Live data from Hacker News

LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

techcrunch.com

431–439 of 439 posts

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#431
post #330

Honestly, if Flock forces people to enforce speed limits and follow the rules of the road, its expansion can't come fast enough. I realize how contrarian of a view this is to the mainstream, but car accidents are a leading cause of death worldwide, and it's my belief that many of them wouldn't have happened if driving rules were respected.

We've had speed cameras and red-light cameras for years. Flock cameras are not traffic enforcement cameras.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#433

I don't understand flock cameras in high crime areas. Every time somebody commits a heinous crime it's always like "they were arrested 72 times and were well known by the police" What's the point in helping the police catch criminals when they don't do anything after the fact!

Maybe the police are part of the problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LASD_deputy_gangs

[deleted]

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Closed loop systems that require explicit consent to share outside the organization. Flock is like 50x worse than NSA stuff like PRISM that everyone freaked out about. The Feds have full access to search everything, are no doubt exempt from any transparency on the platform, and ICE is already using it to abuse and intimidate political enemies. It’s a nationwide surveillance system posing as a local police tool.

They're pretty comparable in that the people most het up about them tend not to know what either actually was. The feds do not have full access to search everything on Flock's platform except through the same mechanism by which they'd have access to search literally anything (a court order).

Fair. I’d argue that lack of friction is meaningful.

Also, the Feds are creative in their application of the law. Things like HIDTA designated areas led to Flock-predecessors - scaled infrastructure deployed decades ago. One of the “drug corridors” is the I-95 corridor from Miami to Maine.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't know about sunshine request - the website[1] - until I searched for this term! [1]: https://www.sunshinerequest.com/

Im not sure if there is a way to verify that the one he is talking about, but for public records request muckrock is great. https://www.muckrock.com

Thank you for sharing this!

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re not utility. But you don’t have to be a utility to construct in the right-of-way.

Good point. Then, if the contract lapses, who is responsible for that infrastructure? Does flock have to tear it down?

No, because they have other customers.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#437
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paintballs are even better, environmentally and effort-wise. Especially if the propellant tank is pressurized using a solar powered compressor. (Theoretically, of course. I wouldn’t advocate destroying private property.)

Destroying public property is bad in a general sense, but not enough to describe the situation here. Would you take the knife out of your robber? Or is that stealing private property? Surveillance endangers society/democracy and it's a threat too

At no point did (or will) I defend the surveillance state.

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem a bit distracted by the links instead of the content that can be accessed by clicking on them, they show that in tens of instances, your personal anecdote about how flock removal went don't hold. Flock drags their feet, makes legal threats to cities that cancel, forgets to turn cameras off, turns cameras back on, claims cameras are shut off when they are on, installs new cameras after cancellation, leaves ca…

Again, not sure what you're trying to prove here. By your own timeline the cameras were inactive by the deadline in the termination notice. But even if they weren't, what do you think the plot was? That they were just going to keep the cameras up forever, come what may from Evanston? I take it you don't live in Evanston, so let me fill you in: that's not plausible.

Anecdotal

Re: LAPD lets contract with surveillance giant Flock expire

#439
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need for snark; I'm genuinely interested in your position. From my re-read and re-read, you've provided a conclusory statement without actually explaining the details. Is your definition of "stupid" anything that contradicts 50 years of case law? That seems.... tautologically limp.

I’m saying it’s stupid to equate viewing = searching for multiple reasons. 1) A lay understanding of a search would require way more than just seeing and recording the license plate of a car on a public roadway. 2) Courts have extensively and repeatedly upheld the idea that cops can examine your car, your house, your trash can, your curtilage, and more without it constituting a search. To backpedal and now claim bein…

My position is that no amount of policy will ever make these tools safe, fullstop. I've been an investigative journalist doing research into the use of technology by police and prosecutors and the shit I've personally seen is beyond shameful. The modes of failure for these systems are such that it's inevitable that they'll be abused and even when abuses don't happen, accidents do. And also FWIW, I've been a sysadmin at some pretty large companies, have seen how the meat is made, and I have a deeply grim understanding of how systems are secured.

Some example: Chicago Police Department accidentally sent me the ALPR XML data from the state's system (LEADS). The data included about a thousand social security numbers, many credit cards, the fingerprint hashes. This happened during FOIA litigation and when we raised it to them, instead of freaking out, they asked us if wanted them to actually redact. We said yes, they came back later and the XMLs still had many SSNs and credit card numbers. Third time was better, but it's still awful. Thousands of pages.

Another example: City of Chicago has given me the license plate records for millions of vehicles through FOIA. You can read about it at the end here: https://mchap.io/losing-a-5yr-long-illinois-foia-lawsuit-for...

Another example: Cook County Sheriff's Office's electronic monitoring program was using a 20 year old webserver that was exposed to the internet, leading to this: https://www.vice.com/en/article/contractor-exposed-the-movem...

Another example: City of Seattle accidentally sent me 30 million emails (including police): https://mchap.io/that-time-the-city-of-seattle-accidentally-...

The town I grew up in was a target of Bovino's ICE. A FOIA request for the usage of Flock in that town returned back the longest FOIA denial I've ever received, and I've done thousands, including over a dozen lawsuits. The friends that I graduated with, who think of this country as their home are being targeted. It's hard to express the grief of that. https://www.muckrock.com/foi/waukegan-11153/flock-safety-alp...

Another example: Recently I even found an S3 bucket used by police to share photos of people across state lines. Just... on the internet. Facial recognition, flock, etc.

I think you're hyper-focusing on the 4A public space stuff honestly. The 4A issue that I specifically research is about the extent of exculpatory information given to defense attorneys during criminal prosecution. Of the 150 arrests done by Chicago Police that I found in Flock audit lots, only one arrest report actually mentioned Flock. People have a 4th amendment right to have access to the exculpatory information about their arrest in order to make a proper defense.

This is all just stuff that I've found in my research and I feel like I've barely scratched the surface.

Post reply on HN