After last year’s announcement by the CDCR that they would halt the deployment of the managed access systems touted to stop the supply of contraband cell phones into California’s state prisons, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has now announced it is installing 272 more metal detectors, 68 X-ray machines to scan packages, 103 low-dose X-ray scanners, 170 hidden surveillance cameras, 34 devices to decrypt and analyze cellphones, and 272 scanners that detect magnetic signals in a new effort to address this supply problem.

According the the prison payphone provider in California, who also oversaw the now cancelled managed access system deployment, “The latest crackdown is unlikely to deter inmates who want to conduct illegal activities using an unmonitored cellphone,” said a Global Tel-Link product manager. “There is no magic bullet, You can’t try to address the demand because the demand is always going to be there. So it’s better to control the supply, not only by capturing illicit phones but analyzing their calls and contents. That analysis has at times led to investigators uncovering weapons or drugs within prisons.”

Demand and supply are two sides of the same coin

We have long advocated for a balanced strategy that addresses both supply AND demand, however. We believe that the problem of demand for smuggled mobile phones in jail goes beyond long-term offenders looking to continue their drug or crime operations, witness intimidation and the avoidance of high LD rates. The demand is also driven by a desire for more communication and more privacy (not secrecy). As such, any comprehensive solution should address both sides of the equation – supply and demand. However, like the problem of drug smuggling, without addressing the demand for contraband, the problem will never be solved.

A recent CDCR inmate, now released, shared with us the following insight, “California’s gangs have evolved over the past 5 decades to operate efficiently within the system of scarce resources. They can get gang orders out of a locked down county jail and into a locked down prison 70 miles away between midnight and 2 AM without reliance on any contraband inside either facility, telephones, nor help from staff using only technology from the 1970’s plus a large number of people inside and out working towards a common goal (FGA in custody terms – in furtherance of a gang activity). Sanctioned gang action does not travel over any phone for a reason. The reality is contraband phones are used for calls to friends and family, mostly female, because the GTL system is inadequate to serve the number of people housed within CA’s system of incarceration. Managed Access has become an asset for the gang that controls and sells and profits from the technology to defeat it, since it now drives demand for the product they offer to sell inside while reducing supply of competing alternatives.”

An article written by a current CDCR inmate also provides some interesting insights into this demand and how it is met, “The black market within the fences of the California prison in which I am incarcerated is as bad as any corrections department in this country. In my case, this prison is five hours from home, and the distance makes visitation a financial burden. Some prisoners have it even worse. The vast majority of the prison population lives on the support of loved ones alone. While the cost of a contraband cellphone is high, the corporation-run prepaid call system is downright robbery. Desperate to stay in touch with loved ones and faced with only unaffordable options, incarcerated people turn to the black market, where they are charged as much as $1,000 for a contraband smartphone. Incarcerated persons prefer to take the risk and spend the money on contraband phones than rely on the prison phone system because of the freedom they provide and their functionality beyond making simple calls. There are no time limits and fees to place calls…”

“The drug market is self-sustaining because drugs are consumed almost immediately. There will always be a demand for them, and the supply can flow as freely as they can be smuggled into the housing units. But a phone can possibly last years once you have one. So, there is a need for constant manipulation of the supply in order to ensure a steady stream of demand. The models of phone that I’ve come across are difficult to conceal and this could be deliberate. In the outside world, there are keychain-sized smartphones with 3G capabilities, but rarely have I seen one in here. I bought a basic talk and text-only phone the size of two fingers, and costed me the same amount as a 4G touchscreen model the size of my hand.”

meshDETECT is a secure prison cell phone solution that gives detainees highly customized cell phones with all the security and control features of prison payphones. This allows those detainees whose only desire is for legitimate, non-criminal contact with family to use wireless technology safely and securely.

By siphoning off and co-opting this non-criminal wireless usage, we significantly reduce the overall demand for contraband cell phones and therefore the profitability for those smuggling these devices. Less financial reward for cell phone smugglers changes the risk/reward equation and makes it much less appealing given the high personal and professional risk for those caught smuggling.

