5 ms·
A Cop Searched 19,000 Flock Cameras Across 1,558 Cities. His Reason: 'LMAO'
- toomuchtodo 2mo agohttps://ij.org/the-ij-database-of-alpr-abuse/ https://ij.org/the-ij-database-of-alpr-abuse/
- lemmetellya 2mo ago[dead]
- Caius-Cosades 2mo ago[dead]
- vatsachak 2mo agoThis cop is doing his part to get rid of flock
- lemmetellya 2mo ago[dead]
- nonethewiser 2mo ago[flagged]
- _8L34K 2mo ago>... and should be reprimanded. L O fucking L
- nonethewiser 2mo agoThe point is: whose to blame if they aren't reprimanded? It's not flock.
- sheikhnbake 2mo agoThat wasn't an initial safety feature. It was added after abuse had already been reported. Flock also needs to require a case number or some other method of validation for legitimate use. Presuming the continue to exist in any capacity. Otherwise we're just going to keep discovering incidents like this.
- rtkwe 2mo agoThey'll just keep a random old case number on a notepad to put in.
- sheikhnbake 2mo agoThat's a fair point. The only other validation gate I can think of within our current system would be a valid warrant number. A system where the warrant automatically limits the search by time and geo-fence could be interesting.
- rtkwe 2mo agoI don't think warrants are currently cataloged and formatted in a way that can easily be retrieved and parsed by Flock to validate that a given warrant covers the requested data.
- sheikhnbake 2mo agoI don't think it would need to validate the applicability of the warrant to the requested data. It would just be checking that a valid warrant exists. The deterrent to abuse would be that a Judge's name is attached to each warrant. Cops have lied to judges before to get bogus warrants but I think it would make abuse less likely overall.
- chucksta 2mo agoThey also designed some amazing validation for that audit software: >Data reviewed by the EFF included searches labelled 'LMAO', 'LOL', 'Hehe', 'Haha', 'idk' and 'blah'. Other entries included 'asdfg' and strings of apparently random keyboard characters. In one case, an officer entered: 'robbery I don't remember the case number leave me alone'. Seems like they really put a lot of thought into preventing abuse >Network Size and ReachTotal Count: Flock Safety reports having over 120,000 active cameras.Community Spread: These cameras are placed in more than 6,000 communities.Data Collection: The system records roughly 20 billion vehicle scans every single month. [1] (https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/09/14/trump-expresses-support-flock-license-plate-surveillance-technology/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/09/14/trump-e...), [2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flock_Safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flock_Safety) He searched ~1/5 of the cameras available in America..
- nonethewiser 2mo agoWhat do you mean validation? The reason field is for auditing. Auditing is not validation. And its how the public knows this officer is not meeting quality expectations.
- defrost 2mo agoNot anymore. Flock has updated the reason field to a drop down choice menu. Now the many officers that typed in LMAO, dunno, and geafdghdstr will now choose a more realistic looking "reason" and the public will no longer know how many police are covering up stalking by entering "robbery". You seem very keen to make shallow excuses and defend flock and the LEOs here.
- kashunstva 2mo ago> So Flock and the local governments are acting responsibly here. The police officer is not and should be reprimanded. Who is responsible for ensuring that agents of the government in jurisdictions that host Flock cameras adhere to proper procedures, if not the local governments themselves? Who is designing access systems that permit random text in lieu of actual case numbers that can be verified in real time and properly gate the system? If Flock and the IT departments of local governments cannot provide proper locks against this sort of random surveillance then the cameras should be removed.
- Forgeties79 2mo ago>Flock designed their software so that the police have to state a reason. And yet none of this stopped an individual from first accessing 19,000 cameras across 1558 cities with "LMAO" as the reason. The damage is already done and it could have been prevented.
- nonethewiser 2mo agoThe reason is for audibility not prevention. Flock surfaced the officer whose not meeting quality expectations.
- Forgeties79 2mo agoYes that’s why I’m not satisfied. It doesn’t actually stop the problem. It’s a legal safety net for them at best. Our data is not safe from rogue officers, which there are many of as we have seen with US policing for many years. The reason should need to be approved. This would all be so laughably ridiculous if the consequences weren’t so serious.
- nielsbot 2mo agowhy is flock good?
