By the time many residents learn that Flock Safety's Falcon cameras are operating in their towns, the devices have already been tracking every passing vehicle for months. In upstate New York, for instance, communities installed the cameras with little warning and no public discussion. The same pattern has repeated across the United States, where an estimated 90,000 Flock-branded cameras now silently monitor traffic.
They're everywhere and easy to miss
These cameras are small, black boxes typically mounted on utility poles or traffic light arms. They are powered by batteries or solar panels and communicate via cellular networks, not Wi-Fi. Unlike red-light or speed cameras, they do not capture speed. Instead, each unit takes six to twelve still images every time a vehicle passes. Using automated license plate recognition (ALPR) and machine learning, the system extracts the plate number, make, model, color, body type, direction of travel, and even details like bumper stickers, roof racks, or aftermarket wheels.
Flock Safety reports more than 12,000 customers, including police departments, businesses, schools, and homeowners associations. The company also integrates with partner cameras from manufacturers like Motorola via platforms such as CommandCentral Aware, expanding the surveillance network even further. In many towns, both Flock Falcon and third-party cameras feed into the same searchable database.
How the data is used and stored
All images and vehicle data are sent over cellular networks to Amazon Web Services cloud servers, encrypted, and typically deleted after 30 days. Authorized users—often law enforcement—can search the dashboard by license plate, partial plate, or vehicle description. They can also set up real-time alerts when a camera detects a plate linked to a stolen vehicle, missing person, warrant, or other database entry.
This capability means a single camera provides a snapshot of a car at a particular location. But a network of many cameras across towns and states creates a comprehensive record of a person's movements. As University of California Berkeley law professor Catherine Crump explains, "Over time it will become a comprehensive record of someone's movements… where they work, live, worship, what they do in their spare time, who they associate with." Unlike traditional surveillance, this data can reconstruct past travel patterns.
The AI and cloud risks
The use of AI introduces additional concerns. While ALPR data was once manually reviewed for specific investigations, AI now allows operators to proactively search for suspicious behavior unconnected to a known crime. This could lead to profiling or drawing inaccurate conclusions. For instance, police could ask the system to flag vehicles near a protest without any criminal predicate.
Cloud storage, while convenient, creates a single point of failure. If hackers or unauthorized insiders gain access, vast amounts of location data could be exposed. Trevor Horwitz of TrustNet emphasizes the need for strong access controls and monitoring. "The quieter danger is access," adds Noam Birnbaum of Ignition, noting that authorized users within the system can misuse data or share it with outside agencies. Once shared, local rules about retention and use may be undermined.
False alerts: real consequences
False positives are another significant risk. Joel Feder, director at The Drive, was driving a Range Rover with a manufacturer plate in Minnesota when police surrounded him and his wife. A Flock camera had partially read his plate, which resembled one reported stolen in California. The AI incorrectly linked the two, triggering a police response. "If a Flock reads a plate and sees anything beyond an exact match, it should alert with a notification that there are other characters," Feder said. He argues that companies like Flock must take responsibility for their language models and guardrails.
Such incidents show that even advanced AI systems can produce dangerous false matches. Regulations have not kept pace with the technology, as Feder notes: "New laws, rules, and regulations absolutely need to be enacted and enforced about how technology like this is used."
Speaking out against Flock Safety
Former Rhode Island police officer Noel Pichardo went public after claiming his career ended because he testified against Flock cameras. He says he was suspended, passed over for promotion, and pressured to resign. The Rhode Island Police Chiefs' Association disputed his account, but Pichardo maintains his goal was to force an intelligent conversation about the cameras. "I just want you, the public, to know these cameras exist, and that they were put up without your consent," he stated.
How to find Flock cameras and push for discussion
Residents can use the volunteer-run website DeFlock.org to look for reported cameras near their town or route. The map shows camera locations, models, and directions. However, because it relies on user submissions, some entries may be missing or outdated. For example, Saranac Lake, New York, still appears on the map even after the village removed its cameras following public protest.
Once a camera is identified, individuals can contact their local police, town office, or homeowners association to determine ownership. They can request the contract, data retention policies, sharing agreements, audit logs, false alert procedures, and a list of outside agencies with access. If answers are unsatisfactory, residents can raise concerns at public meetings, contact elected officials, file public records requests, or demand a hearing before new cameras are installed.
Civil rights attorney Adanté Pointer stresses that "there should be at minimum robust public discussion and debate to determine Flock policies as it relates to the sharing of the information they gather and who has access to that data." Saranac Lake's example proves that when residents are informed and engaged, they can push back and halt surveillance programs.
Before writing this article, a request for comment was sent to Flock Safety. The company acknowledged the deadline but did not provide a statement or answers in time for publication.
Source:ZDNET News