Flock Safety CEO Calls for “Compromise” Over License Plate Reader Abuse

Police camera network used to stalk former partners

Flock Safety, a company supplying police with surveillance cameras, drones, and license plate recognition systems, is facing growing backlash. The Washington Post recently identified 46 cases where police officers allegedly used Flock technology for unauthorized purposes, including stalking their wives, girlfriends, or former partners.

CEO Garrett Langley apologized during a CBS News interview but insisted that Flock did not invent police abuse; rather, it built the audit tools to shine a light on it. Speaking to Fox News, he also called for finding a “compromise” between public safety and privacy.

Pressure mounts from across the political spectrum

The backlash against the technology is uniting politicians from both sides of the aisle, much like the debate over data center power consumption. Democrats warn about mass surveillance of citizens without their knowledge.

Meanwhile, House Republicans introduced a bill that would prohibit the federal government from purchasing automated surveillance systems that use facial recognition, biometric IDs, or automated license plate recognition, explicitly naming Flock Safety cameras as a target.

Concessions appear mostly cosmetic so far

In response to the criticism, the company reduced the default data retention time from 30 days to seven days and required a case code before accessing data. However, both of these changes can be easily bypassed in practice.

Police officers can store data for extended periods using a setting called “Evidence Mode.” The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has pointed out that the real impact of these changes will depend entirely on how loosely this evidence-gathering mode is applied, questioning whether the move is a genuine fix or merely a PR strategy.

Responsibility shifts to state regulators

Whether the abuse of the technology can be curtailed will depend on if states heed Langley’s call to make the illegal use of such data a criminal offense, or if lawmakers pass federal bans on purchasing the hardware altogether. Langley will face further questioning on these issues at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in October.

Lilith's verdict

Mass deployment of surveillance systems is crashing into reality. The biggest security flaw isn't a lack of compromise, but the naive assumption that an audit trail alone will stop a person at the console from abusing their power.