Flock’s Half-Measures Won’t Solve the Surveillance State

Flock Safety, a company building a nationwide surveillance network using Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPRs), is attempting to address concerns about police misuse. The company’s new safeguards and data retention changes are being touted as major concessions, but they do little to alleviate concerns about abuse or the scale of surveillance.

The default data retention period has been reduced from one month to one week, a change that still allows for extensive storage of individuals’ private information. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), this is longer than necessary, with a recommended 48-hour limit. The added step of requiring law enforcement officers to enter a case number when seeking data longer than a week is a token gesture at best.

Flock’s business model relies on collecting and sharing massive amounts of location data from ALPRs installed across the country. This creates a comprehensive picture of Americans’ daily lives, including real-time movements, habits, and associations. Marlow has described Flock as “a mass surveillance company that collects billions and billions of license plate scans every month on people who have done nothing wrong.” These scans are used to target vulnerable communities and undermine civil liberties.

The rollout of Audit Assistance, a system designed to prevent abuse by locking out users displaying abnormal activity, is unclear in its implementation. It’s uncertain what constitutes “abnormal” or how this will prevent abuse rather than provide a veneer of oversight. Flock has yet to fully deploy this system, suggesting that the company prioritizes appearances over actual reform.

Law enforcement agencies contracting with Flock can access travel information without warrants and share data across jurisdictions, creating an immense database of Americans’ movements. This raises questions about what exactly Flock’s proposed reforms aim to address: police abuse or the surveillance itself?

While some hail Flock’s moves as a step in the right direction, this is short-sighted. As long as companies like Flock continue to collect and share location data without meaningful oversight or regulation, the risk of abuse will persist. Moreover, these reforms do little to address the fundamental issue at play: the unchecked growth of surveillance infrastructure in our society.

The American public should be wary of piecemeal solutions that fail to confront the magnitude of this problem. Marlow noted that Flock collects location data on virtually every car in America every month and facilitates the nationwide sharing of that data, which can be used to target members of vulnerable communities and undermine privacy and chill behavior.

The implications of this story extend far beyond Flock itself, highlighting a broader issue with how our society values convenience over civil liberties. The national wave of vandalism against ALPRs is a symptom of growing unease about these technologies, but meaningful change will require more than just token gestures from companies like Flock.

The surveillance state we’re building, with its emphasis on data collection, sharing, and analysis, poses a significant threat to our democracy. It’s time for policymakers, civil society, and the public at large to engage in a serious conversation about what kind of society we want to live in – one that values privacy, transparency, and accountability or one where convenience and security are prioritized above all else.

The path forward is not clear-cut, but it’s certain that Flock’s latest moves will do little to stem the tide of surveillance unless accompanied by a more fundamental shift in how we approach these issues. Until then, Americans should remain vigilant, questioning both the technologies being imposed upon them and the companies that profit from their data.