Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Schneier on Security
Blog >
Since the 1999 Columbine High School shootings and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many
parents feel better having a way to contact their children. But hundreds of students on cell
phones during an emergency can cause problems for responders.
"There's a huge difference between feeling safer and being safer," says Kenneth Trump,
president of National School Safety and Security Services.
According to Trump, students' cell phone use during emergencies can do three things:
increase the spread of rumors about the situation, expedite parental traffic at a scene that
needs to be controlled and accelerate the overload of cell-phone systems in the area.
Tom Hautton, an attorney for the National School Board Association, said that cell phones
in schools also can lead to classroom distractions, text-message cheating and
inappropriate photographs and videos being spread around campus.
We are just naturally inclined to make irrational security decisions when it comes to our children.
Tags: cell phones, children, cost-benefit analysis, fear, infrastructure, mitigation, phones, risks, schools
Posted on August 14, 2008 at 12:20 PM • 58 Comments
Comments
Classroom distractions are older than cell phones. Papers and pencils could be used to enable cheating.
Backpacks and pockets could be used to spread contraband around campus.
And redundant realtime communications channels in an emergency situation might have its benefits.
However, of Trump's 3 issues, the last is the only one I consider valid. We don't have stadiums full of
children too often, so traffic congestion isn't a problem, and trying to make rules to avoid rumors
is...well...it hasn't worked yet in history :-)
I must admit, however, that the arguments which boil down to "it makes the children harder to control"
leave me cold. Aside from the mistaking control for security, I'm one of those people who think that
parents, not government, are responsible for their children.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 2/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
There's nothing wrong with giving a 15 year old kid a cellphone to use when necessary.
As far as redundant emergency channels, cellphones rarely work in (large, like 9/11 or earthquake or
Katrina) emergencies. Either the infrastructure (links to the POTS system) is gone, or they are saturated.
And even if they did work, you could issue each teacher a cellphone for just that purpose.
The fact that there were already low-tech ways to cheat is not a reason to add additional, high-tech ways
to cheat.
Students have no need for iPods, comic books, World of Warcraft accounts, pianos or cellphones IN the
classroom. If they want to keep them in their lockers, that would be OK.
@Jason: I agree with your sentiment, but there is a large percentage of the US population who would
not know which is better.
@Noah Slater: My High School had way over 1500 students. Assuming 70% had cellphones (I bet its
more) and someone heard shots and/or the classrooms were locked down I cant believe the number of
kids who called could SOMEONE (maybe each other - worst case) would be less than 700 or so,
although probably ~evenly distributed between 2 major systems. So that would be 350 calls in a single
cell. All trying to dial at the same time. Sounds like a substantial load to me.
Ironically, in this case two times irrationality equals rationality. Cell phones come in handy in more
common emergencies, such as sickness, a traffic accident, or a mugging. From a security viewpoint you
should focus on the largest risk...
now). Shockingly none of us felt less safe for not having them, and we all managed to get out of high
school alive.
Several years later, when cell phones were taken as a given, I decided to give up my cell phone for a
while. Someone close to me (who shall remain nameless) was shocked when she heard this - "what will
you do in an emergency" she said, "it's not safe not to have a cell phone".
The moral is, it's all about norms. In 1998, no one thought of a cell phone as normal, and therefore no
one thought of it was a safety measure. In 2008 cell phones are normal, and the lack of one is seen as a
detriment to safety. It has nothing to do with whether or not a cell phone actually makes you safer, but
rather whether a cell phone is considered "normal".
Keep them in your bag, and turned off. There is absolutely no reason why you need to have them on
during school. If a parent needs to contact their child during school hours, then they can call the office. If
a child needs to call someone during school hours, then they can go to the office.
It occurs to me that low-end smartphones will help exacerbate most of the issues raised in the article, by
allowing parents to lock down functionality that they don't want their kids using - white- and blacklists for
incoming and outgoing calls and messages, always-on GPS, that sort of thing. The phone is owned by
the parent, and loaned to the child; who should have control over its capabilities?
If we really don't want parents to know about the danger in realtime, perhaps we should ban live news
coverage of emergencies where children could be in danger.
Otherwise, I hope that crowd control is generally included in first responder training and implemented in
crisis responses.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 4/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
"Kids should not be allowed to have pencils or lunchpails in school because of the potential for violence
and distractions caused by these nefarious objects."
