Skip to content

Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

Technology
9 8 40
  • cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/215357

    Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

    Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company with a presence in thousands of communities across the U.S., has stopped agencies across the country from searching cameras inside Illinois, California, and Virginia, 404 Media has learned. The dramatic moves come after 404 Media revealed local police departments were repeatedly performing lookups around the country on behalf of ICE, a Texas officer searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, and lawmakers recently signed a new law in Virginia. Ordinarily Flock allows agencies to opt into a national lookup database, where agencies in one state can access data collected in another, as long as they also share their own data. This practice violates multiple state laws which bar the sharing of ALPR data out of state or it being accessed for immigration or healthcare purposes.

    The changes also come after a wave of similar coverage in local and state-focused media outlets, with many replicating our reporting to learn more about what agencies are accessing Flock cameras in their communities and for what purpose. The Illinois Secretary of State is investigating whether Illinois police departments broke the law by sharing data with outside agencies for immigration or abortion related reasons. Some police departments have also shut down the data access after learning it was being used for immigration purposes.

    “Some states, like California, do not allow any sharing across state borders. For those states, Flock has disabled National Lookup to make compliance easier,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley wrote in a public blog post on June 19.

    In that blog post, titled “Setting the Record Straight: Statement on Flock Network Sharing, Use Cases, and Federal Cooperation,” Langley says he is writing to provide transparency on “recent clickbait-driven reporting and social media rumors that mischaracterize Flock’s LPR devices.” Rather than refuting any of our reporting, he instead explains that as a result of it, Flock has decided to perform numerous internal audits about how police are using the network that exactly aligns with 404 Media’s reporting, and that Flock has decided to make specific changes to how Flock works to ensure that local police are complying with state data sharing laws, which include disabling the national lookup tool in California.

    That post followed another published by the company a few days earlier, which discussed an audit Flock conducted on what agencies were accessing data in Illinois. “Since we initiated the audit in May, 47 agencies have been removed from access to Illinois data,” that blog post reads.

    Flock has also removed the national lookup feature for cameras in Virginia, according to an internal Flock message viewed by 404 Media. 404 Media granted the source who shared it anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. On Tuesday a Flock spokesperson confirmed in an email to 404 Media that the changes to Virginia data access are complete.

    In May, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a new law which will limit the use of such data to specific criminal investigations, human trafficking, stolen vehicles, and missing persons cases, the local TV outlet WAVY reported. The law comes into effect July 1, the report added.

    Flock cameras work by continuously scanning the plates, model, and color of vehicles driving by. Law enforcement can then access data collected from their own cameras, but Flock also allows state and nationwide lookups. For a nationwide search, agencies are able to search other police departments’ cameras if they in turn make theirs available for search. But this can result in illegal data sharing if such access violates state law.

    💡Do you know anything else about Flock? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Joseph securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send him an email at joseph@404media.co. Jason's Signal is jason.404

    404 Media reported in May that local police around the country were performing Flock lookups on behalf of ICE. That included lookups on cameras administered by the Danville, Illinois Police Department, triggering the audit there. 404 Media also reported cops in California are illegally sharing Flock data with agencies out of state, and searched cameras related to an “immigration protest.”

    Flock says it conducted an internal audit of agencies that had access to Illinois data. If an agency was found to have affirmed compliance with Illinois law while also conducting multiple searches using reasons impermissible under state law, then Flock revoked their access to Illinois data. Flock also wrote that “All out of state agencies with access to Illinois data are being re-educated  on Illinois-specific legal requirements and product functionality,” and that the company is placing new emphasis on “responsible sharing, with updated training content, in-product guidance, and communications to reinforce compliance.”

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Flock said it also has plans for an AI-based tool that will identify suspicious searches and allow agencies to require case numbers when their cameras are searched (as opposed to the vague reasons such as “immigration” in some of the data 404 Media obtained).

    404 Media’s investigation into local police departments performing Flock lookups for ICE was based on a “Network Audit” obtained by researchers by public records requests. A Network Audit shows what agency searched another agency's Flock cameras, and for what stated purpose. The investigation into a Flock search performed for “had an abortion, search for female,” was based on Network Audits from other police departments obtained by 404 Media. The sheriff in that case said the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her.

