How do you solve a problem like Flock?

TL;DR: In a letter to the US Senate Judiciary Committee, Flock CEO Garrett Langley said that it’s “possible to search for humans in images taken by Flock cameras.” This contradicts the information currently on Flock’s own website, which states that “Flock cameras do not use facial recognition” and that “they are not designed to search for people, scan faces, or track individuals.”

What happened: The committee held a hearing yesterday on Flock’s technology and its mass surveillance across 49 states. Though Langley and other representatives from Flock declined to attend, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), the chair of the Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, read aloud a letter he received from Langley.

In it, Langley said Flock does not engage in significant oversight when it comes to how its clients use its vast media database and that they can store the photos and videos however they see fit.

“They’re just open to just about anybody who subscribes. There are no controls on them,” Hawley said of the technology. “Flock also admitted in their letter that it is possible to search for humans in images. That is a direct quote.”

Flock said in a statement to Tech Brew that it’s “possible to search for the presence of people in images taken by Flock’s non-license plate reader cameras, but searches must be related to elements visible in footage, such as shirt color, glasses, etc., not a biometric template. Searches related to race, skin tone, or ethnicity are blocked.”

Flock Public Relations Manager Paris Lewbel added that the company “demonstrated this functionality for Senator Hawley’s staff and made the distinction between these technologies.”

Why it matters: Though previous reporting found that Flock cameras “explicitly” detect people, this is the first time the company itself has admitted that capability. And it’s not just Flock: Technology from other companies like Axon and Motorola does the same or similar things—and many cities are already switching in response to Flock backlash.

That’s why hearing witness Benn Jordan, a data scientist who hacked a Flock camera, called the company “a canary in a coal mine” when it comes to mass surveillance.

“This doesn’t go away by removing one company from the equation,” he said in his testimony. “This is an opportunity for Congress to build the overdue framework to protect the privacy of Americans for generations to come.”

When asked by the committee what effective legislation against private mass surveillance technology would look like, witness Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel for the ACLU, said federal laws should address Flock and other related technology not as a measure to uphold public safety—but as a constant threat to it.

“Flock seems to change its story from week to week,” Marlow said, but “never acknowledges that no security procedures [that are] put in place do anything to protect against the misuse of its system.”

Bottom line: To close the hearing, Hawley said that the Bill of Rights is more important than ever “because the threats to our liberties are actually much greater.” Now, it’s just up to Congress to enforce it. —TC