Surveillance technology company Flock is rolling out significant policy changes after multiple reports showed police officers using its automatic license plate readers to stalk former partners and harass others. CEO Garrett Langley is offering a public apology, saying the company failed to take enough responsibility for how law enforcement agencies use its tools.

In an interview, Langley said he has changed his mind about where Flock's obligations begin and end. Previously, the company had argued that local lawmakers were responsible for crafting rules around police surveillance. But Langley now says waiting for regulation was unsatisfactory. “This is such an obvious way to curb abuse,” he said, referring to case codes for searches. “And I said, 'Fine. You know what? I think that's right, and we got this one wrong. We should make it a requirement.'”

Mandatory safeguards and shorter retention

Over the coming weeks, Flock will implement a set of updates designed to make it harder for officers to misuse its technology. The centerpiece is Audit Assistance, a feature that flags abnormal search behavior and immediately locks out suspicious users until an administrator reviews their activity. The feature had been available since April, but only about one-third of participating agencies turned it on. Now, it will be mandatory for all users.

Flock will also require users to enter case codes when running searches. This is meant to ensure queries are tied to legitimate investigations. For emergencies, such as tracking a missing child, an administrator can override the requirement, but those overrides will automatically be flagged for review. The company believes this will reduce the likelihood of an officer running a search for personal reasons.

Another major change is the reduction in default data retention. Flock automatically stores data collected from its license plate readers for 30 days, but that will now shrink to seven days. Police departments can still choose longer retention periods if they wish. In addition, Flock is introducing an “Evidence Mode” that preserves searches tied to a specific case number, ensuring data relevant to investigations is not automatically deleted.

Data sharing between agencies is also being updated. Previously, a city or county shared access to its Flock data on an all-or-nothing basis. Now, individual localities can set granular permissions. For instance, one police department could allow another agency to search its data for a homicide suspect while prohibiting access for immigration enforcement. This gives local officials more control over how their data is used beyond their jurisdiction.

Reports of stalking and harassment

The changes follow a series of high-profile incidents that exposed how easily Flock's tools can be abused. In Braselton, Georgia, a police chief searched his ex-girlfriend's license plate more than 500 times over seven months. In California, prosecutors alleged that a former Riverside County Sheriff's Office deputy used Flock data to stalk his ex-girlfriend and look up the license plates of men she was dating. In both cases, the officers allegedly accessed the system not for police work but to satisfy personal obsessions.

Reports of ALPR abuse date back at least to 2021, according to the nonprofit Institute for Justice. The recent spate of incidents has renewed public concern over the rapid spread of license plate readers, which mount on streetlights and police cruisers, capturing images of every passing vehicle. Privacy advocates have long warned that the data can be used to build detailed records of a person's movements, revealing where they live, work, and socialize.

Langley said he expects more officers will be caught as the company's tools improve. “You are going to see more officers fired and more officers arrested for abusing police power,” he predicted. He noted that agencies that voluntarily turned on Audit Assistance saw a predictable increase in the identification of abuse. With the feature now mandatory, he expects more departments to uncover misconduct.

Privacy advocates respond cautiously

The American Civil Liberties Union released an analysis of Flock's changes. While the organization called the shorter data retention period a potential “step in the right direction,” it expressed skepticism about the overall package. The ACLU said the changes appear “more focused on addressing a perceived PR problem than the significant harms its products create.” It also called for independent review of Flock's auditing and case code tools to determine whether they are actually effective.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has also criticized Flock in the past, accusing it of misleading the public about the risks of its technology. The EFF and other groups have warned that ALPRs could be used to track people seeking abortions in states where the procedure is restricted. Flock has said officers are prohibited from searching its data for reproductive health care in states where such searches are restricted, but critics remain worried about enforcement.

Langley's attitude toward critics has shifted over time. In a Forbes interview last year, he described DeFlock, a website that maps Flock's cameras across the country, as a “terroristic” group. In July, he apologized for that characterization, calling it a mistake. He now says frequent conversations with communities, including at city council meetings, have changed his perspective. “All I guess I'm asking for is a fair shot,” he said.

Balancing public safety and privacy

Flock says its technology has substantial public safety benefits. The company reported that in July alone, its systems helped find almost a thousand missing people and more than 22,000 stolen cars. These numbers illustrate why many police departments have embraced Flock, which now operates in thousands of communities across the country.

But critics argue that these benefits do not justify the potential for abuse. They point to the fact that ALPRs capture data on everyone who drives past a camera, not just people suspected of a crime. This means a woman fleeing an abusive partner might be tracked down by law enforcement using data that should never have been collected. The design of the system, they say, is a mass surveillance tool that happens to be used for some legitimate police work.

Langley said he understands why many people do not trust his intentions. He acknowledged that his thinking has evolved as he realized the scale of Flock's impact. “It took me maybe longer than it should have to realize the sheer impact of the company,” he said. “I'm still surprised. I got our July update a week ago, and we helped find almost a thousand missing people, over 22,000 stolen cars — in July. That's crazy. That's such a big impact on the world. And 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.”

Despite the company's new measures, privacy advocates remain worried about the broader trend. License plate readers are just one part of an expanding surveillance ecosystem that includes facial recognition, cell phone location tracking, and predictive policing algorithms. The question is whether voluntary corporate changes are enough, or whether new laws are needed to establish clear boundaries.

Langley still says he prefers legislators make the key calls about how policing tools should be used. But he now says he recognizes the regulatory process moves slowly. By making audit requirements and data limits mandatory, Flock is attempting to close some of the most obvious gaps without waiting for new laws. Whether that will be enough to restore public trust remains an open question.

Source: The Verge News