    Since publishing those articles and much of the related data, other outlets have dug into the information themselves. For example, Suncoast Searchlight used the data we published to find the Florida Highway Patrol tapped Flock cameras to aid immigration crackdowns; the Evanston Roundtable used it to find its police department shared access to its cameras with agencies that performed searches related to immigration; the Central Current reports officials in Syracuse, New York, are investigating their data sharing practices the outlet reviewed the data; and KUSA-TV Denver found Loveland Police Department’s Flock cameras were used for “ICE” searches.

    And several cities have decided not to renew or expand their contracts with Flock. The City of Austin let its contract with Flock lapse, in part because of concerns around ICE access to the data. The City of San Marcos decided to not place additional cameras in the city. The San Marcos Police Department also changed their policy to require outside law enforcement agencies to file a request concerning a specific crime in order to receive Flock data, Spectrum News 1 reported.

    The Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety said it blocked outside access to its cameras after learning the data was being searched by departments “focused on immigration-related violations,” local media reported.

    “License plate readers can serve as an important tool for law enforcement, but these cameras must be regulated so they aren’t abused for surveillance, tracking the data of innocent people or criminalizing lawful behavior. No one seeking legal healthcare services in Illinois should face harassment or jail—period,” Secretary Giannoulias told 404 Media in a statement.

    Flock declined to comment further on its changes to California data access.


    From 404 Media via this RSS feed

  • cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/215357

    Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

    Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company with a presence in thousands of communities across the U.S., has stopped agencies across the country from searching cameras inside Illinois, California, and Virginia, 404 Media has learned. The dramatic moves come after 404 Media revealed local police departments were repeatedly performing lookups around the country on behalf of ICE, a Texas officer searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, and lawmakers recently signed a new law in Virginia. Ordinarily Flock allows agencies to opt into a national lookup database, where agencies in one state can access data collected in another, as long as they also share their own data. This practice violates multiple state laws which bar the sharing of ALPR data out of state or it being accessed for immigration or healthcare purposes.

    The changes also come after a wave of similar coverage in local and state-focused media outlets, with many replicating our reporting to learn more about what agencies are accessing Flock cameras in their communities and for what purpose. The Illinois Secretary of State is investigating whether Illinois police departments broke the law by sharing data with outside agencies for immigration or abortion related reasons. Some police departments have also shut down the data access after learning it was being used for immigration purposes.

    “Some states, like California, do not allow any sharing across state borders. For those states, Flock has disabled National Lookup to make compliance easier,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley wrote in a public blog post on June 19.

    In that blog post, titled “Setting the Record Straight: Statement on Flock Network Sharing, Use Cases, and Federal Cooperation,” Langley says he is writing to provide transparency on “recent clickbait-driven reporting and social media rumors that mischaracterize Flock’s LPR devices.” Rather than refuting any of our reporting, he instead explains that as a result of it, Flock has decided to perform numerous internal audits about how police are using the network that exactly aligns with 404 Media’s reporting, and that Flock has decided to make specific changes to how Flock works to ensure that local police are complying with state data sharing laws, which include disabling the national lookup tool in California.

    That post followed another published by the company a few days earlier, which discussed an audit Flock conducted on what agencies were accessing data in Illinois. “Since we initiated the audit in May, 47 agencies have been removed from access to Illinois data,” that blog post reads.

    Flock has also removed the national lookup feature for cameras in Virginia, according to an internal Flock message viewed by 404 Media. 404 Media granted the source who shared it anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. On Tuesday a Flock spokesperson confirmed in an email to 404 Media that the changes to Virginia data access are complete.

    In May, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a new law which will limit the use of such data to specific criminal investigations, human trafficking, stolen vehicles, and missing persons cases, the local TV outlet WAVY reported. The law comes into effect July 1, the report added.

    Flock cameras work by continuously scanning the plates, model, and color of vehicles driving by. Law enforcement can then access data collected from their own cameras, but Flock also allows state and nationwide lookups. For a nationwide search, agencies are able to search other police departments’ cameras if they in turn make theirs available for search. But this can result in illegal data sharing if such access violates state law.

    💡Do you know anything else about Flock? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Joseph securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send him an email at joseph@404media.co. Jason's Signal is jason.404

    404 Media reported in May that local police around the country were performing Flock lookups on behalf of ICE. That included lookups on cameras administered by the Danville, Illinois Police Department, triggering the audit there. 404 Media also reported cops in California are illegally sharing Flock data with agencies out of state, and searched cameras related to an “immigration protest.”