Soon, we won't be allowed to carry them (pencils or lunchpails) on airplanes, either -- right?
I mean, it's so *reasonable* that kids can't use mobile phones properly while adults can. I mean, look at
all the *brilliant* adults you're surrounded with on a daily basis.
The "inappropriate photographs" is the one which amuses me the most (and it is in lots of anti-cellphone
articles). I gather that they've never heard of (portable) Cameras?
If some lunatic starts shooting people and I'm nearby, everybody is better off if I have a cell phone. I'll
immediately call the police, and the faster someone calls, the faster they'll arrive and the sooner the
lunatic will stop shooting people. Removing cell phones from everybody just allows his rampage to go on
longer.
Now replace me with a 12-year-old kid. I don't see why that would change the argument at all.
The real answer of the future is micro-blog sites with authentication tied to online maps.
In other words, responders (including parents) would be given role-based access to see who is doing
what, where and when.
Shooting is an extreme example, and should be factored into all disasters such as earthquakes, fires,
tornadoes, etc. where people closest to the incident (even students) with cameras can post images and
twitter brief status updates. If the system is designed properly, it makes responders far more effective.
The irrational response is to ignore the benefits of technology simply because we are afraid of a few
things that might happen when individuals are given some freedom. Anticipate the risks, create
opportunities for benefits.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 6/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
I like our public schools and the majority of the kid's teachers that I have met but there is only one that I
would I trust to be effective in an emergency. My authority while my children are minors trumps the
school's authority absolutely.
Plus maybe a little chaos is a good thing, especially in light of the type of order that authorities like to
create.
If a cell phone will make a parent feel better about their kid walking to school instead of having their fat
ass driven then more power to them.
Finally, I would hope that people here can recognize a real safety argument from one designed to
leverage a particular outcome. Giving a kid a cell phone has enormous practical benefits for the parent. I
spent my entire school life dealing with late rides and other surprises that a mobile phone would have
greatly mitigated. When schools try to ban phones parents will pull out every card including the "safety
card". If the safety card can be used to restrict our freedoms why not use it to prevent schools from
infringing on student's rights to mobile communication.
The proper response is for the FCC to stop being retarded and allow the use of cell phone jamming
technology as currently employed in Israel to prevent bombings. It's the least invasive way to implement
reasonable time and place restrictions on truly irritating and unecessary mobile communications.
Replacing one set of rare, sensationalist issues with a different set of rare, sensationalist issues isn't
news, it's CNN.
Cell phones allow teenagers to communicate with each other and with parents. The latter still have some
vestigial rights which might get in the way of an administrator's attempt to "keep control" of the situation.
As for making emergency calls, if people were trained to quickly and accurately report emergencies to
the proper authorities. 911 as a centralized calling number has been a good start, but more sophisticated
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 7/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
When I call for emergency help, I call that agency's seven digit telephone number because it is
programmed into my phone, as opposed to '911' which is answered by a call center sixty miles away.
This requires more sophistication and knowledge of your local agencies, and I default to 911 when
traveling (119 internationally). A quick and competent call to local police dispatch trumps twenty
panicked 911 calls to a state police call center that has to transfer the calls to one overworked local
dispatcher.
>> If armed parents charged into my child's school, and my child was harmed as a result, I'd sue the
living shit out of them, and I'd win.
Would you sue the SWAT team for not securing the scene quickly enough, or the paramedics for
obeying protocol and police orders and waiting outside while your child bled to death? Just checking.
This trend of delegating responsibility, authority and common sense to "them," whether it be the
government or the 'proper authorities' is puzzling to many rural residents and sets disturbing precedent.
If someone starts shooting up a high school in Redneckville, I would expect the local rednecks to take a
profound and heavily armed personal interest. The sheriff knows this and plans accordingly. The same
shooting in Urbantown results in additional police being tied up "maintaining a perimeter" and "keeping
unauthorized persons out of the area," effectively allowing the active shooter their own personal
playground, which they will eventually get to share with the SWAT team.
I personally think that cell phones are almost useless for the ordinary person in an emergency, and
especially useless for muggings. ("Excuse me, do you mind if I call 911 instead of handing you my
wallet? Please wait, I'm on hold.") However they offer the illusion of control and thus empowerment.
