of knowledge among C-suite executives and board members as a reason why companies haven’t adequately invested in cybersecurity, CISOs who took part in this survey were extremely involved in helping educate senior leaders about these issues. In fact, 72 % of CISO respondents said they did two or more of the following:

• Made presentations on cyber threats at senior leadership meetings and/or board of directors’ meetings;
• Brought in outside cybersecurity experts to speak to senior leadership or board of directors;
• Held tabletop exercises with senior leadership of company on cyber threats;
• Implemented penetration tests of company and provided results to senior leadership;
• And, developed new employee training on cyber threats and risks.

As a result of these activities, CISOs have created more awareness and understanding among C-suite leaders about the cybersecurity threats they face, and many expect to see increased budgets moving forward. Indeed, 77% of CISOs said they expect to see increased cybersecurity budgets over the next few years while only 33% predict an increase in the physical security budget.   

Of the technologies and innovations that CISOs expect to have a “very significant impact” on their jobs over the next five years, the majority of respondents felt that the shift to cloud-based services (71%) would affect them the most, followed by big data and artificial intelligence (47%), the Internet of Things (44%), and employee use of mobile devices (41%).

Click here to read the full study results. 

See Original Post