    Flock says it conducted an internal audit of agencies that had access to Illinois data. If an agency was found to have affirmed compliance with Illinois law while also conducting multiple searches using reasons impermissible under state law, then Flock revoked their access to Illinois data. Flock also wrote that “All out of state agencies with access to Illinois data are being re-educated  on Illinois-specific legal requirements and product functionality,” and that the company is placing new emphasis on “responsible sharing, with updated training content, in-product guidance, and communications to reinforce compliance.”

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Flock said it also has plans for an AI-based tool that will identify suspicious searches and allow agencies to require case numbers when their cameras are searched (as opposed to the vague reasons such as “immigration” in some of the data 404 Media obtained).

    404 Media’s investigation into local police departments performing Flock lookups for ICE was based on a “Network Audit” obtained by researchers by public records requests. A Network Audit shows what agency searched another agency's Flock cameras, and for what stated purpose. The investigation into a Flock search performed for “had an abortion, search for female,” was based on Network Audits from other police departments obtained by 404 Media. The sheriff in that case said the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her.

    Since publishing those articles and much of the related data, other outlets have dug into the information themselves. For example, Suncoast Searchlight used the data we published to find the Florida Highway Patrol tapped Flock cameras to aid immigration crackdowns; the Evanston Roundtable used it to find its police department shared access to its cameras with agencies that performed searches related to immigration; the Central Current reports officials in Syracuse, New York, are investigating their data sharing practices the outlet reviewed the data; and KUSA-TV Denver found Loveland Police Department’s Flock cameras were used for “ICE” searches.

    And several cities have decided not to renew or expand their contracts with Flock. The City of Austin let its contract with Flock lapse, in part because of concerns around ICE access to the data. The City of San Marcos decided to not place additional cameras in the city. The San Marcos Police Department also changed their policy to require outside law enforcement agencies to file a request concerning a specific crime in order to receive Flock data, Spectrum News 1 reported.

    The Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety said it blocked outside access to its cameras after learning the data was being searched by departments “focused on immigration-related violations,” local media reported.

    “License plate readers can serve as an important tool for law enforcement, but these cameras must be regulated so they aren’t abused for surveillance, tracking the data of innocent people or criminalizing lawful behavior. No one seeking legal healthcare services in Illinois should face harassment or jail—period,” Secretary Giannoulias told 404 Media in a statement.

    Flock declined to comment further on its changes to California data access.


    From 404 Media via this RSS feed

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Lol, I feel like this can be easily sidestepped. ICE and the other fascist fucks enabling them don't give a shit about laws anymore. They can easily just change the purpose of their search to be one of the legally permissible reasons. Flock is supposedly working on a tool to automatically flag suspicious searches, but I doubt they'll work hard on ensuring it's effective.

    As much as I am loathe to abandon this kind of tech to help find missing/kidnapped persons/human traffickers, it's way too easily corrupted when law enforcement is actively hostile to citizens no longer viewed favorably by the regime.

  • Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Lol, I feel like this can be easily sidestepped. ICE and the other fascist fucks enabling them don't give a shit about laws anymore. They can easily just change the purpose of their search to be one of the legally permissible reasons. Flock is supposedly working on a tool to automatically flag suspicious searches, but I doubt they'll work hard on ensuring it's effective.

    As much as I am loathe to abandon this kind of tech to help find missing/kidnapped persons/human traffickers, it's way too easily corrupted when law enforcement is actively hostile to citizens no longer viewed favorably by the regime.

    Lol.

    ICE after Trump is gone: Hii guys we’re cool now right ? That was Trump making us act that way we’re not actually bad 🙂

  • cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/215357

    Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

    Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company with a presence in thousands of communities across the U.S., has stopped agencies across the country from searching cameras inside Illinois, California, and Virginia, 404 Media has learned. The dramatic moves come after 404 Media revealed local police departments were repeatedly performing lookups around the country on behalf of ICE, a Texas officer searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, and lawmakers recently signed a new law in Virginia. Ordinarily Flock allows agencies to opt into a national lookup database, where agencies in one state can access data collected in another, as long as they also share their own data. This practice violates multiple state laws which bar the sharing of ALPR data out of state or it being accessed for immigration or healthcare purposes.

    The changes also come after a wave of similar coverage in local and state-focused media outlets, with many replicating our reporting to learn more about what agencies are accessing Flock cameras in their communities and for what purpose. The Illinois Secretary of State is investigating whether Illinois police departments broke the law by sharing data with outside agencies for immigration or abortion related reasons. Some police departments have also shut down the data access after learning it was being used for immigration purposes.

