Why Flock’s new surveillance safeguards still have loopholes
Flock is making automated audits of officer searches mandatory, recommending that agencies retain data for seven days instead of 30,.
Flock is making automated audits of officer searches mandatory, recommending that agencies retain data for seven days instead of 30, and allowing departments to restrict outside searches by stated purpose.[7] The safeguards remain limited because agencies may override the retention recommendation,…
Flock is making automated audits of officer searches mandatory, recommending that agencies retain data for seven days instead of 30, and allowing departments to restrict outside searches by stated purpose.[7] The safeguards remain limited because agencies may override the retention recommendation, officers self-report search purposes, and Flock has not disclosed the auditing system’s accuracy or opened it to independent evaluation.[7]
Why it matters: More than 120,000 Flock cameras are installed across the US and can use AI to identify vehicles by attributes including plate number, make, model, and color, creating a network capable of tracing movement across communities.[12] At least 30 cities reportedly dropped Flock in the year before February 2026, while some jurisdictions are considering bans or switching providers.[7]
Key insights: The mandatory audit system analyzes officer search activity and flags searches it considers suspicious to administrators.[7] | Departments can permit searches for stated purposes such as kidnapping while excluding purposes such as immigration enforcement, but the control depends on officers accurately describing their searches.[7] | Flock says contract cancellations are a small portion of the roughly 5,000 agencies that have contracted with the company.[7] | Los Angeles is among the communities that canceled contracts or switched cameras off, and Ring ended a Flock partnership following online backlash.[12]
Cheatsheet facts: What changed: Flock made automated search auditing mandatory and added configurable access controls, while recommending a shorter seven-day data-retention period.[7] | Why now: Reports of police misuse, community opposition, contract losses, and proposed legal restrictions have intensified scrutiny of networked license-plate surveillance.[7][12] | Watch next: Watch whether Flock releases accuracy data or permits independent evaluation of its mandatory auditing system, and whether more jurisdictions cancel contracts or restrict license-plate readers.[7]
Flock is making automated audits of officer searches mandatory, recommending that agencies retain data for seven days instead of 30, and allowing departments to restrict outside searches by stated purpose.[7] The safeguards remain limited because agencies may override the retention recommendation, officers self-report search purposes, and Flock has not disclosed the auditing system’s accuracy or opened it to independent evaluation.[7]
Why it matters: More than 120,000 Flock cameras are installed across the US and can use AI to identify vehicles by attributes including plate number, make, model, and color, creating a network capable of tracing movement across communities.[12] At least 30 cities reportedly dropped Flock in the year before February 2026, while some jurisdictions are considering bans or switching providers.[7]
Key insights: The mandatory audit system analyzes officer search activity and flags searches it considers suspicious to administrators.[7] | Departments can permit searches for stated purposes such as kidnapping while excluding purposes such as immigration enforcement, but the control depends on officers accurately describing their searches.[7] | Flock says contract cancellations are a small portion of the roughly 5,000 agencies that have contracted with the company.[7] | Los Angeles is among the communities that canceled contracts or switched cameras off, and Ring ended a Flock partnership following online backlash.[12]
Cheatsheet facts: What changed: Flock made automated search auditing mandatory and added configurable access controls, while recommending a shorter seven-day data-retention period.[7] | Why now: Reports of police misuse, community opposition, contract losses, and proposed legal restrictions have intensified scrutiny of networked license-plate surveillance.[7][12] | Watch next: Watch whether Flock releases accuracy data or permits independent evaluation of its mandatory auditing system, and whether more jurisdictions cancel contracts or restrict license-plate readers.[7]