Surveillance technology company Flock is introducing a range of new safeguards for its automatic license plate readers following a string of reports showing that police officers used the tools to stalk ex-partners and monitor innocent people. CEO Garrett Langley now says he was wrong to leave oversight entirely to lawmakers, telling reporters that the company must take responsibility for how its products are deployed.
The changes, rolling out over the coming weeks, will make mandatory a feature the company previously offered as optional. Known as Audit Assistance, it flags abnormal search behavior and immediately locks out suspicious users until an administrator reviews their activity. The company is also requiring all users to enter case codes before running searches, a move intended to curb searches for personal or malicious reasons. Administrators can override the requirement in emergencies, such as locating a missing child, but those overrides will be automatically flagged for review.
Mandatory audits and shorter data retention
The new policies address longstanding criticism from privacy advocates who said Flock had too few guardrails against misuse. Previously, individual police departments could choose to enable Audit Assistance or not, and many declined. According to the company, since the feature launched in April, only about a third of agencies using Flock turned it on. Among those that did, identification of abuse rose noticeably. Langley says that’s exactly why the feature should be mandatory.
Beyond audit requirements, Flock is reducing the default data retention period for license plate scans from 30 days to seven. The move aligns more closely with recommendations from civil liberties groups such as the ACLU, which have long argued that storing location data for longer periods creates unnecessary risks. Police departments can still choose to keep data longer, but they will have to make that choice explicitly. A new “Evidence Mode” will preserve searches linked to a specific case number, ensuring that data relevant to an investigation is not automatically deleted.
The company is also changing how data can be shared between agencies. Previously, participating localities could share their data with other departments on an all-or-nothing basis. Now, administrators can set granular limits, allowing another agency to search their Flock data for a homicide suspect while prohibiting access for immigration enforcement or other unrelated purposes.
Recent abuse cases sparked outcry
The policy changes follow a series of high-profile incidents in which officers were accused of using Flock data for stalking and harassment. News reports detailed a police chief in Braselton, Georgia, who allegedly searched his ex-girlfriend’s license plate more than 500 times over a seven-month period. In California, prosecutors alleged that a former Riverside County Sheriff’s Office deputy used Flock data to stalk his ex-girlfriend, including looking up license plate information about men she was dating. These cases, among others, have drawn renewed scrutiny to the company and the broader industry of automated license plate recognition, or ALPR, technology.
Privacy advocates note that reports of such abuse date back years. The nonprofit Institute for Justice has documented incidents of ALPR misuse dating to 2021, and a recent cluster of cases has pushed the issue into public view. Langley predicted that the company’s new auditing tools would lead to more officers being caught. “You are going to see more officers fired and more officers arrested for abusing police power,” he said.
ACLU cautions that changes may be insufficient
After Flock announced its updates, the ACLU released an analysis suggesting the changes appear “more focused on addressing a perceived PR problem than the significant harms its products create.” The group called the shorter data retention period a potential “step in the right direction,” but noted that the effectiveness of the changes depends on how Evidence Mode and the audit tools are implemented. The ACLU also called for independent review of Flock’s auditing and search case code systems to determine whether they truly deter abuse.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation and other digital rights organizations have similarly accused Flock of misleading the public and policymakers about the risks of its technology. Critics have warned that license plate readers can be used to track women seeking abortions, target journalists, or compile detailed profiles of individuals’ movements. Flock has said its technology is prohibited from being used for reproductive care searches in states where such searches are restricted, but critics argue that enforcement of those rules has been inconsistent.
A change of course for the CEO
Langley’s public stance has shifted significantly over time. In the past, he took a combative approach toward critics, saying that local policymakers should decide what guardrails are appropriate for its tools. Last year, he described DeFlock, a website that maps the locations of Flock cameras across the United States, as a “terroristic” group. In July, he apologized for that characterization, calling it a “mistake.”
Now Langley says his thinking evolved through conversations with communities and local officials. He notes that he still believes legislators should ultimately make key decisions about how policing tools are used, but acknowledges that waiting for regulations is not enough. “This is such an obvious way to curb abuse,” he told reporters, referring to mandatory case codes. “And I said, ‘Fine. You know what? I think that’s right, and we got this one wrong. We should make it a requirement.’”
Langley says he understands that many critics will not immediately trust his intentions. “All I guess I’m asking for is for a fair shot,” he said. He also points to the company’s track record of helping law enforcement solve serious cases. According to Langley, in July alone, Flock helped find almost a thousand missing people and more than 22,000 stolen cars. That scale of impact, he said, comes with an obligation to ensure the technology is used responsibly.
“It took me maybe longer than it should have to realize the sheer impact of the company,” Langley said. “What I came to realize over time was that the responsibility that bears with it is an obligation to make sure that it’s creating a society that we both, you and I, and everyone around us, want to raise their kids in.”
Source:The Verge News