Home

Learn More

What does the law say?

California Law is Clear

What Does Senate Bill 34 (2015) Say?

California law explicitly prohibits law enforcement agencies from sharing automated license plate reader (ALPR) data with out-of-state or federal agencies.

California Civil Code § 1798.90.55(b) states:

“A public agency shall not sell, share, or transfer ALPR information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law.”

California law defines “public agency” as California state and local agencies only—not federal or out-of-state agencies.

California Civil Code § 1798.90.5(f):

“‘Public agency’ means the state, any city, county, or city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state or a city, county, or city and county, including, but not limited to, a law enforcement agency.”

What this means:

  •  Cannot share with ICE, CBP, FBI, DEA, or any federal agency
  •  Cannot share with out-of-state law enforcement
  •  Cannot share with private companies
  •  Can only share between California state/local agencies

Sources:

Attorney General Rob Bonta’s Official Interpretation (2023)

“Importantly, the definition of ‘public agency’ is limited to state or local agencies, including law enforcement agencies, and does not include out-of-state or federal law enforcement agencies.”

“Accordingly, SB 34 does not permit California LEAs to share ALPR information with private entities or out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement agencies.”

Source: California Department of Justice, Information Bulletin DLE 2023-06, “California Automated License Plate Reader Data Guidance” (March 2023)
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/2023-dle-06.pdf

Flock Safety’s Pattern of Violations

Mountain View, California (January 30, 2026)

What Happened: Mountain View discovered federal agencies had been accessing their Flock data for months without the city’s knowledge or permission. Flock had enabled “nationwide search” settings, allowing agencies across the country to search Mountain View’s license plate data.

Agencies that illegally accessed data:

  • ATF (Kentucky)
  • ATF (Tennessee)
  • Langley Air Force Base (Virginia)
  • GSA Office of Inspector General

Timeline:

  • August – November 2024: “Nationwide search” enabled (3 months)
  • August 2024 – January 5, 2026: “Statewide lookup” enabled without authorization (17 months)
  • 250+ California agencies conducted 600,000 unauthorized searches

Police Chief’s Response:

Mountain View Police Chief Mike Canfield announced immediate suspension of all Flock cameras, stating in an official letter to the community:

“While the Flock Safety pilot program demonstrated clear value in enhancing our ability to protect our community and help us solve crimes, I personally no longer have confidence in this particular vendor.“

“Like many of you, I was deeply disappointed to learn that Flock Safety did not meet the City’s requirements regarding our data access control and transparency. The existence of access by out of state agencies, without the City’s awareness, that circumvented the protections we purposefully built and believed were in place is frankly unacceptable to me and to the dedicated people of the MVPD.”

“Community trust is more important than any individual tool.“

Current Status: All cameras suspended. City Council reviewing whether to cancel contract permanently.

Sources:

San Francisco, California (September 2025)

What Happened: Electronic Frontier Foundation investigation revealed at least 19 searches related to ICE documented in San Francisco’s Flock data. Additionally, agencies from Georgia and Texas (anti-abortion states) accessed San Francisco residents’ location data.

Violation: California law explicitly prohibits sharing ALPR data for immigration enforcement purposes and with out-of-state agencies.

Source:

Santa Cruz, California (December 2025)

What Happened: Analysis of Santa Cruz’s Flock data found nearly 4,000 searches containing immigration-related terms (ICE, HSI, CBP) performed by 32 different California law enforcement agencies.

Violation: Searches related to federal immigration enforcement violate both SB 34’s prohibition on federal sharing and California’s sanctuary state protections.

Source:

Richmond, California (January 2026)

What Happened: Richmond Police Department discovered unauthorized “national search” features were still active on their Flock system—despite Flock’s August 2025 promise to disable these settings across all California customers.

Response: Richmond shut down their entire Flock system pending investigation.

Significance: Proves Flock’s “fixes” after the August 2025 California Highway Patrol warning were incomplete or ineffective.

Sources:

Los Altos, California (January 2026)

City’s response: Completely severed ties with Flock Safety, going offline immediately.