That said, 911 cell phone calls are an important means by which emergency responders can become
aware of a situation in progress. That doesn't mean that YOU must have one, merely that enough
people have one that there will be a phone on or driving past the scene.
Anyone banning cell phones for the same reason is equally missing the point.
When my, now adult, child was in school, her mother and I shared custody, but lived in different states
within driving distance. This was an important reason to be able to contact our child and/or the other
parent. If calling the office were effective, rather than an interruption of the class, for an announcement
to send the child to the office, there might be some basis for having everything filtered through the office.
Plans change. I am a paramedic, so emergencies may cause a delay of my arrival to pick my child up,
even cancel them completely.My situation is much less rare than a school shooting.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 8/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
Emergency services do have their own means of communication. Still, 911 centers have their lines tied
up when all the adults call 911 for something that happens in public that "looks bad." Children are not
necessarily less responsible than adults. Children can be taught to behave responsibly. Those behaving
irresponsibly should be dealt with individually, not as a group.
Text messaging can be an effective means of communication when all of the phone lines are tied up. A
message could state, "I'm safe. I will be at this location. Don't worry." This can avoid a lot of the
interference of parents at the scene. Expecting that everyone will panic treats everyone as the lowest
common denominator. That is a mistake. Deal with the problems individually, not by punishing everyone
for what you think someone will do.
In England they have been banning fire extinguishers from some apartments. Why? Someone might use
them. Why not train people to use them responsibly, instead?
What if? Is generally a question used to prevent people from thinking. We should avoid that approach,
here.
In Pennsylvania, they have been forcing the local police departments to switch to county based dispatch
through requirements for more and more training. This has removed those familiar with the locality from
911 dispatch. Some police departments no longer even have non-emergency numbers. If you are
connected to the wrong county's dispatch, it is also a big delay.
First, because the most common networks in the US (CDMA and GSM) have AOC (access overload
control) systems that can prioritize access for emergency responders. This system has largely been
deployed over the past two years.
Second, emergency responders shouldn't even be relying on the public cell phone network for their
response. That is why they have their own emergency radio network that is separate and independent of
the cell phone network.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 9/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
A side point: Schools like to think of themselves as authorities, as unelected governments answering to
no one, but they operate 'in loco parentis', 'in place of parents', acting as the parents' deputies, the same
as it would be in day care, day camp, summer camp, music lessons, or Sunday school. If schools get to
have their own police, then the parents should get to have uber-police, with authority over the school
police.
I got caught in the steam pipe explosion outside Grand Central. Even though it was smaller than 9/11,
you couldn't get a call out while you were near GCT. I think I was at least 10 blocks away before I was
able to get a call out.
Could several hundred kids calling at the same time block cell service? Absolutely.
So, your saying keep the parents in the dark if there is an unfortunate event at a school - the emergency
services here work on their own communication band - not public mobile (cell) phones - and I'm darn
sure the States are the same.
As for spreading rumour and flase information - do the networks do any better in a real life example --
think not!
Your child is 1000 times as likely to die or be injured in an auto accident than in a school shooting. When
evaluating the safety aspect of giving your child a cell phone, if you waste even on minute thinking about
the school shooting case instead of the accident case, you're parenting poorly.
It seems to me that a cell phone would be quite handy after an auto accident, and for a teenager it might
occasionally lead to a ride from home rather than from friends. Sounds like cell phones are worthwhile
on balance.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 10/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
OTOH, my son used his yesterday when he locked himself out of the house, and a crisis was soon
resolved. (Yes, it would have been worse if it had been, say, snowing, instead of 75F and sunny.)
A lot of people believe this - in my big urban area, the radios are just another theater prop. They happen
to be a very expensive prop - so lots of money can be kicked back - but until the system works as
advertised, the radios are as useless as they were on 9/11.
There are quite a few police and emergency departments in the greater NYC area that have spent
millions on upgrading (or investigating the possibility of upgrading) radio systems. They still have almost
as many "dead spots" as before. Watch any police activity in that area, and you will see most reaching
for their personal cell phones - not the radio.
The cell is more reliable, and is not monitored (at least not easily) like the radios are.
I can only speculate where that habit can lead.
You do realize that jamming technology, deployed consistently, will just encourage people to use bands
that aren't jammed, don't you?