The post Controlling Supply And Demand For Contraband Phones In Prisons appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

This news tracks with reports elsewhere that this technology to block cell phone usage in prisons is problematic. An effective contraband cell phone strategy should focus on reducing demand, in addition to restricting supply.

Corrections officials have shared with us the fact that at least 40% of the calls intercepted by these systems are to phone numbers on inmates’ approved calling lists. We suspect that an even higher percentage are to other family and loved ones not on the limited list of allowed contacts and are also non-criminal wireless usage.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) cannot say it was not warned that the high-tech system it was deploying to stop rampant, forbidden cellphone use by inmates in the state’s 34 prisons probably would not work.

The 2012 report by the California Council on Science and Technology said the system wouldn’t block 4G, Wi-Fi, MiFi, Skype, text messages or satellite transmissions. It can’t triangulate radio signals, limiting its effectiveness in identifying specific phones or users. And radio frequency leakage could interfere with regular cellphone usage, affecting the public’s access to 911 operators.

But the state forged ahead, installing the system at 18 prisons before deciding it wasn’t working.

The Associated Press reported on Wednesday that the department has halted expansion while options are pondered. “It’s been difficult to make sure the technology can handle those upgrades,” CDCR spokeswoman Dana Simas told AP. “Whether we’re going to scrap it or whether we can find solutions to these issues, that will be determined later.” “What remains to be determined is if the constant upgrades performed by the vendor will be sustainable in the future,” Simas said.

The report had called the state’s long-term investment in untested technology “unwise” and premature, especially in light of the fact that it really doesn’t even know how many illegal cellphones are floating around the prison system. The council recommended using airport-style screening systems for all personnel and having private carriers identify and disable illicitly obtained phones.

“In point of fact, there are no prisons anywhere in the United States using a functional managed access system to control cell phone use,” the report said.

Prison officials go to great lengths to prevent cellphones, often stolen, from being slipped into the prison by employees or visitors. It doesn’t work very well. Charles Manson, a high-profile 81-year-old killer, was recently caught twice with cellphones used to call around the country. A visitor was caught with a third phone meant for him, in a hallowed out boot heel.

Global Tel-Link’s blocking system made it into 18 of the state’s 34 prisons, and for now that seems as far as it’ll go, because cell phone companies of 2015 are using drastically different networks than the companies of 2011. Between 4G and Long Term Evolution services, phone companies are transmitting calls over a system that has more in common with a wifi network than old-school cell connections.

AP said the number of cellphones grabbed in California prisons declined markedly from 15,000 in 2011 to 8,000 in 2015. But the inmate who talked on his illicit phone to Vice reporter Seth Ferranti in February described a very active tech scene.

“All my homies that got phones, all of us are friends on Facebook. Niggas be making rap videos, they be filming riots and filming shit that’s going on and putting them on YouTube.”

The inmate, a lifer called “Big Smoke,” said, “The cellphones is rampant up and down the coast of California.” He claimed most of the phones were brought in by staff, but, “Some inmates is even smuggling them in now because it’s so profitable. They smuggling in memory cards, chargers, cords, anything that has to do with a cellphone. All that stuff goes for $50 a pop. Every part that has to do with a cellphone is profitable. The black market is big.”

(Source)

The post CDCR Halts Roll Out Of Managed Access Cell Phone Jamming appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

Update (10/19/12): The Avanal cell phone Managed Access System (MAS) system is scheduled to go live on Monday October 22nd. Very soon, inmates at Avenal won’t hear a dial tone if they try to make an outgoing call. Instead, they’ll hear: “The cellular device that you are using at Avenal State Prison has been identified as contraband. It is illegal to possess.”

Avenal flips the switch Monday, and will be the first facility to block cellphones. In the next three years, all 35 institutions in the California are expected to have the technology installed.

Staff numbers are programmed to work, but all other cellphones inside the prison will be blocked.

It will mean that prisoners can no longer make voice calls, send emails, text messages (or) access the Internet.

Source

Original Posting:

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) plans to implement a Managed Access System (MAS) at Avenal State Prison on or about October 1, 2012.  According to CDCR, an MAS is “a system which deploys a secure cellular umbrella over a specified area generally within the bounds of a facility, to either permit or interfere with transmissions from mobile wireless devices.”

