Schneier Unfair to CCTV: Exploring CCTV Advantages

Author: John Honovich, Published on Jul 01, 2008

While Bruce Schneier is a brilliant security thinker, I find his recent arguments against CCTV to be unfair. This is a critical issue because Schneider's opinions are singularly critical to shaping both security practitioner's and the general public's views on security. I hope to offer a different perspective and additional information to better help the community understand this important issue.

Here are three main points from Schneier's CCTV Camera article:

  • “Criminals can easily adapt by moving their crimes to someplace not watched by a camera and there will always be such places.”
  • “By their very nature, cameras result in underused and misallocated police resources.”
  • “The funds spent on CCTV cameras would be far better spent on hiring experienced police officers.”

In this report, I will offer 4 main claims:

  • CCTV cameras increase the costs of crimes
    • CCTV cameras are far less expensive than police
    • CCTV cameras are force multipliers
    • Get Video Surveillance News In Your Inbox
      Get Video Surveillance News In Your Inbox

    • Cost of CCTV systems has dropped substantially in the last 5 years

    Not Just Shifting Around Crime

    A common Schneier critique is that CCTV cameras just shift crime around. The supermarket adds cameras and the criminals just move to the mini-mart, etc., etc. As such, there is little or no social value being generated, just private individuals pushing off crime to their neighbors.

    This is a tricky argument. You could make the same case for using a lock on your door. If you use a lock, the criminal simply shifts next door and robs them. Clearly, not everything can be locked and the criminals will simply move to those places without locks. QED, we should not buy locks anymore and simply spend more money on hiring experienced police officers.

    CCTV cameras decrease the value of conducting crimes. Assets have different worth. Locations have different costs. Criminals are trying to maximize the total value of their thefts by choosing high value targets with sufficiently low risks of being caught. By placing cameras on assets with the highest worth and in areas where the cost is low to access, cameras can decrease the value of crimes.

    Let's look at fraud in banks. Fraud is a huge problem for banks. A competent fraudster can walk into a bank and in 10 minutes steal $5,000 while getting a smile and a thank you from a teller. Almost every bank I have ever seen has cameras. Are the banks simply shifting the crime somewhere else? The crime may shift but the value to the criminal is much lower and the potential loss to society is lower because there are very few targets as attractive to a criminal as a bank.

    When crime is harder and less profitable, criminals take less from society and are are less motivated to conduct crimes. While solving murders and terrorist events get all the sizzle, cameras are valuable in solving 'mundane' and routine day to day issues like theft, assault, vandalism, etc. that generate real economic returns to society.

    How much actual reduction is a genuine discussion for debate and evaluation. My point here is not to claim that cameras eliminate all crime but to discredit this unqualified notion that cameras simply shift crime around and create no social value.

    How much Better is a Police Officer than a Camera?

    Schneier recommends spending money on police officers rather than cameras. Certainly, police officers are better than cameras much like having Bruce Schneier run your Information Security program is better than just having free ware anti-virus on your PC. The substantive question is that given the relative costs, how much more valuable is police officers than cameras.

    A police officer is about 200-300 times more expensive than a security camera. A 24/7/365 police officer rotation likely costs $150-$200K USD. Today, a security camera generally costs $2,000 to $4,000 USD (installed, networked and with a video management system). Given a 5 year lifespan, the annual cost of a security camera is $500 - $1000 USD (factoring in service costs and the time value of money).

    Security cameras are a very inexpensive substitute for policing. You can literally have hundreds of cameras for the cost of 1 more police officer. That being said, if security cameras do not work, then it does not matter if they are free. As a first step, I do think it's important that everyone understands just how incredibly inexpensive cameras are compared to people. In my previous points, I noted how security cameras can decrease the value of crime to criminals and how they can help in solving and reducing mundane crimes. Next, let's look at how they can help the police.

    Force Multipliers

    Schneier's position that cameras, by their very nature, “result in underused and misallocated police resources” is in stark opposition to the experience and understanding of most every working physical security manager. Moreover, it opposes the recommendation of Sandia Lab's Mary Lynn Garcia in her seminal work, “The Design and Evaluation of Physical Protection Systems.”

    Cameras are force multipliers – tools that make a given group of people more effective without adding more people. Force multiplication is an old and critical concept in security. You will hear military people talk about it routinely. I have personally seen cameras successfully used as force multipliers in city wide surveillance, malls, stadiums and major retailers, just to name a few. They allow limited operators to cover more areas through centralized direction.

    Improper use of video surveillance will absolutely result in problems but I believe it is absolutely false to conclude that it is “by their very nature” as Schneider does. Certainly if you have 500 cameras over 10 square miles and 5 people, you will have serious problems. But if you have 30 cameras across 1 square mile and 3 people, you can very effectively coordinate resources.

    Properly used, cameras allow security responders to cover a greater area without increasing headcount. This is where the cost differential between cameras and officers becomes most critical. Rather than adding more officers costing hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, a fraction of that amount can be used make existing officers more effective. Even if crime stays the same relative to hiring an additional officer, it decreases the cost of security which is a societal good.