Students don't have lockers anymore, they're a "security issue". So now, instead of socking their drugs
and guns away during the school hours, they're packing them around in their backpacks.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 11/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
@ Zeuss
Not precisely accurate. The emergency responders can use the local cell tower, sure. The problem is
getting the emergency responders *to* the location in the first place (at which point they're probably
using their own communication nexus, not their cell phones). For that, some (small number of) the
people *at* the incident need to be able to transmit calls.
Once the response is in full swing for a major event (like a school shooting or a building collapse), first
responders need critical data.
The problem is that they can't get the critical data if the people *with* the data can't call out. And the
people *with* the data can't call out if there are 400 people at the location with cell phones.
NOT necessarily because they're all calling out. In 1999 (the last time I checked this sort of thing, a
million years ago in technology terms) the average cell tower could handle about 100 calls. I imagine
that number has scaled way up; there's probably enough cell towers within range of a school to handle
outgoing calls. The problem is the INCOMING calls.
If 400 students have cell phones, when a building collapse or shooting occurs at a school, each one of
those students is going to have N concerned relatives calling *in*, boom... no more circuits (this is what
happened in the Minnesota bridge collapse: http://www.switched.com/2007/08/03/bridge-collapse-why-
did-cell-phones-fail/).
Sure, kids should pack cell phones for lots of reasons. But defense against major catastrophes isn't one
of them; in any major event, their cell phone is going to be a shiny brick.
Giving kids cell phones because you want them to be able to call or be called by you or someone else is
reasonable.
If you're against the latter then the extremely low probability of the former shouldn't override that
decision. Or get a phone with no service that can still dial 911.
I don't really mind if she has one, but we didn't get it for her for safety. I think it's a ridiculous argument. If
a shooting starts, one phone per classroom is more than sufficient, and I think every teacher I've met
recently has a phone.
One cannot make the argument that having cell phones for kids in schools make the school safer in "big"
incidents for the reason that Schneier states --- network congestion, collapse, etc. when it happens.
But what about the other smaller incidents that are "big" to the individuals concerned, but may be small
in the overall scheme of things?
Examples:
A gang of bullies corning a student to and from school, in a dark corner of the school?
An incident involving students (like the kind of things that tend to occasionally happen in certain
Mississippi school(s)) that is unpleasant even though it causes no physical injury.
All of these incidents that are every day occurrences but not "big event(s) like a killing" can benefit from
students having instant communications.
I concur with school administrators who argue that phones need to be not used while school is in
session --- which can be handled with a mandatory power off rule (with a very simple signal detector that
detects for an "on" wireless device.
Is it really the case that there are kids in American High Schools who _don't_ have their own mobile
phones? What an odd country :-)
There aren't that many classroom distractions. Usually the teacher keeps the order, and if someone
starts to distract people with a cell phone they get the same treatment as any other distractor. Cheating
in a test with a cell phone is as easily dealt with as cheating with a piece of paper in a pencil case.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 13/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
As to cell phone networks getting congested during emergencies, that didn't happen here during the
Jokela school shooting. You would need a nationwide emergency to have something like that.
The biggest problem here has been cell phone cameras. Recently there was an incident where a
teacher sang a song in the school's may day celebration. Someone shot a video of this with a cell phone
and uploaded it to Youtube with a text that referred to the school as a mental asylum and to the teacher
as a maniac. The incident was then handled by a district court, which decided that the student was guilty
of "kunnianloukkaus" (I believe slander is the equivalent term in Finnish).
I'm confident, though, that this kind of problems will vanish as time goes by.
I'm not saying cell phones at school should be encouraged. I'm saying they absolutely shouldn't be
discouraged.
Big emergencies are very rare. Kids with cell phones can't help and could hurt in a big emergency.
Little emergencies are pretty common. Having a cell phone when you miss the last bus out of a dubious
neighborhood, or when you're at a party and you realize it was a really bad idea* can make a huge
difference. When I was in high school, stuff like that happened at least a couple times a year, but I was
never in a big emergency.
*Also, parents, make sure your kids have the number of an adult who will never, ever tell you about the
scary party your kid was at. Your kids will not call you, no matter how much you plan to not yell at them,
but they will usually know when they're in over their heads and if they have a way to get out without
losing face, they will take it.
dissemination of info from the university itslef. In the wake of the various nationally-covered campus
incidents, the university set up a text-messaging system to alert people as to the safest action and dispel
rumors, which they've used a few times successfully.
