Flock surveillance cameras under fire in Silicon Valley’s hometown as nationwide backlash grows - even from ‘Darth Vader’

Flock surveillance cameras under fire in Silicon Valley’s hometown as nationwide backlash grows - even from ‘Darth Vader’ Amid nationwide privacy concerns over Flock cameras, a Darth Vader impersonator mocked the company at a San Diego council meeting this week - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments Amid a growing national backlash against cameras that automatically read license plates, people in Palo Alto, the hometown of leaders of some of Silicon Valley’s most powerful tech companies, are pushing back against the surveillance. Flock Safety cameras are being reviewed by Palo Alto’s independent police auditor over how law enforcement handles the data, including who can access it, whether it can be shared with outside agencies, how long it is stored, and how the cameras are being used, NBC Bay Area reported Friday. Concern over Flock cameras has grown after investigations revealed that some officers used the system to track romantic partners and exes. The devices use artificial intelligence to scan vehicles and people, recording details like license plates, car descriptions, stickers and movements in a searchable database. More than 50 cities and law enforcement agencies have canceled, suspended or rejected Flock contracts since the beginning of the year, according to data tracked by the grassroots monitoring group DeFlock, Stateline reports. Cities including Los Angeles, Dayton, Ohio, Redmond, Washington, Ithaca, New York, and Flagstaff and Sedona, Arizona, have indefinitely shut off their cameras or ended their Flock contracts. The cameras have also attracted mockery. A man ironically dressed as Darth Vader spoke at a San Diego City Council meeting in apparent favor of the Flock technology. “The emperor is a fan of Flock, and we must continue utilizing flock technologies so that we can follow and surveil the rebel scum as they move from playground to playground, from playground to pool, from pool to gymnasium,” he said, breathing heavily into the microphone in an imitation of the iconic Star Wars character. “Because we all know that the flock cameras are not only following the license plate readers, they are following children. They are following children in parks and gymnasiums. And we need this. I need this so I can stalk my ex-girlfriend.” Flock CEO Garrett Langley defended the cameras in a Fox News interview Saturday, saying privacy concerns are valid but overlook how the technology can help law enforcement. “I value my privacy… but what we’re talking about is safety as well. And so I think when people talk about just one of these things, privacy or safety, they’re prioritizing the wrong thing. What we have to prioritize as a country is compromise: how do we have our safety, and how do we balance privacy?” Langley said. Palo Alto City Council is expected to finalize the scope of the OIR Group audit on Monday before deciding whether any changes are needed to the city’s use of the cameras. The group argues the Flock cameras can go too far, creating a massive database of people’s movements that could be misused by law enforcement. "We want to make sure that value isn't overridden by the lack of trust in misuse of the data," Michael Gennaco, from OIR Group, said in a statement to NBC. Palo Alto's police chief told The Independent the license plate readers are a “tremendous investigative tool.” “It has helped us solve cases, recover stolen vehicles and property, apprehend wanted individuals, and safely locate missing and suicidal persons. I am confident that our officers are using the technology responsibly and to good effect,” James Reifschneider, Palo Alto's police chief, said in a statement. Reifschneider said the independent police auditor will review Flock’s security, transparency, data-sharing, training, retention and auditing practices. The Independent has contacted Flock for comment. Following the controversy, Flock announced it was adding stronger safeguards. In an August 13 news release, the company revealed plans to require law enforcement to use misuse-detection tools, flag unusual searches and link searches to specific criminal cases. It is also reducing the recommended data retention period from 30 days to seven days. But this may not be enough for some communities. Narragansett and Glocester, Rhode Island, are among the latest communities to end their Flock contracts. Narragansett’s Town Council voted unanimously on August 3 to end its contract early, citing privacy and surveillance concerns, Independentri.com reported. Three days later, Glocester’s Town Council voted 4-1 to terminate its contract and remove the cameras, potentially costing the town $10,000 to $15,000, Uprise RI reported. Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments