When the LAPD Walks: The Toxic Data Trail of Flock Safety
AI-generated image · US National Wire
Los Angeles law enforcement is cutting ties with a surveillance company over privacy gaps and security flaws—a massive red flag for anyone still trusting 'automated' plate readers.
If there is one thing we know about the Los Angeles Police Department, it is their appetite for surveillance. So, when an agency with that track record decides a tool is too risky to keep, the rest of us should be paying attention.
As Engadget first reported, the LAPD has suspended its use of surveillance technology provided by Flock Safety. The department had entered into a three-year agreement with the company in 2023, but that contract expired over the weekend and will not be renewed.
At the center of the fallout are 138 cameras deployed across Los Angeles. While these devices are designed to identify license plates to help officers locate fugitives or stolen vehicles, the actual handling of that data has become a liability. Engadget reports that city leaders raised alarms regarding the company's privacy controls. Specifically, Flock has reportedly shared data with federal and state agencies, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), despite the existence of California laws intended to limit the sharing of such information with government officials.
**Dana's Take: Opinion** *This is the nightmare scenario for privacy advocates. We are told these systems are 'automated' and 'secure,' but the reality is a chaotic pipeline of data moving wherever the provider deems fit. If the LAPD—an organization that typically leans into surveillance—finds Flock's data handling too toxic to touch, we need to stop pretending these systems aren't just unmanaged privacy leaks waiting to be exploited.*
The breakdown isn't just about who sees the data, but who controls it. Dean Gialamas, the Chief Information Officer for the LAPD, told the Los Angeles Times that the primary conflict involves establishing clear terms regarding who owns the data and what happens to it once it is collected. Gialamas indicated the department will abstain from using the tech until contractual agreements can resolve these security, privacy, and sharing concerns.
Beyond the policy failures, the hardware itself is a liability. Engadget notes that Flock's cameras have been revealed to possess multiple cybersecurity flaws, adding a technical layer of risk to an already precarious privacy situation.