How Cops Are Treating Mass Surveillance as a Joke

More from the article ...

... When law enforcement and tech salespeople pitch ALPRs to city councils, they stick to a familiar script. They trumpet the technology, which is often provided by private companies like Flock Safety, Motorola Solutions, or Axon, as an essential tool for solving high-stakes crimes, such as car jacking, kidnapping, or murder.

But when you strip away the carefully curated talking points, the data continues to reveal a different (and frankly, ridiculous) story. An EFF analysis of ALPR search logs from Flock Safety systems shows that officers across the country are spying on drivers for completely nonsensical "reasons."

Police are routinely searching the Flock database without providing any legitimate justification, making a mockery of our civil liberties by logging reasons like "LOL" (short for "laugh out loud"), "LMAO" (short for "laughing my ass off"), "sexy," and "idk" (short for "I don't know") to access sensitive ALPR location data.

And in some cases, officers are just mashing keyboard buttons rather than articulating the nature of their searches.

Flock Safety claims it has improved its system by requiring officers to select from a dropdown list of crimes before running a search -- but that only makes it easier for officers to hide improper searches behind the veneer of uniformity.

The system does not require proof that the dropdown reason actually matches the true purpose of the search.

With no warrant requirements, limited guardrails, and deficient audit processes, ALPR databases have fostered a culture of unrestricted access to everyone's location information. This culture of abuse has allowed police to treat a mass surveillance network like their own personal search engine, permitting the tracking of the movements of everyday citizens for low-level complaints, personal whims, and sometimes, seemingly, for the lols. ...

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-16 04:30 PM | Reply

Cops get to treat anything they want to like a joke when they know nobody's watching. Seems like one of the perks of the job.

#2 | Posted by Angrydad at 2026-09-16 09:59 PM | Reply

As usual, it's a joke until it effects them.

#3 | Posted by fresno500 at 2026-09-16 11:12 PM | Reply

Because the nature of the job has become one that attracts the sorts of people who shouldn't have a badge and a gun.

You really think these people are at all concerned about anyone else's rights so long as they know they'll never suffer a single consequence?

#4 | Posted by jpw at 2026-09-17 07:54 AM | Reply

ACAB

#5 | Posted by qcp at 2026-09-17 10:54 AM | Reply

... One hacked camera captured 1.6 million images and could detect people as well as cars.

Hackers ripped down a Flock camera above a roadway, made a near-complete copy of the data stored inside it, and shared the files with 404 Media and WIRED, revealing in new detail how exactly Flock Safety's cameras track the movements of both vehicles and people. The hackers say they are also publishing details on how they managed to obtain the software, in the hopes that other people may copy them.

The breach provides an unprecedented look inside a system that Flock has described as protected by on-device encryption. The hackers were able to copy the camera's storage and recover an encryption key stored on the device, which unlocked videos of thousands of vehicle detections. The hackers shared the material with 404 Media and the transparency nonprofit Distributed Denial of Secrets, which shared the data with WIRED. 404 Media and WIRED then analyzed those files as part of a joint investigation. ...

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-17 11:56 AM | Reply

... A Senate Judiciary subcommittee will hold a hearing on Flock Safety's network of automated license plate readers that's drawn privacy concerns over its ability to track people, and the potential to be misused by police. ...

#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-17 02:05 PM | Reply

Cops walk away from their service firearms more often than we know. They cannot operate their body cameras, despite training and orders about the equipment. No one should expect them to use Flock data for its intended purpose, or to protect that data ...

#8 | Posted by catdog at 2026-09-17 06:29 PM | Reply

Connecticut's new license plate camera law: What changes Oct. 1
www.newstimes.com

... New regulations on automated license plate cameras go into effect Oct. 1 in Connecticut. But in the four months since legislators in Hartford approved those rules, the debate on the technology has only gotten louder. ...

The new law changes who Connecticut departments can share data with. Starting Oct. 1, Connecticut law enforcement agencies can only opt into sharing license plate data with towns in Massachusetts, New York and/or Rhode Island, given those towns agree to Connecticut's usage policies. This can be done with specific cases or with automatic sharing agreements. Police in other states will only be able to search Connecticut data if they receive a judicial warrant to do so.

The law also changes what Connecticut data can be used for. Local departments, and the neighboring states with which they can share data, will be prohibited from using the data for immigration, reproductive care or gender-affirming healthcare investigations. The data also cannot be searched to identify someone "engaged in a First Amendment-protected activity," such as attending a protest.

The data collected by the cameras will only be retained for 21 days unless it is used for an active investigation, to comply with a warrant or for highway usage fees. Departments must also now follow a model policy developed by the state's police council and create annual reports on how they are using the technology.

"The law, for a first bite at the apple, is not bad," said Ken Barone, the manager of the University of Connecticut's Racial Profiling Prohibition Project that focuses on equitable roadway safety. "It puts limits on retention periods, prohibits certain locations for cameras, restricts how the database can be used and who you can share data with."

The law bars public agencies from collecting license plate data near a reproductive or sexual health facility that primarily provides gender-affirming healthcare services, or organizations that primarily serve immigrant communities. ...

#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-09-18 03:53 PM | Reply