    “Some states, like California, do not allow any sharing across state borders. For those states, Flock has disabled National Lookup to make compliance easier,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley wrote in a public blog post on June 19.

    In that blog post, titled “Setting the Record Straight: Statement on Flock Network Sharing, Use Cases, and Federal Cooperation,” Langley says he is writing to provide transparency on “recent clickbait-driven reporting and social media rumors that mischaracterize Flock’s LPR devices.” Rather than refuting any of our reporting, he instead explains that as a result of it, Flock has decided to perform numerous internal audits about how police are using the network that exactly aligns with 404 Media’s reporting, and that Flock has decided to make specific changes to how Flock works to ensure that local police are complying with state data sharing laws, which include disabling the national lookup tool in California.

    That post followed another published by the company a few days earlier, which discussed an audit Flock conducted on what agencies were accessing data in Illinois. “Since we initiated the audit in May, 47 agencies have been removed from access to Illinois data,” that blog post reads.

    Flock has also removed the national lookup feature for cameras in Virginia, according to an internal Flock message viewed by 404 Media. 404 Media granted the source who shared it anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. On Tuesday a Flock spokesperson confirmed in an email to 404 Media that the changes to Virginia data access are complete.

    In May, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a new law which will limit the use of such data to specific criminal investigations, human trafficking, stolen vehicles, and missing persons cases, the local TV outlet WAVY reported. The law comes into effect July 1, the report added.

    Flock cameras work by continuously scanning the plates, model, and color of vehicles driving by. Law enforcement can then access data collected from their own cameras, but Flock also allows state and nationwide lookups. For a nationwide search, agencies are able to search other police departments’ cameras if they in turn make theirs available for search. But this can result in illegal data sharing if such access violates state law.

    💡Do you know anything else about Flock? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Joseph securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send him an email at joseph@404media.co. Jason's Signal is jason.404

    404 Media reported in May that local police around the country were performing Flock lookups on behalf of ICE. That included lookups on cameras administered by the Danville, Illinois Police Department, triggering the audit there. 404 Media also reported cops in California are illegally sharing Flock data with agencies out of state, and searched cameras related to an “immigration protest.”

    Flock says it conducted an internal audit of agencies that had access to Illinois data. If an agency was found to have affirmed compliance with Illinois law while also conducting multiple searches using reasons impermissible under state law, then Flock revoked their access to Illinois data. Flock also wrote that “All out of state agencies with access to Illinois data are being re-educated  on Illinois-specific legal requirements and product functionality,” and that the company is placing new emphasis on “responsible sharing, with updated training content, in-product guidance, and communications to reinforce compliance.”

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Flock said it also has plans for an AI-based tool that will identify suspicious searches and allow agencies to require case numbers when their cameras are searched (as opposed to the vague reasons such as “immigration” in some of the data 404 Media obtained).

    404 Media’s investigation into local police departments performing Flock lookups for ICE was based on a “Network Audit” obtained by researchers by public records requests. A Network Audit shows what agency searched another agency's Flock cameras, and for what stated purpose. The investigation into a Flock search performed for “had an abortion, search for female,” was based on Network Audits from other police departments obtained by 404 Media. The sheriff in that case said the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her.

    Since publishing those articles and much of the related data, other outlets have dug into the information themselves. For example, Suncoast Searchlight used the data we published to find the Florida Highway Patrol tapped Flock cameras to aid immigration crackdowns; the Evanston Roundtable used it to find its police department shared access to its cameras with agencies that performed searches related to immigration; the Central Current reports officials in Syracuse, New York, are investigating their data sharing practices the outlet reviewed the data; and KUSA-TV Denver found Loveland Police Department’s Flock cameras were used for “ICE” searches.

    And several cities have decided not to renew or expand their contracts with Flock. The City of Austin let its contract with Flock lapse, in part because of concerns around ICE access to the data. The City of San Marcos decided to not place additional cameras in the city. The San Marcos Police Department also changed their policy to require outside law enforcement agencies to file a request concerning a specific crime in order to receive Flock data, Spectrum News 1 reported.

    The Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety said it blocked outside access to its cameras after learning the data was being searched by departments “focused on immigration-related violations,” local media reported.

