The Surveillance Technology Company Is Tightening Safeguards on Its Nationwide License Plate Reader Network as Privacy and Police Misuse Grow
Flock Safety is rolling out new privacy and accountability measures for its nationwide license plate reader network following mounting criticism over police misuse, immigration enforcement and concerns about warrantless surveillance.
The changes have local implications. The Bexar County Sheriff’s Office uses Flock’s automated license plate recognition technology across the county, placing cameras primarily in areas identified as having higher rates of property and violent crime.
The Bexar County Sheriff’s Office Flock Safety dashboard currently lists 33 license plate reader cameras, although the local news reported that BCSO had installed 35 cameras. The county dashboard says the cameras detected more than 757,000 unique vehicles and generated 2,725 hotlist hits during its latest 30-day reporting period.
Flock Safety Tightens Rules on Police Searches
Flock operates automated cameras that capture license plates along with other visible vehicle characteristics, including make, model and color. Thousands of law enforcement agencies across 49 states can search and, depending on local settings, share information across jurisdictions.
Police departments have credited the technology with helping investigators find missing people, recover stolen vehicles and identify suspects in violent crimes.
But the rapidly expanding network has also drawn criticism from civil liberties organizations and lawmakers who argue that tracking motorists on such a large scale creates the potential for warrantless mass surveillance.
Flock announced Thursday that several safeguards previously available as optional features will become mandatory for law enforcement customers.
Among the most significant changes, Flock will reduce its standard data-retention period from 30 days to seven days. Information connected to an investigation can still be preserved longer when tied to a case.
Goldman, File)
Law enforcement users will also be required to connect searches to case codes from their records management systems. Emergency overrides will be flagged for review.
The company is additionally making its misuse-detection system mandatory. The audit feature is designed to identify unusual search patterns and temporarily lock users out while the activity is reviewed. The changes are expected to be required for customers by Jan. 1.
Flock CEO Garrett Langley said another change will allow individual departments to determine what types of crimes outside agencies may use their camera data to investigate.
That could allow cities or departments, for example, to block outside searches connected to immigration enforcement.
Langley said the goal is to give communities greater control over using the system in a way “consistent with community values.”
Privacy Advocates Say Changes Do Not Go Far Enough
The changes come after a series of cases involving officers accused of using Flock technology for personal reasons, including searches involving current or former romantic partners and relatives.
The controversy has helped fuel a growing movement against automated license plate readers. More than 50 agencies or jurisdictions have canceled, suspended or rejected Flock contracts or deactivated cameras since the beginning of the year, according to the grassroots group DeFlock.
The American Civil Liberties Union called the shorter retention period a potential improvement but argued that many of Flock’s remaining changes do not address its broader concerns about government surveillance.
Robert Frommer, a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, called the measures “window dressing,” arguing that access to such extensive location information should involve judicial warrants rather than decisions made solely by law enforcement officers.
Others have argued that the technology itself is not necessarily the problem but that government agencies need stronger policies governing how it can be used.
Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, described the issue as a balance between a community’s interest in privacy and its interest in effective policing. He said that balance may ultimately depend more on department policies than changes made by Flock itself.
Flock Cameras Already Operating Across Bexar County
That debate is increasingly relevant in San Antonio and Bexar County.
BCSO began expanding its use of Flock cameras in 2025, placing them in areas selected through crime-data analysis. Unlike a traditional photograph of only a license plate, the system creates searchable records that can include vehicle color, make, model and other distinguishing characteristics.
Flock cameras are also used privately by neighborhood associations in the San Antonio area, while some neighboring municipalities have deployed similar systems. The San Antonio Police Department uses license plate recognition technology from a different vendor, Axon.
For Bexar County, the national changes could mean substantially shorter storage periods and tighter controls over who searches vehicle records and why.
The larger debate, however, remains unresolved: whether stronger safeguards can preserve what police describe as a valuable investigative tool while preventing a nationwide network of cameras from becoming a system capable of tracking Americans without sufficient oversight.