According to the Association of California State Supervisors blog, the MAS test phase at ASP will run from approximately October 1st through October 15th.  At the end of the test phase, ASP will go live with MAS. CDCR eventually will be implementing the MAS at all institutions statewide.

On September 25, 2012, ACSS conducted a meet and confer with CDCR Labor Relations staff and MAS subject matter experts to ensure that your career will remain productive and protected.

ACSS:   Who is responsible for monitoring the MAS system?
CDCR:  MAS is a hosted system.  The system will be monitored and installed by a third party, Global Tel*Link (GTL).  CDCR will be responsible for the authorization process for mobile devices.

ACSS:    Will the MAS be used to track employee arrival to work, and/or exit from work times?
CDCR:    No.

ACSS:   When will MSA be implemented at other institutions?
CDCR:   The MAS implementation is scheduled to complete within 36 months following Contract effective date of May 31, 2012.  The CDCR has identified a phased approach and plans to finalize the implementation schedule, that includes: Phase 0, one (1) facility to be completed within 5 months of contract award; Phase I, 17 adult facilities to be completed within 18 months of contract award; Phase II, 19 adult facilities to be completed within 36 months of contract award.  Future Phases/Sites currently in the design, construction and/or planning stages are to be completed within 6 months of the State’s request to GTL.  Implementation of Phases I, II, or Future Phases/Sites will not begin without CDCR’s acceptance of Phase 0 test results.

ACSS:    What devices will be authorized?
CDCR:   At each institution there will be a process to submit a request to authorize a mobile device.  Once the device is approved to have authorized access it will be entered into the MAS system as an authorized device.  At this time, CDCR anticipated that only those mobile devices that are necessary for state business will be authorized, i.e. state issued cell phone.  Personal cell phone will be considered on a case by case basis.  CDCR anticipated that authorization of personal cell phones will only occur in extraordinary situations.

ACSS:    Will employees be able to use their personal cell phones in non secure areas like employee parking lots, break areas, etc?
CDCR:   CDCR is making an effort to configure the MAS system to allow personal cell phone use in employee parking lots.  However, due to the nature of the MAS system that may not always be possible.  CDCR provides payphones in institution administration buildings and Visitor Processing area that can be utilized by employees.  In addition, CDCR employees are allowed to use state phones to call home if they are going to work late.  Furthermore, MAS does not affect the ability of incoming callers to leave a voice message on unauthorized devices.

ACSS:    Will CDCR track or monitor personal phone calls, local or remote whereabouts or other activities while on or off duty employees use authorized devices? 
CDCR:    MAS is able to block calls from unauthorized devices within the radio frequency umbrella. MSA will capture information regarding unauthorized devices such as the cellular phone number, mobile device hardware ID, telephone number called, as well as the date and time of the call.  Tracking will only occur on outgoing communications.  Incoming communications are blocked and not captured.  Authorized devices will not be tracked by MAS.  The information captured and tracked by MAS is not under the control of CDCR.  The MAS information that is captured and tracked is managed by the third party monitoring the system and only made available with a valid warrant.

Under Penal Code Section 4576 (e) “the department shall not access data or communication that have been captured using available technology from unauthorized use of a wireless communication device except after obtaining a valid search warrant.”  Under Penal Code Section 4576 (f) “the department shall not capture data or communications from an authorized wireless communication device, except as already authorized under existing law.” (Cal. Pen. Code, sec. 4576)

ACSS:    What is the cost to the state?
CDCR:   There is zero cost to the state for the MAS system. Global Tel*Link (GTL) be responsible for all costs associated with implementation of the MAS services, including costs associated with new installation of MAS equipment and services.  The costs of implementing Managed Access System services at all CDCR institutions are provided by GTL with the revenue generated by the Inmate/Ward Telephone System.  There are no additional costs incurred by California taxpayers or inmate/ward families and friends.

Source

The post Avenal State Prison Cell Phone Jammer Test appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

This article discusses the TDCJ’s decision to investigate the viability of managed access contraband cell phone jamming. California, Mississippi and Maryland are also testing the technology. The impact of smuggled contraband cell phones in prisons has been significant. As the article states, “A couple of years ago, there were long lines at the pay phones—hours long. By this year, no one was using them, there were so many smuggled cell phones.”