    “License plate readers can serve as an important tool for law enforcement, but these cameras must be regulated so they aren’t abused for surveillance, tracking the data of innocent people or criminalizing lawful behavior. No one seeking legal healthcare services in Illinois should face harassment or jail—period,” Secretary Giannoulias told 404 Media in a statement.

    Flock declined to comment further on its changes to California data access.


    From 404 Media via this RSS feed

    The hell is Flock a stupid name.

  • Lol.

    ICE after Trump is gone: Hii guys we’re cool now right ? That was Trump making us act that way we’re not actually bad 🙂

    You seem very optimistic about the state the world will be in when he's gone... 😅

  • You seem very optimistic about the state the world will be in when he's gone... 😅

    Who said he's leaving? He's been talking this whole time about 2024 being the last election you ever need to vote in.

  • Who said he's leaving? He's been talking this whole time about 2024 being the last election you ever need to vote in.

    Hes quite old: he could drop dead any time ...

  • cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/215357

    Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

    Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company with a presence in thousands of communities across the U.S., has stopped agencies across the country from searching cameras inside Illinois, California, and Virginia, 404 Media has learned. The dramatic moves come after 404 Media revealed local police departments were repeatedly performing lookups around the country on behalf of ICE, a Texas officer searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, and lawmakers recently signed a new law in Virginia. Ordinarily Flock allows agencies to opt into a national lookup database, where agencies in one state can access data collected in another, as long as they also share their own data. This practice violates multiple state laws which bar the sharing of ALPR data out of state or it being accessed for immigration or healthcare purposes.

    The changes also come after a wave of similar coverage in local and state-focused media outlets, with many replicating our reporting to learn more about what agencies are accessing Flock cameras in their communities and for what purpose. The Illinois Secretary of State is investigating whether Illinois police departments broke the law by sharing data with outside agencies for immigration or abortion related reasons. Some police departments have also shut down the data access after learning it was being used for immigration purposes.

    “Some states, like California, do not allow any sharing across state borders. For those states, Flock has disabled National Lookup to make compliance easier,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley wrote in a public blog post on June 19.

    In that blog post, titled “Setting the Record Straight: Statement on Flock Network Sharing, Use Cases, and Federal Cooperation,” Langley says he is writing to provide transparency on “recent clickbait-driven reporting and social media rumors that mischaracterize Flock’s LPR devices.” Rather than refuting any of our reporting, he instead explains that as a result of it, Flock has decided to perform numerous internal audits about how police are using the network that exactly aligns with 404 Media’s reporting, and that Flock has decided to make specific changes to how Flock works to ensure that local police are complying with state data sharing laws, which include disabling the national lookup tool in California.

    That post followed another published by the company a few days earlier, which discussed an audit Flock conducted on what agencies were accessing data in Illinois. “Since we initiated the audit in May, 47 agencies have been removed from access to Illinois data,” that blog post reads.

    Flock has also removed the national lookup feature for cameras in Virginia, according to an internal Flock message viewed by 404 Media. 404 Media granted the source who shared it anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. On Tuesday a Flock spokesperson confirmed in an email to 404 Media that the changes to Virginia data access are complete.

    In May, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a new law which will limit the use of such data to specific criminal investigations, human trafficking, stolen vehicles, and missing persons cases, the local TV outlet WAVY reported. The law comes into effect July 1, the report added.

    Flock cameras work by continuously scanning the plates, model, and color of vehicles driving by. Law enforcement can then access data collected from their own cameras, but Flock also allows state and nationwide lookups. For a nationwide search, agencies are able to search other police departments’ cameras if they in turn make theirs available for search. But this can result in illegal data sharing if such access violates state law.

    💡Do you know anything else about Flock? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Joseph securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send him an email at joseph@404media.co. Jason's Signal is jason.404

    404 Media reported in May that local police around the country were performing Flock lookups on behalf of ICE. That included lookups on cameras administered by the Danville, Illinois Police Department, triggering the audit there. 404 Media also reported cops in California are illegally sharing Flock data with agencies out of state, and searched cameras related to an “immigration protest.”

    Flock says it conducted an internal audit of agencies that had access to Illinois data. If an agency was found to have affirmed compliance with Illinois law while also conducting multiple searches using reasons impermissible under state law, then Flock revoked their access to Illinois data. Flock also wrote that “All out of state agencies with access to Illinois data are being re-educated  on Illinois-specific legal requirements and product functionality,” and that the company is placing new emphasis on “responsible sharing, with updated training content, in-product guidance, and communications to reinforce compliance.”

