Flock's 'Creepy Cameras' Remain Major Threat to Privacy Despite Small Recent Changes, Warns ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has expressed concern over Flock's recent adjustments to its AI-powered traffic cameras, despite the company touting these as positive developments. The ACLU argues that the proposed changes are merely reiterating previous measures and do not adequately address the significant privacy issues posed by Flock's products.

According to the ACLU, Flock's default retention periods should be reduced to 48 hours instead of one week, as the longer retention periods can be granted to police departments upon request or when officers activate the "Evidence Mode." This mode, whose exact scope remains unclear, could still result in the retention of substantial location data on individuals and vehicles, even if they are not suspected of any wrongdoing.

Flock claims that its modifications will grant local police more control over the types of offenses they can search through the company's data. However, this idea is not new, as Flock has attempted this approach before with limited success. For instance, in June 2025, the company introduced a "Proactive Search Term Tool" designed to block impermissible searches, such as abortion-related searches in states that prohibit sharing reproductive healthcare data.

Nonetheless, law enforcement officers soon discovered they could circumvent this system by simply inputting arbitrary terms like "investigation" or "hehehe" as search reasons. Subsequent adjustments, such as replacing the open text box with a drop-down menu of acceptable search reasons, only provided police with a list of potential justifications without ensuring their accuracy.

The ACLU emphasizes that Flock's proposed "Audit Assistance" tool appears promising, yet there is no evidence to support its consistent effectiveness in preventing improper searches. Recent incidents involving police officers misusing Flock for personal reasons have been arrested, fired, or disciplined, but Flock's assertions that these cases demonstrate the effectiveness of its auditing tool are questionable.

Without knowing the actual number of officers abusing the system, it is impossible to determine whether Flock and its auditing tools are catching 95% of violators or only 5%. The ACLU recommends that an independent evaluator assess the tool's actual efficiency before drawing any conclusions.

Additionally, Flock's announcement that every search will require police to input a case code seems promising, but it remains unclear how this measure will improve the system's functionality. The ACLU points out that the promise of making an ineffective voluntary security measure mandatory does little to address the underlying issues.

With Flock's substantial $1 billion in venture capitalist funding, the company is committed to prioritizing profits over privacy, and the ACLU vows to continue its efforts to cancel local ALPR contracts and advocate for legislative protections against this surveillance threat.