    Camera System Costs Dropping

    Schneier focuses on historical results of CCTV cameras. I totally agree with him on this as it is always dangerous and risky to make rosy projections about how things will improve in the future.

    One thing that has already occurred and is a matter of fact is how far the cost of camera systems has fallen in the past five years. In 2003, the typical public surveillance solution consists of proprietary analog fiber systems which routinely ran $4,000 USD or more per camera simply for the infrastructure. Today, public surveillance solutions use IP networks. Even in the worst case scenario where you have build your own IP network, the overall cost reduction for the system is 50% or greater.

    Similar decreases in the cost of megapixel cameras and video analytics have also occurred, providing greater evidence quality and better response to high threat activities.

    All of this is actual pricing and production deployments today. This will inevitably lead to greater success in the field. How much success is certainly an issue to be measured and tracked but significant improvements are reality, not speculation.

    Conclusion

    While I share many of Schneier's concerns, his consistent and uncritical criticism of video surveillance needs questioning. I hope the points I have raised spurs further discussion and reflection of this matter. As this is a very popular topic, I am looking forward to your thoughts in the comments.

Related Reports on Police

FLIR Acquires Drone Manufacturer For $134M on Dec 01, 2016
FLIR has acquired Prox Dynamics, a Norwegian maker of small military-grade drones, for $134M.  FLIR president Andy Teich provided additional...
Bribe Accusations By Multiple US Cities Against Taser on Jun 17, 2016
One company is dominating the body camera business - Taser. The stun gun leader aims to grow a VSaaS powerhouse and take over one of the fastest...
Security Planning For Bars And Nightclubs on Jun 16, 2016
The shooting at Orlando's Pulse nightclub is raising questions among entertainment venue owners, and security professionals, about how to balance...
Hitachi Crime Prediction Analytics Examined on Jun 03, 2016
Hitachi, relatively unknown in the security industry, says their forthcoming analytic software can "predict crimes before they happen". We spoke...
Police Require Problem Businesses To Get Video Surveillance on May 31, 2016
Government intrusion or smart practice? One city is requiring business that cause repeated problems to get video surveillance. In this note, we...
Hikvision Exec Simultaneously Chinese Government Security Leader on Apr 27, 2016
New information shows a Hikvision executive is simultaneously a leader within the Chinese government national security ministry. This runs counter...
Knightscope Security Robot Examined on Apr 19, 2016
Silicon Valley is bringing us security robots, or as the startup, Knightscope, likes to call it, "Advanced Physical Security Cutting Edge Anomaly...
The Power of HD Video Shown With Detroit Gas Station Shooter on Mar 23, 2016
CCTV video quality is widely seen by the public as terrible - grainy, out of focus, hard to make more out than moving fuzzy blobs.   The Motor...
Panasonic Body Camera Tested on Mar 16, 2016
Bodyworn camera use continues to increase, with more police departments mandating it and the US pledging $75M for new cameras. In this report, we...
The Most Dangerous (and Easiest) Way To Export Surveillance Video on Mar 11, 2016
Rouge cellphones.   Most DVRs/NVRs and VMSs have options to limit video export to external devices, but none of them can fix the analog...

Most Recent Industry Reports

Knightscope - $122,509 Revenue, $2.5 Million Loss Seeks $20 Million Investment on Dec 09, 2016
The robot that ran over a child, Knightscope, wants money and they need it. Investors can invest as little as $1,000 to participate and...
The Russian SMP Security Robot on Dec 08, 2016
A Russian manufacturer, SMP, has a commercially available outdoor security robot, at a lower price and with much less marketing than their main...
How Hikvision Beats Its OEMs on Dec 08, 2016
Hikvision GM declared that they are not aggressive with their competitors. But some of their own OEM partners disagree. Inside, we reveal a key...
Dahua Discontinuing H.264 Only Products on Dec 08, 2016
Dahua has taken a stand for H.265 and is discontinuing its H.264 only products. We examine the shakeup inside this...
IP Networking Course January 2017 on Dec 08, 2016
This is the only networking course designed specifically for video surveillance professionals plus it includes live training, personal help and...
Hikvision vs Dahua Mobile Apps Tested on Dec 07, 2016
With smartphone use and low-cost video recorders surging, many user's main interface to their surveillance system is their phone. With mobile video...
Paxton Drops US Reps, Plans Major Expansion on Dec 07, 2016
Paxton is gearing up to make a big run at  US access control success. The first step they have made is to cut all US Rep Firms, in anticipation of...
Axis Partner Elder Care Video Analytics (Smartervision) on Dec 07, 2016
Can video analytics be used to improve the care of the elderly? Axis and a video analytics startup, Smartervision, are working together to do so....
Sony IP Camera Backdoor Uncovered on Dec 06, 2016
A backdoor has been uncovered in ~80 Sony IP camera models, attackers can remotely enable telnet on the camera, and then potentially login as root,...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact