Flock Safety’s New Reforms Fall Short of Fixing Mass Surveillance Risks

Flock Safety has rolled out new operational reforms for its automated license plate readers, or ALPRs, responding to nationwide backlash and contract cancellations from towns over mass surveillance concerns, according to company announcements and reports.

The most significant change from the surveillance technology vendor is a default optional seven-day data retention period, lowered from the previous default of 30 days. Law enforcement agencies wanting to keep information past the seven-day limit must now switch to “Evidence Mode,” which requires the target information to be linked to an ongoing case instead of a mere fishing expedition.

According to company statements, the manufacturer previously charged some customers extra fees to extend their data retention periods. Cities may still opt for longer retention settings, though potential costs could influence those municipal decisions.

New Filters and Audit Tools

Alongside the retention adjustment, the vendor introduced two additional platform modifications. The first is offense filtering, which allows municipalities to restrict departmental access to ALPR data strictly to specific serious crimes, such as murder or robbery, while blocking access for other matters like immigration investigations.

The second adjustment involves enhanced audit features designed to proactively lock out law enforcement officers who submit suspicious requests for data. Critics point out that these transparency tools attempt to manage a tracking system that captures vehicle movements continuously.

Executive Tone Shift and Public Pressure

The product updates accompany a notable tone shift from company CEO Garrett Langley. Previously, the executive characterized the DeFlock movement as “terrorists” and attributed the anti-surveillance backlash to federal political dynamics rather than product concerns.

In subsequent statements reported by the BBC, the executive acknowledged valid criticisms regarding mission creep and data retention.

Historically, my point of view as a chief executive of a private company was, I don’t know if I should be making these decisions. I don’t know if it’s my job to say how long data should be retained.

Garrett Langley, via BBC

The executive also noted agreement with civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, regarding the requirement that police need an active case number to search Flock’s data.

They’re right. I think it should be required.

Garrett Langley, via BBC

Remaining Privacy Concerns and Legal Scrutiny

Despite the implemented changes, privacy advocates question the long-term durability of these voluntary vendor reforms, noting that nothing prevents the company from altering its settings if municipal customers object or migrate to competing vendors.

Related legal challenges, such as SIREN and CAIR-CA v. San Jose, continue to test the boundaries of municipal surveillance deployment. Observers argue that private vendors should not dictate baseline privacy standards for millions of citizens without binding legislative intervention from lawmakers to restrict government use of mass tracking tools.