from the better-late-(and-minimal)-than-never dept
Flock Safety has spent a few years building a massive network of ALPR (automated license plate reader) cameras. Flock’s cameras are a step ahead of competitors. They not only grab plate/location info, but they provide searchable tags/images that cover everything from car make/model to specific vehicle features. These photos also include images of the drivers and passengers, which makes adding facial recognition tech the expected future development.
Flock has also built itself a reputation that only plays well with surveillance hawks and the worst people in law enforcement. It has made its database — something that adds around 20 billion car/plate images per month — accessible to any agency with a contract. And it has refused to add guardrails that might prevent federal agencies from utilizing local law enforcement access to perform searches they’re not legally allowed to do on their own. It has also portrayed misuse of its cameras and data as the actions of a few rogues that are not representative of its law enforcement customers.
Pretending it’s not responsible for abuse of its equipment/databases hasn’t worked out well for Flock. In addition to drawing heat from US senators, the company has lost a lot of its plausible deniability because it has done nothing to deter abuse of its systems… until now.
It looks like the last six weeks of concertedly negative press about cops using Flock tech to stalk their exes, their exes’ family members, and anyone else misogynist cops might want to keep tabs on has finally forced the company to do something, rather than just pretend it’s not Flock’s fault that far too many law enforcement officers are also horrible human beings.
Flock has finally recognized its most profitable market is littered with people who simply can’t be trusted with this access to billions of license plate records.
Following a Washington Post report that police officers were accused in 46 cases of improperly using access to Flock’s license plate camera network, in some instances allegedly stalking women, Flock CEO Garrett Langley said he had listened to one woman’s interview Thursday morning.
“I apologize,” Langley said in an interview with CBS News. “It kills me that she went through that.”
Asked if he took enough responsibility soon enough when it came to the accusations of abuses, Langley said hindsight is “a brutal tool.”
Words are nice. But Flock has always talked a lot but has steadfastly resisted implementing changes that might deter abuse of its systems. Almost everything that might make cops think twice before tracking their exes is optional, rather than on by default.
Some of that appears to be changing now that Flock’s CEO has been forced to confront the inevitable side effects of mass surveillance and unfettered law enforcement access. Here’s what Flock is doing now, following a half-decade or so of not giving a fuck.
- Flock is recommending a 7-day ALPR data retention period and introducing Evidence Mode to preserve specific data for active investigations when needed.
- New offense filtering, required Audit Assistance, proactive lockouts, and required case codes will give agencies more control while strengthening oversight of system use.
- Flock is strengthening data security through mandatory multi-factor authentication, an independent security review by Bishop Fox, and a new Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure program.
- Customers retain ownership and control of their data, while Flock is expanding transparency and reinforcing safeguards around ALPR accuracy, access, sharing, and review.
It’s better than the nothing it’s been doing. But it still leaves a lot to be desired. As you can see from the first bullet point, data retention won’t actually be changing. Flock is only “recommending” a 7-day limit on retention. The standard retention period is 30 days. Contrary to reporting elsewhere, Flock is not limiting all customers to seven day retention periods.
That being said, Flock is at least making it slightly more difficult to extend the retention period. The seven-day limit will be on by default. And default mode tends to be the preference of everyone anywhere. With a bunch of cities kicking Flock to the curb, agencies that still retain access to their systems would do well to embrace the default limit, rather than poke the (general public) bear by switching things back to “always on forever.”
What’s better is Flock’s filtering system update, which will allow law enforcement agencies to prevent others agencies with access to their plate reads to run searches that might be forbidden in their own localities. To use something that isn’t even hypothetical, law enforcement agencies around the nation can now prevent Texas cops from using their cameras to hunt down women seeking out-of-state abortions. Just as importantly, it will thwart local agencies that have decided they want to be part of ICE’s entourage.
We are also introducing Offense filtering for sharing. Now, cities can choose which type of offenses are permissible for other agencies to access their cameras. For example, City A could allow City B to search its cameras only for a stolen vehicle, missing person, or violent crime while blocking searches related to immigration enforcement.
Going further, Flock is making it easier for agencies to recognize misuse of the system and forcing those who just don’t care to fall in line with Flock’s abuse deterrents.
16 weeks ago, we introduced Audit Assistance, which detects abnormal activity and flags it for Administrator review. In recent weeks, those reviews have been associated with arrests of several law enforcement officers who allegedly abused the system. More than one-third of our customers have voluntarily adopted Audit Assistance.
We will now require all law enforcement customers to adopt this feature by the end of this year. In addition, we will institute proactive lockout. When a user’s activity meets defined criteria for abnormal behavior, Flock will automatically suspend access pending administrator review. The goal is to intervene before misuse becomes recurring or widespread.
This is all… well, not exactly good news, but… better news? Flock’s systems are still a concern, given how much is collected and how often. But what’s implemented here will, at the very least, give cop shops a heads up on misuse and misconduct. And if officers know they’ll soon be subject to automatic account suspension if they can’t link searches to case numbers (which is what Audit Assistance requires), they’ll be less likely to use Flock to engage in stalking or harassment.
To be sure, the worst officers will still find some way to work around the safety checks and limitations. But police officers are like everyone else: a not-insignificant percentage are lazy and only do this sort of thing because it’s easy to do. Any minimal roadblock will shut them down because then the ex-stalking they do for fun is going to start feeling like work.
But let’s be clear here: I’m not looking to hang a “GOOD GUY TECH BRO” medal around the neck of Flock’s CEO. There’s still plenty to be concerned about here, including Flock’s apparent unwillingness to comply with cities’ requests to deactivate cameras following contract terminations or the startling prevalence of Flock cameras no government ever approved for installation.
Furthermore, there’s no real justification for these systems to exist at all. Both Flock and its law enforcement supporters claim the cameras help investigations and increase public safety. While it’s certainly true that this does happen from time to time, Flock has portrayed its systems as essential when that’s obviously not true. Crime rates have been at historical lows for most of the past 25 years. And this happened without persistent nationwide surveillance enabled by a network of souped-up ALPR cameras.
Pretending this is essential now deliberately ignores the last quarter-century of crime reduction efforts that didn’t rely on massive surveillance networks and private contractors only willing to do the right thing when it looked like blowing off the public might finally affect its bottom line.
Filed Under: acab, alpr, police misconduct, stalking, surveillance abuse
Companies: flock, flock safety
You must be logged in to post a comment Login