{
  "id": 9595474,
  "title": "Flock is finally requiring police to have a real reason before searching its camera database",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/24/flock-is-finally-requiring-police-to-have-a-real-reason-before",
  "topic": "tech",
  "section": "Tech",
  "published": "2026-09-24T17:10:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "TechSpot",
    "slug": "techspot",
    "url": "https://www.techspot.com/news/113975-flock-finally-requiring-police-have-real-reason-before.html"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "Flock Safety, a company that operates license plate camera surveillance systems, is altering its policies regarding police searches of its database due to increasing concerns in Washington over privacy, accuracy, and potential misuse. The company has introduced new controls to its search system, which scans approximately 20 billion license plates per month. Previously, users had to provide a reason for conducting a search, but now they must select from a drop-down menu of standardized categories based on the FBI's crime-reporting system. Law enforcement users will also be required to enter a case number by the end of the year, though this can be waived in emergencies.\n\nThese changes were disclosed in a letter from Flock's chief legal officer to Senator Josh Hawley, who initiated an investigation into the company last month. Hawley presided over a Senate hearing on Wednesday, examining Flock and three other companies providing similar surveillance technology. The hearing included a testimony from a Florida woman who was detained for 13 days after her car was detected by a Flock camera near the site of a fatal accident. Authorities were searching for a similar vehicle.\n\nFlock's license plate recognition system has rapidly expanded, with the company reporting around 120,000 cameras across the nation. Police departments and public safety officials argue that the technology can assist in locating missing children, tracking stolen vehicles, and investigating hit-and-run incidents. However, privacy advocates, civil liberties groups, and individuals from various political backgrounds express concerns about the system's potential for misuse, such as tracking individuals' movements over time and allegations of officers using the system for personal reasons like stalking. Flock does not maintain a centralized record of confirmed customer misuse, but it leaves the decision to determine if a search was justified and if disciplinary action is needed to its customers. If an employee abuses access, the company's customers decide whether discipline is warranted.\n\nFlock has also implemented monitoring tools to detect unusual search activity, which has identified several instances of misuse, leading to arrests. The company is developing a feature to lock out users exhibiting abnormal behavior. Senator Hawley suggests that the issue could lead to congressional action, warning that without limits from companies or the government, there could be significant concerns about the invasion of basic rights and liberties. Flock is also reducing the default data retention period, with new customers having a seven-day retention period, down from 30 days. Existing customers can opt-in for the shorter period, and agencies can still request longer retention with approval from an elected governing body or official. Currently, about 3% of law enforcement customers retain data for over 30 days, with a maximum retention period of one year.",
  "summary": "Until recently, users were required to explain why they were conducting a search by typing into an open text field. Flock said those entries were not always specific enough. The company has replaced the field with a drop-down menu of standardized categories based on the FBI's crime-reporting system. Read Entire Article",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}