If you’re commuting in the Milwaukee area, you might notice a black camera and solar panel affixed to a pole. These are Flock Safety’s motion-activated cameras. They gather vehicle fingerprint data, like a car’s make and model, color and license plate by capturing still images of the backs of vehicles. Flock Safety’s cameras and software are used by law enforcement agencies to create a shared database from over 3,000 communities nationwide.
Flock Safety Spokesperson Holly Beilin says one of the ways the company protects peoples’ privacy is its data retention policy. "We’re currently helping law enforcement solve about 7% of reported crime in the U.S. while balancing personal liberties, personal privacy," says Beilin.
Images are usually stored in the cloud for 30 days, but Beilin says there are exceptions.
"Now of course, if a state or local legislative body rules a shorter or longer retention period of course we’re always going to comply with the law," she says.
At the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin, Interim Legal Director Tim Muth says the lack of uniformity is a concern. Some police departments can request to store data for longer than 30 days. Muth says there should be standard regulations in place for managing data because there have been reports of unauthorized misuse by officers.
"Part of the real problem is that these systems are being implemented without a system of rules or oversight or policies and it certainly makes the possibility of misuse a real one," he says.
Each search in Flock’s database requires a record of justification, which is typically a case number. The data of who conducted the search and why is saved. Flock shares best practices to law enforcement agencies, like conducting regular and random audits of how the video is being used. Spokesperson Beilin gives an example:
"So maybe it was a hit and run case that they were looking for a white Jeep somewhere between 1:30 and 3:30 in the morning," she explains. "The parameters of the search, the search justification and the user who searched are all saved. That audit log is available indefinitely for command staff or city council members or anyone that’s charged with auditing to actually go through and understand what are people using this system for."
Another concern for the ACLU’s Muth is how unaware most people are that they’re being tracked.
"Imagine if the police said we want to put a tracking device on every single car in the country so that we know where every car is every single moment of the day," says Muth. "And we’re going to build a database of all those locations run by an unaccountable private company and accessible to every law enforcement agency across the country without needing any type of warrant. I think if you asked most people, they would say that’s not acceptable."
Beilin says Flock has a team that attends municipal meetings to answer questions and hosts public forums. But Muth says the process for getting public officials to approve the cameras varies across jurisdictions.
"Very often the extent of the oversight is just a purchase request, but there may not be any significant amount of requests for how is this going to be used by public officials," says Muth.
Beilin says another way Flock protects privacy is in their terms of service. She says the company doesn’t own the data, so they can’t sell it to third parties. As the number of cameras in Wisconsin rises, the ACLU hopes to see serious debates at local and state levels about how the tech will be controlled and limited.
