Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company, exposed some of the license plate cops were looking for and the reason for doing so.

Flock, the automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company, exposed some of the license plate cops were looking for and the reason for doing so.

  • Leon@pawb.socialEnglish
    96·
    15 hours ago

    They’re little computers with cameras that capture everything. I think some of these types of devices run Android. Many are very poorly secured, like the article suggests. A “license plate reader” sounds like it only reads license plates, these are surveillance platforms, with cameras and microphones. They can be accessed remotely to do more than just read a license plate.

    I’m thinking the person says that couching it as a license plate reader is disingenuous, because it doesn’t really convey the gravity of what the devices are capable of.

    • extremeboredom@lemmy.worldEnglish
      15·
      13 hours ago

      Yes, ALPR is a term used for the purpose of public relations. It does not accurately describe the technology.

    • deadcream@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      1·
      9 hours ago

      Any “license plate reader” has a camera and can be used for anything. This was true before flock.

      • EldritchFemininity@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        6·
        7 hours ago

        I didn’t know “any license plate reader” also scanned your phone as you went by and added your dog to their database to better identify you as an individual.

        They don’t just read license plates. They analyze faces/pets/distinctive clothing to ID people, scan nearby WiFi and Bluetooth signals to track devices, scan distinctive features of vehicles (dents, scratches, bumper stickers, etc) to track them even without a clear license plate, etc… Calling it a license plate reader vastly downplays their capabilities.

        It’s like someone calling a fully automatic high-powered machine gun “a rabbit-hunting gun”. Sure it could be used to shoot rabbits, but that’s vastly understating the capabilities.

        • deadcream@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          1·
          9 hours ago

          You think USA government agencies never thought of using public surveillance cameras to spy on people before now? That’s like basic stuff for any domestic security agency, in any country. The only difference is that now the data is shared with regular police with all the incompetence and abuse it implies. You have always been spied on.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            7 hours ago

            You think USA government agencies never thought of using public surveillance cameras to spy on people before now?

            No. I do not.

            I think allowing a private company access to that kind of data, without any meaningful restrictions on what they can do with it, is a lot different than the current situation of ‘spy agencies can spy for the government’.

            If I’m a bad guy and I can get access to a Flock (or Palantir, fed by Flock) subscription then I can do bad guy things a lot more effectively. Can you think of any bad guys who could afford such a subscription?

            Who owns that data and what rules it falls under is important. The government needs a warrant to obtain cell-site location tracking data, but Flock can sell a subscription to obtain that same data to anybody who can clear an ACH transfer.