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Flock said it also has plans for an AI-based tool that will identify suspicious searches and allow agencies to require case numbers when their cameras are searched (as opposed to the vague reasons such as “immigration” in some of the data 404 Media obtained).

    404 Media’s investigation into local police departments performing Flock lookups for ICE was based on a “Network Audit” obtained by researchers by public records requests. A Network Audit shows what agency searched another agency's Flock cameras, and for what stated purpose. The investigation into a Flock search performed for “had an abortion, search for female,” was based on Network Audits from other police departments obtained by 404 Media. The sheriff in that case said the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her.

    Since publishing those articles and much of the related data, other outlets have dug into the information themselves. For example, Suncoast Searchlight used the data we published to find the Florida Highway Patrol tapped Flock cameras to aid immigration crackdowns; the Evanston Roundtable used it to find its police department shared access to its cameras with agencies that performed searches related to immigration; the Central Current reports officials in Syracuse, New York, are investigating their data sharing practices the outlet reviewed the data; and KUSA-TV Denver found Loveland Police Department’s Flock cameras were used for “ICE” searches.

    And several cities have decided not to renew or expand their contracts with Flock. The City of Austin let its contract with Flock lapse, in part because of concerns around ICE access to the data. The City of San Marcos decided to not place additional cameras in the city. The San Marcos Police Department also changed their policy to require outside law enforcement agencies to file a request concerning a specific crime in order to receive Flock data, Spectrum News 1 reported.

    The Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety said it blocked outside access to its cameras after learning the data was being searched by departments “focused on immigration-related violations,” local media reported.

    “License plate readers can serve as an important tool for law enforcement, but these cameras must be regulated so they aren’t abused for surveillance, tracking the data of innocent people or criminalizing lawful behavior. No one seeking legal healthcare services in Illinois should face harassment or jail—period,” Secretary Giannoulias told 404 Media in a statement.

    Flock declined to comment further on its changes to California data access.


    From 404 Media via this RSS feed

    how do I get my state out too

  • cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/215357

    Flock Removes States From National Lookup Tool After ICE and Abortion Searches Revealed

    Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company with a presence in thousands of communities across the U.S., has stopped agencies across the country from searching cameras inside Illinois, California, and Virginia, 404 Media has learned. The dramatic moves come after 404 Media revealed local police departments were repeatedly performing lookups around the country on behalf of ICE, a Texas officer searched cameras nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, and lawmakers recently signed a new law in Virginia. Ordinarily Flock allows agencies to opt into a national lookup database, where agencies in one state can access data collected in another, as long as they also share their own data. This practice violates multiple state laws which bar the sharing of ALPR data out of state or it being accessed for immigration or healthcare purposes.

    The changes also come after a wave of similar coverage in local and state-focused media outlets, with many replicating our reporting to learn more about what agencies are accessing Flock cameras in their communities and for what purpose. The Illinois Secretary of State is investigating whether Illinois police departments broke the law by sharing data with outside agencies for immigration or abortion related reasons. Some police departments have also shut down the data access after learning it was being used for immigration purposes.

    “Some states, like California, do not allow any sharing across state borders. For those states, Flock has disabled National Lookup to make compliance easier,” Flock CEO Garrett Langley wrote in a public blog post on June 19.

    In that blog post, titled “Setting the Record Straight: Statement on Flock Network Sharing, Use Cases, and Federal Cooperation,” Langley says he is writing to provide transparency on “recent clickbait-driven reporting and social media rumors that mischaracterize Flock’s LPR devices.” Rather than refuting any of our reporting, he instead explains that as a result of it, Flock has decided to perform numerous internal audits about how police are using the network that exactly aligns with 404 Media’s reporting, and that Flock has decided to make specific changes to how Flock works to ensure that local police are complying with state data sharing laws, which include disabling the national lookup tool in California.

    That post followed another published by the company a few days earlier, which discussed an audit Flock conducted on what agencies were accessing data in Illinois. “Since we initiated the audit in May, 47 agencies have been removed from access to Illinois data,” that blog post reads.

    Flock has also removed the national lookup feature for cameras in Virginia, according to an internal Flock message viewed by 404 Media. 404 Media granted the source who shared it anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. On Tuesday a Flock spokesperson confirmed in an email to 404 Media that the changes to Virginia data access are complete.

    In May, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed a new law which will limit the use of such data to specific criminal investigations, human trafficking, stolen vehicles, and missing persons cases, the local TV outlet WAVY reported. The law comes into effect July 1, the report added.

