Key facts
- Flock CEO Garrett Langley admitted the company was too slow to implement safeguards against police misuse of its surveillance technology.
- New safeguards include reducing data retention from 30 days to seven days.
- Abnormal searches and uses of Flock's technology will be automatically flagged.
- Langley agreed that police should require an active case number to search Flock's data.
- The company is making its audit feature, which logs searches and flags unusual behavior, standard for all police customers.
Flock, a US surveillance firm, is introducing new safeguards to prevent the misuse of its technology by law enforcement, with its CEO admitting the company should have acted sooner. The firm has faced public backlash as police have used its license plate readers, cameras, and drones to track individuals without suspicion, including romantic partners and strangers.
Garrett Langley, Flock's founder and chief executive, conceded that the company took too long to protect its systems from abuse. The new measures include reducing data retention from 30 days to seven days and automatically flagging abnormal searches. Langley also stated his agreement with groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation that police should be required to have an active case number to access Flock's data.
Despite the controversies, Langley reported that 16 cities that had previously deactivated Flock services have since re-engaged with the company, and the company generally sees a 7:1 ratio of new customers to lost ones. He acknowledged that police customers have widely adopted the new audit feature, which logs searches and flags unusual behavior, to the point where Flock is making it a standard offering.
Langley expressed a willingness to take responsibility for guiding the company's stance on data retention and usage, a role he previously resisted. He is now pitching Flock's products as essential for crime fighting and improving policing, asserting that cities not using the technology are effectively choosing to be less safe. He also noted that when misuse occurs, it is often due to bad data and officers failing to follow rules, but acknowledged that Flock, as a visible company, becomes an "easy villain."