A recent report on Flock Safety, the growing US surveillance technology company, reveals how opposition to automated license plate readers is playing out at the local level.
In South Carolina, officials are arguing over whether to install 25 new cameras, a dispute that reflects broader questions about cost, oversight and the level of surveillance communities are willing to accept. The city of Los Angeles recently terminated its contract with Flock Safety, although Flock’s CEO says the suspension is expected to be temporary while the police department revises its rules.
These cancellations are largely driven by public concern over a system designed to enable mass surveillance, which is susceptible to serious abuses, including biased policing and privacy violations.
To track such surveillance, journalists and researchers are increasingly turning to a free tool called the Atlas of Surveillance, a collaboration between the renowned digital privacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation and the University of Nevada, Reno. The site has become a go-to source for mapping police technology — which also includes drones, facial recognition cameras and body cameras — with a searchable database that is often more reliable than alternatives.
With the Atlas of Surveillance tool, you enter a city, county, state, law enforcement agency, or vendor in the United States and select the technology you want to track. You’ll get a list of details based on your search, including links to public documents or news articles.
“We frequently encounter situations where local officials don’t even know a certain tool is being used,” said Beryl Lipton, a senior researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Discovering technology that we recorded in the Surveillance Atlas is intended to help people have conversations [about] If this tool is appropriate for local use, start asking questions and advocating for standards on how their police can or cannot use this equipment.
Monitoring monitoring
While other tools for trGiven that Flock cameras and similar surveillance systems exist, I prefer the EFF approach, which uses reliable data from specific volunteers, including University of Nevada students and staff, as well as experienced researchers. These volunteers use a variety of information, including government documents, press releases, news reports, and confirmed social media posts, to create accurate lists of surveillance technologies used by local police or sheriff’s departments, as well as when they were adopted.
Deflock, another popular app for reporting Flock camera locations, has an open source design that makes it vulnerable to false reports from people who are just think they see a surveillance device. Self-assessments also become less reliable because surveillance cameras are hidden in road signs and cacti.
I tried the Atlas tool with several location searches, including in Albany, Georgia, where five police officers were fired and arrested in July for abusing the city’s Flock system. Sure enough, I was able to see exactly when Albany started its Flock program, among other details about the technology it uses.
“Even if we know that a police department has a tool, we may not know that they don’t have a governance policy or the content of their policy, such as how long data is retained,” Lipton told me.
Lipton recommends users pair the Atlas tool with EFF’s street-level monitoring hub, which offers more in-depth documentation, including details on third-party vendors that work with law enforcement.
The Atlas database is not perfect and there is only so much volunteers can do. In my own research, I found that my hometown offered accurate lists of traffic cameras, but didn’t mention the period of time it adopted Flock automated license plate readers last year, before removing them after a public complaint. I observed similar trends in other cities with comparable histories, suggesting that the database may emphasize active programs or exclude portions of older records.
Resources like the Surveillance Atlas give residents a clearer view of the technologies used by their police departments, information that might otherwise be difficult to obtain. As I’ve explained before, some cities carefully omit the name “Flock” when announcing new surveillance or enforcement programs, even if they use the brand’s drones or ALPR cameras.
If you would like to volunteer for the Monitoring Atlas, you can select the Collaborate option to submit a data point for review.
Tyler Lacoma
Editor / Home security and smart home
Tyler has worked, lived with, and tested all types of smart home and security technology for over a dozen years, explaining the latest features, privacy tips, and top recommendations. With degrees in business management, literature, and technical writing, Tyler takes every opportunity to play with the latest AI technologies, push smart devices to their limits, and occasionally throw cameras off his roof—all to find the best devices to trust with your life. He’s always checking in with the tenants (and pets) in his life to see which smart products can work for everyone, in every living situation. Living in beautiful Bend, Oregon gives Tyler plenty of opportunities to test the latest technologies in all kinds of weather conditions and temperatures. But when he’s not at work, he can be found hiking the trails, trying a new cooking recipe for loved ones, keeping up with his favorite reads, or playing games with good friends. See full bio
