Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

ajc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#21

Post by sroussey »

NetworkPerson wrote: post #4

I'm not sure what to think here. Legitimate misuse, sure. But the article says at least one person only looked up their own license plate. I feel like that should be considered acceptable. It's not law enforcement usage specifically, but can't I grant myself the right to see information on my own vehicle? Yes, devil's advocate could say if standard citizens can't, no one can. Just seems so minor it's not worth losing…

It’s a test with a good excuse. If caught, it’s only their own data, right? If not caught, then time to abuse the system.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#22

Post by themaninthedark »

roncesvalles wrote: post #6

In a way, new companies like Flock entering such domains are a boon because they probably maintain tight audit logs and alerting mechanisms. Traditional look-up software is probably being misused by cops all the time (à la the old noir trope of a PI having "a buddy in the department" who can look up anything for him).

This news and the timing of it seems like it is trying to elicit your response. Flock has been getting a lot of bad press recently.

The first batch of firing that happened in GA was not because of Flock safeguards, it was because an internal auditor said let's look at your new system.

If they cared about privacy, they would have had such a system in place not something that is just being rolled out.

Second, these people are getting caught because “The activity identified during the audit revealed that the employees searched their own license plates or those of a family member/acquaintance, and not random members of the public,”

A fair reading of that says it is ok to look up information on random members of the public. I feel better already.

If the bar is set at random people, a friend of a friend looking up the info and getting it back to you would get around the safeguards, back to the old buddy in the department.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#23

Post by fhdkweig »

NetworkPerson wrote: post #4

I'm not sure what to think here. Legitimate misuse, sure. But the article says at least one person only looked up their own license plate. I feel like that should be considered acceptable. It's not law enforcement usage specifically, but can't I grant myself the right to see information on my own vehicle? Yes, devil's advocate could say if standard citizens can't, no one can. Just seems so minor it's not worth losing…

In the state of Georgia, https://eservices.drives.ga.gov/_/ gives access to the following information based on license plate or VIN:

Look-up Information Look-up the status of your title, insurance, or registration. Also view available prestige plates or license plates, vehicle history, or search for ELT lienholders.

  Check Title Status
  Check Insurance Status
  Check Registration Status
  Check Prestige License Plate Availability
  View License Plates
  Search ELT Lienholder
  Vehicle History Lookup
  Check on My Purchase from a Dealer
I don't think there is any website that will tell you where a car has been and when it was last spotted, and I assume that was the kind of information that Flock would be gathering.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#24

Post by jareklupinski »

themaninthedark wrote: post #22
roncesvalles wrote: post #6

In a way, new companies like Flock entering such domains are a boon because they probably maintain tight audit logs and alerting mechanisms. Traditional look-up software is probably being misused by cops all the time (à la the old noir trope of a PI having "a buddy in the department" who can look up anything for him).

This news and the timing of it seems like it is trying to elicit your response. Flock has been getting a lot of bad press recently. The first batch of firing that happened in GA was not because of Flock safeguards, it was because an internal auditor said let's look at your new system. If they cared about privacy, they would have had such a system in place not something that is just being rolled out. Second, these peo…

i always hoped the "buddy" would be the lever that goes "no, that's crossing the line between friendship and ethics, please rethink your request"

something an artificial buddy will happily do anyway when you promise that your grandmother is on the line

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#25

Post by ButlerianJihad »

stavros wrote: post #20
jagged-chisel wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethics aside, I don’t think there’s a legal issue with obtaining data on one’s spouse.

Really? Doesn't a spouse have a right to privacy? I don't see how getting married makes you forfeit privacy rights you otherwise have. Unless you mean that there's no legal issue with obtaining data in anyone , which is a much larger problem.

There is a legal concept here of “spousal privilege” similar to that between attorney-client or priest-penitent. So a spouse with “information” could not be compelled to divulge it.

But if you mean husband and wife keeping secrets hidden from each other, that is not really a thing, except for normal human limits and boundaries, and in a marriage, the spouses should probably expect a reasonable minimum of that.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#26

Post by rolph »

NetworkPerson wrote: post #4

I'm not sure what to think here. Legitimate misuse, sure. But the article says at least one person only looked up their own license plate. I feel like that should be considered acceptable. It's not law enforcement usage specifically, but can't I grant myself the right to see information on my own vehicle? Yes, devil's advocate could say if standard citizens can't, no one can. Just seems so minor it's not worth losing…

im not sure if anyone saw me, was my presence noted on camera at the time and locale of a crime?

thats why looking up your own marker, should be suspicious, its reconaissance, investigating the investigation.

when someone queries the police for status of info, or tries to be overly helpful its a checkmark toward reasonable suspicion.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#28

Post by [deleted] »

mushi_shi wrote: post #19
tclancy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a take. Maybe stop, say it out loud and see if you catch yourself. Like, why am I searching for where my own car has been? Oh right, because I am worried about the safety of my children. God save us from child safety.

[]

[deleted]

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#29

Post by tclancy »

mushi_shi wrote: post #19
tclancy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a take. Maybe stop, say it out loud and see if you catch yourself. Like, why am I searching for where my own car has been? Oh right, because I am worried about the safety of my children. God save us from child safety.

[]

I love that eight years on this was your first comment! I am either happy or sorry that I led you to such heights Icarus.

Re: DeKalb deputy charged with Flock camera misuse; more Georgia officers fired

#30

Post by ChrisArchitect »

arkhiver wrote: post #9

archived: https://nonogra.ph/3-more-georgia-police-officers-fired-over...

this isn't an archive. This is copied text onto a page, possibly modified.

Please use one of the standard archive.today sites or wayback machine to offer mirrors.

Post reply on HN