Flock Safety Faces Growing Backlash Over Surveillance Practices

Flock Safety’s network of surveillance cameras, drones, and license-plate-recognition (LPR) systems has drawn intense scrutiny after the *Washington Post* identified 46 instances in which police officers were accused of using the technology for unauthorized purposes, such as stalking spouses or ex-partners. The revelations have sparked criticism from both sides of the political aisle and prompted civil-rights groups to demand tighter controls.

TechCrunch

CEO Garrett Langley told Fox News that the nation must find a “compromise” between privacy and safety, emphasizing that prioritizing one over the other is “the wrong thing.”

TechCrunch

In response to criticism, Flock reduced its default data-retention period from 30 days to seven days and now requires a case code before data access. However, police can still extend storage by activating “Evidence Mode,” a feature that can override the shorter retention window.

TechCrunch

On the Republican side, three House members introduced legislation prohibiting federal purchases of automated surveillance systems that employ facial recognition, biometric IDs, or LPR, explicitly naming Flock cameras.

TechCrunch

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the retention change as a step forward but noted the company has not met its recommendation of a 48-hour default period.

TechCrunch

• “When people talk about just one of these, privacy or safety, they’re prioritizing the wrong thing, and what we have to prioritize as a country is compromise,” — Garrett Langley, flock safety CEO

TechCrunch

These statements encapsulate the tension between public-safety objectives and privacy concerns that continues to shape the debate over Flock Safety’s surveillance technology.

TechCrunch