Flock CEO Calls for “Compromise” Amid Growing Criticism of Surveillance

Garrett Langley, the CEO of Flock Safety, has said the country needs to find a “compromise” between privacy and security. In an interview with Fox News, he noted that when people talk about only one thing — either privacy or security — they are getting their priorities wrong, and the priority should be compromise itself.

The appearance was the latest in a string of interviews Langley has given as public discontent has grown. Critics worry that Flock's surveillance cameras, drones and plate-recognition technology could be misused.

Not Hypothetical Concerns

The concerns are not staying abstract. The Washington Post recently identified 46 cases in which police officers were accused of using Flock's technology for personal purposes — including surveilling wives, girlfriends and former partners. After listening to an interview with one of the alleged victims, Langley told CBS News: “I apologize. It kills me that she had to go through that.” But he immediately added that Flock did not create police abuses, and instead became “the first company to shine a light on them and build tools to detect them.”

Criticism from Both Sides

Much as discontent over data centers has united the left and the right, Flock is irritating politicians in both camps. Democratic candidate in Michigan Abdul El-Sayed accused his rival of supporting the “mass proliferation of Flock cameras that track your every move.” Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders wrote: “Stop mass surveillance with AI. Stop Flock.” On the Republican side, three members of the House introduced a bill banning the federal government from purchasing automated surveillance systems with facial recognition, biometrics or plate reading, “including Flock Safety cameras.”

The company has already made concessions: the default data-retention period has been cut from 30 days to 7, and accessing footage now requires entering a case number. That said, both measures can be circumvented — for example, police can extend retention through Evidence Mode. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) responded cautiously: Flock did not bring the retention period down to the recommended 48 hours, and whether this proves a real change or just another PR move will depend on exactly how “Evidence Mode” works.

Langley himself is proposing that regional regulators pass laws making the illegal use of Flock data a criminal offense. In his view, the problem is that today there is all too often neither regulation nor accountability when it comes to Flock and similar technologies — and that, he believes, is wrong.

Source: TechCrunch