- 7bbfea 2mo agoBuuuullshit that the local governments made the logs public. So many local governments charge absolutely insane amount PER MONTH for the logs. And you're happy that they are public at all? Yeah they are public because activists pay for access out of their own pocket, not because local governments actually care about people and act "responsibly"
- frandroid 2mo agoYeah but they changed it to a dropdown now so others won't be able to follow in his footsteps.
- progforlyfe 2mo agoPolicy officers are mis-using this powerful, hugely invasive massive surveillance tool? I am utterly shocked!
- ShadowOfThePit 2mo ago> Data reviewed by the EFF included searches labelled 'LMAO', 'LOL', 'Hehe', 'Haha', 'idk' and 'blah'. Other entries included 'asdfg' and strings of apparently random keyboard characters. In one case, an officer entered: 'robbery I don't remember the case number leave me alone'. lol wtf. Like, I get it, "haha quirky me", if it was a personal coding project or an informal setting, but not here!? I wouldn't believe if you told me they were older than, what, 30? On second thought, that's absolutely possible.
- a34729t 2mo agoThis sounds exactly what happens when you are required to fill out a reason for say a deployment to your test enrvironment in a jira ticket. After a certain point you just stop obeying cause nobody reads the ticket anyways.
- cogman10 2mo agoSo, I've actually implemented a system like this for my work. It's completely non-shocking to me that a unchecked and unvalided "reason" field ends up with nothing but garbage in it to get past the software checks. My 3 "words" requirement because managers wanted more than just "caus" ended up with workers simply putting in "a o k". These systems need more validation and teeth than simply letting the officers enter whatever text allows them to search. A case number isn't enough, IMO. There needs to be an actual warrant which the system checks. But further, misuse needs to be prosecuted (I know, fat chance).
- nonethewiser 2mo ago
- alistairSH 2mo agoToo bad they haven't named/shamed the actual officers. Lack of details is effectively giving the police carte blanche to continue doing this shit. "Oh, we'll tell the officer to cut that out (fingers crossed behind back)"
- dayyan 2mo agoWould you have not? Don't lie.
- hackyhacky 2mo agoI work in a field where privacy of customer information is protected by law and we all take this very seriously. So, no, I would not do this, and I think that police (who have vastly much more power over people's lives than I do) should not either.
- dylan604 2mo agoThat's great. Now put yourself in the same situation the cops are working with and not your arbitrarily applied restrictions. The cops clearly do not have these restrictions, so why are you applying something artificial like this?
- sophacles 2mo agoI hold myself to all sorts of standards that are not enforced by anyone outside of me. There are plenty of things I choose not do do despite a complete lack of consequence if I do them. It's a called integrity and morality. Clearly another thing cops and their sycophants don't have.
- hackyhacky 2mo agoPardon, but I think that someone who carries a gun (and is allowed to use it) as part of their work uniform requires stronger, not weaker ethical guidelines than someone who pushes code.
- NBJack 2mo agoSince the context here is the U.S., there are plenty of restrictions they are legally bound by. Here's a small sample: - The fourth amendment (protection against unreasonable search and seizure) - Mapp v. Ohio, 1961 (evidence gained without adhering to the fourth amendment is inadmissible) - Wong Sun v. United States, 1963 (conclusions drawn from unlawfully obtained evidence/illegal entry can be challenged or outright discarded) - Franks v. Delaware, 1978 (the right to challenge evidence collected on the basis of a warrant granted on the basis of a false statement)
- foolfoolz 2mo agoflock isn’t going away. this feels like the 1990s web that grew into a more regulated system with safeguards. flock or a (more advanced) replacement are going to be part of policing in the us forever
- dragontamer 2mo agoOnce upon a time, one of the largest companies of the USA, Bell Labratories, was declared an illegal monopoly and eradicated. In the correct political environment, entire companies can be dismantled with one executive action. Not our current political environment, but in the 1980s one it could happen. ----------- Oh, also, companies were literally an act of Congress when this country started. We can change the rules back and dismantle any company that refuses to work for the benefit of this country. Remember that one time when a large global company (The Dutch East India company) got a tax break from the king, and it angered the population so much that we took a bunch of tea (a symbol of the Dutch East India Company) and threw it into the Boston Harbor? Ahhhhh yeah. I remember. Oh right, we teach that situation a bit differently today don't we? People probably don't remember exactly how easy it used to be or how this country used to treat companies that betrayed our values. We can go back. But lets start with understanding that we _can_ go back. Step 2 is electing people who will agree with this political message.