“These two prisons have had the most significant ongoing problems with (smuggled) cellphones, and that’s why they were selected,” Livingston said. “There are no plans at this time to go beyond these two units.”

California and Texas may be considered opposites on the political spectrum, but the two states do have the same philosophy when it comes to cell phones in state prisons.

California got the ball rolling when Global Tel Link agreed to pay millions to install technology in state prisons to block web searches, text messages and phone calls by inmates using smuggled phones.

Texas also saw a problem with its inmates smuggling phones into prison and has recently confirmed working with CenturyLink, a private company that operates pay phones inside Texas’ 111 state prisons, to evaluate installing a similar system in Texas.

“The system would be a managed-access system and does not jam cell phones,” said Jason Clark, spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

“Managed access intercepts the outgoing calls and only allows calls from approved numbers. This is legal,” Clark said, noting that the Federal Communications Commission prohibits jamming.

Inmates’ access to cell phones in prison can have extreme consequences. Some inmates have used cell phones to run criminal enterprises from behind bars and organize assaults on guards and intimidate witnesses, California prison officials said.

“This groundbreaking and momentous technology will enable [the prison system] to crack down on the potentially dangerous communications by inmates,” said Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Secretary Matt Cate.

In 2011, California prison guards confiscated more than 15,000 contraband phones. In the same year, Texas prison officials seized 904 cell phones.

The first prison in California is expected to receive Global Tel*Link’s technology by October 2012, according to Dana Simas, information officer for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

When the system is installed, each prison will get its own cell tower that will allow prison officials to control all incoming and outgoing calls. All other calls will not go through within the confines of the prison.

“After this system goes in, smuggled cell phones will be nothing more than glorified paperweights,” said Simas. “A couple of years ago, there were long lines at the pay phones —hours long. By this year, no one was using them, there were so many smuggled cell phones.”

Source

The post Texas To Invest in Cell Phone Blocking Technology appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

As we have written previously, the CDCR has forgone all prison telephone commissions as part of a new contract with Global Tel*link (GTL) in return for GTL installing managed access signal (MAS) jamming systems in all 33 of the CRDR’s prison facilities.

However, the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) released a report today advising the State of California to use security screening systems, similar to those in airports, in state prisons before investing millions in the untested MAS technology intended to block calls by inmates from contraband cell phones.

There are some very interesting insights to come from the report including:

• During CCST’s visit to two prisons (Solano State Prison and California Medical Facility) in January 2012, we had the opportunity to interview inmates, gathering a unique perspective on the contraband cell phone issue. The opinion expressed by some inmates during those visits was that cell phones used by prisoners allowed unfettered contact to family and loved ones otherwise unavailable. The question, “If cell phones were provided as part of the IWTS, and knowing that the calls were recorded, would this deter cell phone use?” was answered with a “no”; the inmates indicated that they were used to their calls being recorded when using the IWTS. There was also acknowledgment by the prisoners that a percentage – small by the inmates’ estimation – of cell phone calls are used for illicit and illegal activity. It was noted by the CCST Project Team that access to cell phones (even if monitored by CDCR via computers with screening software) offers to many inmates an ongoing connection to family and friends, as well as entertainment on smart phones (such as games, videos  and ESPN sports games). Consideration could be given to piloting a method to screen contraband cell phone calls (rather than blocking) to better understand the impacts that the phones have on prisoner recidivism and overall prison temperament.

(Perhaps a through a trial of the meshDETECT secure prison cell phone solution? Our solution can be deployed immediately and allows the recording and monitoring of each call made.)

• The only MAS system currently implemented in a U.S. correctional facility is the Parchman Prison in Mississippi. This system has been in operation at Parchman Prison since July 2010. According to the Mississippi Department of Corrections, this MAS is still a pilot operation and is not fully deployed due to operational issues. Roll out of the system to other Mississippi prisons is on hold until these issues are worked out satisfactorily. The equipment used at Parchman Prison is not the equipment previously tested in California at a CDCR facility.