    Flock cameras work by continuously scanning the plates, model, and color of vehicles driving by. Law enforcement can then access data collected from their own cameras, but Flock also allows state and nationwide lookups. For a nationwide search, agencies are able to search other police departments’ cameras if they in turn make theirs available for search. But this can result in illegal data sharing if such access violates state law.

    💡Do you know anything else about Flock? We would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message Joseph securely on Signal at joseph.404 or send him an email at joseph@404media.co. Jason's Signal is jason.404

    404 Media reported in May that local police around the country were performing Flock lookups on behalf of ICE. That included lookups on cameras administered by the Danville, Illinois Police Department, triggering the audit there. 404 Media also reported cops in California are illegally sharing Flock data with agencies out of state, and searched cameras related to an “immigration protest.”

    Flock says it conducted an internal audit of agencies that had access to Illinois data. If an agency was found to have affirmed compliance with Illinois law while also conducting multiple searches using reasons impermissible under state law, then Flock revoked their access to Illinois data. Flock also wrote that “All out of state agencies with access to Illinois data are being re-educated  on Illinois-specific legal requirements and product functionality,” and that the company is placing new emphasis on “responsible sharing, with updated training content, in-product guidance, and communications to reinforce compliance.”

    Flock also said it launched a new tool that blocks impermissible searches in real time. “If a search involving Illinois camera data includes terms that indicate an impermissible purpose under Illinois law, the Illinois data will automatically be excluded,” the company wrote.

    Flock said it also has plans for an AI-based tool that will identify suspicious searches and allow agencies to require case numbers when their cameras are searched (as opposed to the vague reasons such as “immigration” in some of the data 404 Media obtained).

    404 Media’s investigation into local police departments performing Flock lookups for ICE was based on a “Network Audit” obtained by researchers by public records requests. A Network Audit shows what agency searched another agency's Flock cameras, and for what stated purpose. The investigation into a Flock search performed for “had an abortion, search for female,” was based on Network Audits from other police departments obtained by 404 Media. The sheriff in that case said the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her.

    Since publishing those articles and much of the related data, other outlets have dug into the information themselves. For example, Suncoast Searchlight used the data we published to find the Florida Highway Patrol tapped Flock cameras to aid immigration crackdowns; the Evanston Roundtable used it to find its police department shared access to its cameras with agencies that performed searches related to immigration; the Central Current reports officials in Syracuse, New York, are investigating their data sharing practices the outlet reviewed the data; and KUSA-TV Denver found Loveland Police Department’s Flock cameras were used for “ICE” searches.

    And several cities have decided not to renew or expand their contracts with Flock. The City of Austin let its contract with Flock lapse, in part because of concerns around ICE access to the data. The City of San Marcos decided to not place additional cameras in the city. The San Marcos Police Department also changed their policy to require outside law enforcement agencies to file a request concerning a specific crime in order to receive Flock data, Spectrum News 1 reported.

    The Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety said it blocked outside access to its cameras after learning the data was being searched by departments “focused on immigration-related violations,” local media reported.

    “License plate readers can serve as an important tool for law enforcement, but these cameras must be regulated so they aren’t abused for surveillance, tracking the data of innocent people or criminalizing lawful behavior. No one seeking legal healthcare services in Illinois should face harassment or jail—period,” Secretary Giannoulias told 404 Media in a statement.

    Flock declined to comment further on its changes to California data access.


    From 404 Media via this RSS feed

    i used to work for secretary of state police and driver privacy was taken deathly seriously.

    glad to see alexi’s keeping up the good work.

  • The Internet is for Extremism - by Jeremiah Johnson

    Technology technology
    9
    1
    83 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    72 Aufrufe
    L
    I've been saying this for years. glad someone wrote about it.
  • 210 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    72 Aufrufe
    R
    If it's on ISP level (auth) - doubt.
  • 4 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    109 Aufrufe
    W
    I often wonder if yours is an automated account, but did you read the comments?
  • Converting An E-Paper Photo Frame Into Weather Map

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    113 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    indibrony@lemmy.worldI
    Looks like East Anglia has basically disappeared. At least nothing of value was lost
  • 104 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    C
    Now we need an open source browser runtime...
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    252 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 0 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    46 Aufrufe
    C
    Oh this is a good callout, I'm definitely using wired and not wireless.
  • *deleted by creator*

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet