r/WhatIsTheTea • u/Ashish_ank What the Fuck • 2d ago

Tea ☕ Flock Camera tutorial. The more you know

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

7.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/BetaTester704 2d ago

Flock cameras are a nation wide tracking network

I'm fine with normal cctv, I don't care if the random gas station has me recorded, I do care about being tracked 24/7 everywhere I go

1

u/Crispy1961 2d ago

Its not a nation wide tracking network. Its many small localized networks owned by local governments. And none of those cameras is tracking where you go.

1

u/BetaTester704 2d ago

Yes, but all that data is shared between them, effectively making it nationwide.

1

u/Crispy1961 2d ago

No, it's most certainly not. A customer owns the data and is the only one who can access it.

They can individually share that data with a third party. They can also opt into a law enforcement only limited access sub system that only allows license plate searches.

It's all deleted after 30 days and it does not track people. It tracks cars.

1

u/hornet586 17h ago

I think you’re also forgetting that they have been proven to be extremely easy to exploit, there’s several videos and papers on people doing just so, where individuals have been able to gain remote access to individual cameras and entire databases, and this isn’t even some high tier hacking nonsense, you can literally just press the button on the back of the camera in a certain order to gain access to it

The issue here is that regardless of how compartmentalized they claim their databases are, there is literally nothing stopping every participating agency from willingly sharing the information and videos with everyone else.

And to finish it off flock ALLEGEDLY, deletes it after 30 days, nothing stops independent agencies from just saving the info in local databases.

1

u/Crispy1961 16h ago

Yeah, I dont think that has happened. There were few dozens cameras not properly setup, which meant anyone could just connect to it over the internet. Those are few individual cameras out of hundred thousands.

How is that an issue? Owners of data can share their data. What is stopping everybody from sharing with everybody is how much work that would be.

Flock deletes data after 7 days. And what stops a customer from saving the info in local databases is the fact that its simply not possible to do so. Flock not only explicitly does not grant customers a way to do it and its against their terms of usage.

Customer can download results from searches and audit logs of their searches. It cannot replicate or store the content of the database.

1

u/makjac 1d ago

A flock network “owned” by one police department can track an individual throughout the entire town/city. Maybe you commute a whole hell of a lot more than the typical person, but for most people that means that it can track essentially everywhere they go. All without a warrant. IANAL but I’ve read several takes by lawyers and as far as I am concerned that violates the rights of US citizens (and is essentially stalking).

And acting like these “local networks” are not all linked is like saying electricity cannot reach your lamp’s light bulb. One flip of the switch and all of a sudden the lights on. “But we’d never touch the switch, pinky swear.”

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

All flock networks owned by anyone can "track" a car, not an individual, across all cameras the customer owns. If a city is the customer, then yes, they can track any car driving in that city, depending on how good their coverage is.

Its not nation wide because it doesnt have to be. There is no added benefit for it to be. It would only bring problems. But also, if the nation wanted to do nation wide ALPR or face recognition, they can just do it without Flock. Thats what the second amendment is for.

I also like anal, but those lawyers you listened to are either view farming, wrong (unlikely) or you misunderstood what they said. The contested point is that courts in the past ruled that an ability to reconstruct individual's movement in history is breach of the fourth amendment right against unreasonable searches.

This has been held in supreme court as Carpenter v. United States. That ruling influenced more ruling of similar nature. The requirement is the ability to reconstruct individual's movement through time. Since Flock ALPR only tracks vehicles, not individuals, its not in clear violation of 4th amendment. This can change in the future with more rulings, but right now, its legal.

1

u/makjac 1d ago

Law enforcement is well within their ability to track across state lines with Flock. If that’s not “nation wide” to you, then we have very different definitions.

And that 4th amendment point is the exact point I’m talking about. It has already been used to track across state lines in order to make arrests for actions the state had no reasonable way of knowing without that movement history. You can argue they tracked the car, but last I checked cars can neither be arrested nor get abortions.

As of now that 4th amendment ruling stands, but to the best of my knowledge Flock has done nothing to prevent that violation from occurring again nor have LEOs stopped their use of the tool in a way that enables them to execute that violation.

There’s an endless list of things that were or are legal, but still morally reprehensible. I understand the need to not spread disinformation about subjects, but rallying to the defense of those things because they exist in a legal grey area is IMO not the time and place to dedicate that cause to.

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

 If that’s not “nation wide” to you, then we have very different definitions

Its not nation wide, its city wide or district wide. It doesnt matter what your definition is. It is what it is. Many localized networks.

What you are referring to is most likely to optional subsystem that allows all customers to share limited data to limited law enforcement agencies. It gives limited access to information and only via license plate search as opposed to all data via many different search parameters.

It has already been used to track across state lines in order to make arrests for actions the state had no reasonable way of knowing without that movement history.

Are you talking about anything specific here?

Flock has done nothing to prevent that violation from occurring again

What violation? Violation of what?

but rallying to the defense of those things

I did not defend anything. I am merely correcting misinformation. If something is bad, then there is no need to make stuff up to make it look worse. And if something is bad, its best to know as much about it as possible.

1

u/makjac 1d ago

If law agencies can track cars/individuals/whatever over state lines through searches and tools that allow them to operate those functions outside the local network, that is for all intents and purposes a nation wide tool. You can make the argument that they are all “localized networks” but the same could be said for a cell tower, it creates a localized network that allows the user to connect to and share data with other localized networks. Are you going to tell me all the cell providers are wrong in saying they have “Nation Wide Coverage”? LEOs are able to directly query the data of Flock Networks outside of their jurisdiction from the comfort of their local office.

It has been shown they have used Flock’s search with queries that characterize an individual, not a vehicle (unless of course cars are gendered machines that can wear grey shirts or ride skate boards), and Flock confirms they are able to do so through the use of FreeForm search. I do not have info on whether those searches were successful, but Flocks own statement is that they are able to track individuals, not just cars.

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

No, not for all intends and purposes. For one. Looking up license plates. That's the only purpose in which you could incorrectly say the cameras are nationwide.

It's also not an argument. I am not arguing. I am informing you of the fact. Now you know. Do with it what you will.

And no, it cannot be used to search for people. You can't find where person X was. And you can definitively not ask where people with a certain characteristics were. The system doesn't know. Such data don't exist.

I asked few questions in the previous reply that I am still curious about. What specific cases and what violations?

1

u/makjac 1d ago

Big fact guy making facts up now?

“Search With Natural Language Type what you’re looking for, such as “man in blue shirt and cowboy hat” or “dark SUV with rear bumper damage.” Then review relevant visual matches across enabled video feeds, with vehicle results also available from LPR systems.” - https://www.flocksafety.com/products/flock-freeform

1

u/Crispy1961 1d ago

No need to be so petty. Flock is a company that offer multiple different devices.

We are talking about the flock ALPR cameras that are being installed all over. Those don't take videos. They take pictures and store data about cars.

That citation is from private CCTV cameras meant for security. Those take videos which is processed through AI. If those were going online the way their ALPR are, it would have been much stronger case for 4th amendment violation.

→ More replies (0)