• Because of the paucity of system vendors, the lack of the ability to monitor interference outside of the subscribed area, and the lack of large-scale operational application of technologies used for MAS, there is no template of implementation techniques to model or follow for MAS. If the CDCR proceeds with the IFB as currently written, it would be important to note that each correctional institution installation will be a new learning experience, and each caveat would be discovered as it is installed. Although similar problems are likely to arise at each installation, solutions for each individual prison are likely going to vary significantly depending on a complex host of local factors.

• The proposed MAS systems lack the finite systematic radio power level control capability necessary to prevent interference in real time. This means the only mechanism for interference mitigation would be by exception. For instance, when someone’s cell phone service outside the prison is affected by interference, they would need to report it, and the cause could then be detected and corrected. The proposed MAS approach also lacks the capability to be simply modified for new cell phone communications technologies. Each and every upgrade of the MAS systems will be tantamount to a complete new installation. This, predictably, would be disruptive and could lead to long periods of inferior performance.

• Since the MAS is a cell phone system with antennas and interconnect cabling and support computers it will need to be installed in highly secure areas away from inmate access to prevent tampering or destruction. The existing cabling systems in prisons will not support the RF signaling being carried to and from the antenna arrays and the transmitter receiver systems. All required MAS infrastructure will need to be newly installed.

• If the prison is in or near a populated area, RF leakage could be highly disruptive to cell phone usage by the non-prison population. Among other things, this disruption could greatly reduce the capability of public safety professionals to serve the community’s needs or the general public’s ability to access a 911 operator.

Source

The post CCST Report Raises Concerns About Untested CDCR Cell Phone Jamming Technology appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

The CDCR recently issued a bid for its inmate telephone services and made the installation of wireless managed access jamming systems in its prisons a requirement for the bidders. Global Tel*Link (GTL) has won that bid and will therefore be bearing the cost of installing these systems. Given the high cost of this selective jamming technology and GTL’s commitment not to raise the cost of calls for prisoners, either the CDCR is taking a much lower commission on the calls or GTL is taking a haircut on its profits.

Managed access has previously been installed at the Parchman correctional facility in Mississippi. Although the jamming system has blocked most contraband cell phone usage, there have been some noteworthy breaches.

Update (4/18/12):Global Tel expects to have the blocking technology running at the California State Prison in Solano by the end of the year and at all prisons within three years.

The state won’t share in the profits Global Tel makes from the collect calls, but the company will pay an estimated $1 million for implementation and installation at each of the state’s 33 prisons.

Global Tel will also pay an $800,000 annual fee to the California Technology Agency for the contract, and the agency will make sure the Mobile, Ala.-based firm doesn’t hike calling rates, according to the contract.

The deal will mean slightly lower rates for collect calls than prisoners currently pay. A 15-minute local call will cost $1.50, while a 15-minute in-state, long-distance call will cost about $2, a decrease of a penny a minute. A 15-minute interstate call will cost $6.60, a decrease of nearly 22 cents a minute.

Update (5/9/12): the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) released a report today advising the State of California to use security screening systems, similar to those in airports, in state prisons before investing millions in the untested MAS technology intended to block calls by inmates from contraband cell phones.

Update (1/6/16): CDCR Halts Roll Out Of Managed Access Cell Phone Jamming. The department has halted expansion while options are pondered.

Original Post: The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) today announced a “groundbreaking and momentous” contract awarded to Global Tel*Link (GTL) designed to eliminate the contraband cell phone use by inmates.

Under the contract, GTL will also provide the Inmate/Ward Telephone System (IWTS) for inmates to make domestic and international calls from an authorized phone network.

“Inmates have used cell phones to commit more crimes, organize assaults on staff, and terrorize victims,” CDCR Secretary Matthew Cate said. “This groundbreaking and momentous technology will enable CDCR to crack down on the potentially dangerous communications by inmates.”

Managed Access technology uses a secure cellular umbrella over a specified area blocking unauthorized cellular communication transmissions, such as e-mails, texts, phone calls, or Internet access.

Implementation of the Managed Access System will come at no cost to taxpayers. GTL is responsible for all implementation costs, including new installation of equipment and services, as well as the costs of operating this technology at CDCR institutions. GTL, in return, receives the revenue generated from the ITWS services.