If I remember the reasoning was to clear the airwaves for emergency use, and stop terrorists from using
the cell phone network to communicate, trigger more bombs, etc.
I would love to reference the article, but I think it was printed and not on the internet - and it was a long
time ago.
There are definite reasons why cell phones are a nuisance at school, but so were cars,comic
books,transistor radios,walkmans, hand held video games,etc back in the day. Adapt to the times and
apply the rules that applied to the same category with some tweak for the new technology. Educators
need to accept new technology, adapt and set rules around it proactively, for kids and parents alike.
No, I did not have a cell phone when I was a kid and yes I survived. But cell phones have also saved
lives in many occurrences and have led investigators to found out what happened whereas without it
someone would have been out of luck.Think about kidnappings,tracking cell phone pings,etc.
Do I think a cell phone will unequivocally make my child safe ? No. Do I think seat belts will
unequivocally make me live in ANY car crash ? No. Do I think that locking my house door will keep a
determined attacker from causing me harm ? No. Most people do not believe any of this either, but they
do know that any modicum of safety or communication is better than none. A kid having a cell phone is
certainly not an extreme measure .
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 15/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
Your child is 1000 times as likely to die or be injured in an auto accident than in a school shooting. (...) It
seems to me that a cell phone would be quite handy after an auto accident, and for a teenager it might
occasionally lead to a ride from home rather than from friends. Sounds like cell phones are worthwhile
on balance."
Keep in mind also that talking on a cellphone has been found to be more impairing to driving ability than
having a blood alcohol level of .08. If your kid is going to be driving, giving them a cellphone is more
dangerous than giving them a stiff whiskey. (If you think they will have the self control not to answer the
phone while driving, you either have a most remarkable kid, or a much more commonplace case of self-
deception)
That's the link to the story referenced above, where the police attempted to get the cell network shut
down in the wake of the 7/7 attacks.
more here:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4659737.stm
"As for class interruption... That's bs, if classes were interesting, nothing would be a distraction, if
classes are boring, everything is a distraction, particularly for a teenager."
I think you're making the mistake of believing that children (teenagers in particular) will act like adults...
most adults don't "act like adults"...
Entertaining DOES NOT equal IMPORTANT. Do you think maybe the USA wouldn't be in such a bad
situation if people paid more attention to the world around them than consumer gadgetry, reality TV, and
who Linsday Lohan happens to be boinking?
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 16/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
i didn't read _all_ the comments, so perhaps someone else has mentioned something that is glaringly
obvious to me:
when i was school-age, it was driven into my skull to call the cops if there was an emergency of the
magnitude of a school shooting. i can't say for sure, but i think calling my parents would've been priority
#2.
Problem solved.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 17/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
and do not forget the effect of the child calling the parent and the parent calling the 911.
also not only the net will be congested, but the first responder center has to handle all the calls from
panicking parents and children, which could prevent effective response if ever there were two school
shooting one 10 mins after another (is a theater, I know, but two generic emergency one after another in
crowded areas are possible in a state large as the USA)
said this, I think that other scenarios as smuggling, bulling and so on are uncounterable by cellphones
(better of with an emergency switch and a gps - but then you need 24/7 surveillance of the other end of
the switch)
as someone else said cellpone is a tool and training is required to use it effectively - the presented
scenario is mitigated if children are instructed only to communicate with parents and only via text in
emergencies, mainly to agree an exit/pickup strategy not to interfere with other
police/firefighter/swat/supermen/monkey masters operations.
This obviously supposes that parents could act responsibly and guide the child from remote outside the
emergency operations area - which is not the case, I fear.
Leave a comment
Login
Name (required):
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 18/19
10/14/2018 Kids with Cell Phones in Emergencies - Schneier on Security
E-mail Address:
URL:
Fill in the blank: the name of this blog is Schneier on ___________ (required):
Comments:
Allowed HTML: <a href="URL"> • <em> <cite> <i> • <strong> <b> • <sub> <sup> • <ul> <ol> <li> • <blockquote> <pre>
Preview Submit
← Data Mining to Detect Pump-and-Dump Scams UK Police Seize War on Terror Board Game →
Schneier on Security is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of IBM Resilient.
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/kids_with_cell.html 19/19