- foolfoolz 2mo agobell went away, the technology they were the monopoly over didn’t
- dragontamer 2mo agoLeaded Gasoline. If we don't like a technology we can easily get rid of it in practice. And by that, I mean that Leaded Gasoline is infeasible to be profitable anymore. So no gas station serves it any more. And please, it will be easier to regulate all public camera companies than to regulate all independent gas stations. So don't give me any crap about difficulties. Especially when said companies are all individually being purchased by government services like police.
- y1n0 2mo agoGiven the absurd commit messages I see, basically along the lines of “oops” “lmao” “wtf” I don’t see the issue.
- SHAKEDECADE 2mo agoI'm guessing that often you find yourself surrounded by people and issues that just don't make sense to you.
- kergonath 2mo agoOTOH, are you in an official role with extended powers because you represent the State? A role where you can routinely infringe on the civil and human rights of the people around you? Why do you think the comparison is relevant at all?
- maerF0x0 2mo agoIn this case the issue isn't 19k flock cameras, but an utter lack of repercussion for failure to justify usage. In the same way I'd be arrested and jailed if I breached/used 19K ring cameras that do not belong to me, this guy should be arrested and jailed for his misuse. Police unions are a major root cause of many issues in the USA.
- kennywinker 2mo agoIt’s clear to me that these networked license plate cameras represent a fundamental impingement on freedom. Just one example: how is a journalist supposed to meet with a secret source if their locations at all times are logged? Even if these databases are only ever searched investigating violations of laws, it’s trivial to find ways to twist that against political rivals, protesters and activists, ex girlfriends, journalists, and leakers.
- maerF0x0 2mo agoWhat freedom is being impinged? AFAIK we have no fundamental right to not being recorded in public, presuming it's not indecent. And I'd reiterate what i said elsewhere: I believe people respond to incentives. What we need are more laws governing the law makers and law enforcers. It maybe trivial to shoplift, but the laws (when enforced) make it irrational to.
- kennywinker 2mo ago> What freedom is being impinged? Freedoms guaranteed by the 1st amendment: Freedom of the press - by harassing or criminalizing journalists who seek to expose gov or politicians who do wrong. Freedom of assembly - license plate readers have been used to mass collect plates from people attending political rallies for mainstream candidates. Freedom of speech and petition - tracking and harassing people for political speech or peaceful protest. Under the second amendment: Right to keep and bear arms. See feds slurping up data on gun show attendees. Doing something that is a basic right should not land you in a gov crime database. Under the 4th: Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Knowing where someone is at all times is an unreasonable search. And of course the supreme court has ruled that there is no basic right to privacy in the constitution, when they overturned roe v wade, but i strongly disagree with that ruling and believe it was not fair or consistent with the intent of the constitution.
- pelagicAustral 2mo agoMy commit messages when no one is looking, and the reason I hardly ever open source stuff...
- josefresco 2mo ago> July 2025, an officer with the Lake County, Indiana, Sheriff's Department Do they not know the name of this officer, or are they not reporting it?
- nonethewiser 2mo agoIt's public. It's in the dataset that was released containing "LMAO".
- jasonlotito 2mo agoFlock makes it easy to track people and where they go. For example, if you are going to a gun range, or going to a place to buy guns and ammo, Flock makes it easy to track that. This makes it easy to figure out who has weapons and allows the government to easily target them first. This would make it easy to create a digital database of known and suspected gun owners. This is something I'm sure all gun owners support.
- kennywinker 2mo agoThe government would never do that! /s https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/dea-planned-monitor-gun-show-attendees-license-plate-readers-new-emails-reveal https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/dea-planned-moni... https://www.libertynation.com/flock-cameras-vs-gun-shops-the-battle-between-privacy-and-security/ https://www.libertynation.com/flock-cameras-vs-gun-shops-the...
- JsonDemWitOster 2mo agoNaturally I don't know how the Flock search platform operates but this implies to me that this "Reason:" field is a mere formality, after-the-fact accountability (if even that!). If the search was granted based on human checks for the reason given, they would not dare be flippant about this. Of course it would take more time, humans don't scale, etc. but that's kinda the point: invasive methods should be a last resort.
- ChrisArchitect 2mo ago[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49699493 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49699493