CDCR anticipates the Managed Access System to be operational at its first institution by the end of the year with other institutions to follow.

The Federal Communications Commission supports Managed Access technology as a lawful means to effectively stop the use of contraband cell phones in prisons.

In October 2011, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed Senate Bill (SB) 26 (Padilla) into law. Under SB 26 it is a misdemeanor, with a possible fine of up to $5,000 per device, for possessing or attempting to introduce an unauthorized cell phone in a prison. The misdemeanor prosecution and fines apply to staff, contractors and visitors. Penalties for inmates include up to 90 days loss of good-time credits.

SB 26 prohibited the company from raising rates for collect calls on the Inmate/Ward Telephone System. In fact, called parties will realize a reduced rate under the new contract. The new IWTS will provide additional enhancements including multiple payment options for inmates and their families. The California Technology Agency, which owns and administers the contract, will monitor service to ensure there are no additional charges applied to calls.

In 2011, CDCR tested the Managed Access technology at two institutions. The test was conducted over an 11-day period for approximately eight hours a day. During the test, the equipment detected a total of 2,593 unique wireless devices. The equipment blocked more than 25,000 unauthorized communication attempts, such as calls, texts, emails, and efforts to log on to the Internet from a smart phone.

In 2007, CDCR staff discovered nearly 1,400 contraband cell phones. In 2008, it was 2,800; in 2009, 6,995; in 2010, approximately 10,760; in 2011, more than 15,000; and to date this year, 2,181 contraband cell phones have been discovered in prisons and Conservation Camps.

Source

The post CDCR To Block Prison Cell Phones Via Managed Access Jamming System appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.

CorrectionsOne has published an interview with California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Secretary, Matt Cate. Cate oversees 33 adult prisons and four juvenile facilities throughout California, with a budget of nearly 10 billion dollars. Right now, CDCR has approximately 160,000 inmates, 105,000 parolees, and 1,100 juvenile offenders (including in and out-of-state housing).

As part of that interview, he discusses the problem of smuggled cell phones in California prisons. Cate is quoted as stating, “There’s a pretty strong lobby of folks who argue that cellphones should be allowed because inmates use them to contact family and that encourages family unification, but with so many instances of violence against staff and civilians on the outside it just gets really frustrating that people don’t recognize it yet.”

Cellphones can in fact be provided to meet that legitimate need. They just have to be cellphones that provide the same level of security, control and monitoring that is available with traditional prison telecommunications systems. The meshDETECT secure cell phone solution offers those benefits and more.

Here is the relevant excerpt from that interview:

C1: You have a huge cellphone contraband problem in your prison system. As of October 1st of this year, you confiscated 11,400 of them, which breaks last year’s record with three months still to collect more! Are you shocked at these numbers?

MC: I’m not shocked. I’ve seen the numbers go up since 2006. I am troubled and concerned about it. It’s obviously a high-tech state and we’re usually ahead of the curve on those kinds of issues. That can be good and bad.

C1: How are inmates getting them?

MC: A number of different ways. They’re thrown over the fence, through visitors, and even staff in some circumstances.

C1: I have read that prison staff in California aren’t searched, so it’s easy to smuggle cellphones in.

MC: We search anything they bring in, like lunch boxes and those kinds of things. We don’t have airport style security for our staff and the governor has issued an executive order to do some additional work to find out if we can implement that in California. One problem is our prisons are so large, we have 500 staff in a shift change, and that’s a lot of equipment to get through the door in a short period of time. We have to figure out a way to reduce the incidents.

C1: What makes you angry about the crimes prisoners have been able to commit from inside because they’re able to communicate, unmonitored, to the outside with a cellphone?

MC: Part of my anger is that there hasn’t been a lot of recognition as to the dangers. There’s a pretty strong lobby of folks who argue that cellphones should be allowed because inmates use them to contact family and that encourages family unification, but with so many instances of violence against staff and civilians on the outside it just gets really frustrating that people don’t recognize it yet. Just recently the governor made smuggling a cellphone into a prison a criminal act in California.

The post CDCR Secretary Matt Cate On Contraband Cell Phones appeared first on meshDETECT® Blog.