Source: Los Altos Hills to remove ALPR cameras

Security Vulnerabilities

Federal Investigation Findings (November 2025)

Senator Ron Wyden’s investigation documented severe security failures:

  • No multi-factor authentication required – Flock does not require MFA for law enforcement accounts accessing sensitive location data
  • At least 35 customer account passwords were stolen by hackers – Documented credential theft
  • Credentials being sold on dark web – Stolen login information available to criminals, stalkers, and foreign adversaries
  • Data exposed to “hackers, foreign spies, and criminals”

Quote from Sen. Wyden:

“Flock has needlessly exposed Americans’ sensitive personal data captured by the company’s
surveillance cameras to theft by hackers and foreign spies, and unauthorized access through multiple
documented instances of unauthorized password sharing.”

Source:

Live Camera Feeds Exposed (December 2025)

Researcher Benn Jordan discovered 60+ Flock Condor cameras streaming live to the internet with no password required.

What Was Exposed:

  • Live video feeds from across the country
  • 30 days of archived video available for download
  • Administrative control panels (could change settings, delete footage)
  • No encryption on any data
  • Footage included children playing on playground swings

How It Was Discovered: Simple search on Shodan (IoT search engine): “HTTP title Flock Admin”

Flock’s Response: Called it “limited misconfiguration on very small number of devices”

Jordan’s Response:

“I think the one that affected me most was the playground. You could see unattended kids, and that’s something I want people to know about so they can understand how dangerous this is.”

Sources:

Massive Data Leak Through Police Redaction Errors (January 2026)

Multiple police departments accidentally released completely unredacted Flock audit logs in response to public records requests.

Data Exposed:

  • 2.3+ million license plates
  • Tens of millions of searches
  • Officer names, timestamps, search justifications
  • Searches by thousands of agencies nationwide (not just the local department that released the records)

Now searchable at: HaveIBeenFlocked.com

Flock’s Response:

  • Threatened the website creator with legal action
  • Blamed “increased public records act/FOIA activity”
  • Secretly modified audit logs to remove officer names, license plates, and search details
  • Removed unique IDs (UUIDs) from transparency portals

The Irony: Flock markets these audit logs as “immutable” and “tamper-proof” transparency tools.

Sources:

Police Instructed to Be “Vague” (January 2026)

404 Media obtained documents showing police departments are being instructed to “be as vague as permissible” when filling out the “reason” field in Flock searches.

Source of Instruction: Houston-area police intelligence center (includes FBI and ICE members)

Claimed Justification: People are using HaveIBeenFlocked.com to “potentially retaliate against law enforcement” (no evidence provided)

What This Reveals: The system is being used in ways that wouldn’t withstand public scrutiny.

Source:

Real-World Abuses Documented

Texas Abortion Tracking Case

Deputies in Texas used Flock’s nationwide network (83,345 cameras across the country) to track a woman who had traveled out-of-state for an abortion.

Implication: California residents’ location data is accessible to states criminalizing abortion.

Source:

Protest Surveillance

Analysis found 50+ law enforcement agencies used Flock to track political demonstrators and protesters.

Violation of: First Amendment right to protest without government surveillance

Source:

Discriminatory Searches

Investigation revealed 80+ agencies used ethnic slurs when searching Flock data for Romani people.

Source:

Activist Targeting

Delaware State Police used Flock to track members of Direct Action Everywhere (animal rights organization).

Source:

The Palantir Connection

What is Palantir?

Palantir Technologies creates massive data integration platforms used by ICE, CBP, and other federal agencies. The company was co-founded by Peter Thiel and initially funded by CIA venture capital (In-Q-Tel).

How Flock Data Flows to Palantir

  1. Flock cameras track vehicle movements
  2. Data shared across agency network (automatic through Flock system)
  3. Agencies integrate Flock data into Palantir Gotham (many use both systems)
  4. Palantir combines license plate data with:
    • Social media activity
    • Financial records
    • Immigration status
    • Biometric data
    • Travel histories
    • Health records
  5. AI analyzes patterns, flags individuals
  6. Federal agencies (especially ICE) query Palantir databases
  7. Daily routines become deportation evidence

All without a warrant. All integrated from systems that were never designed to talk to each other.

The Investment Connection

  • Flock’s initial venture capital came from Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund
  • Thiel co-founded Palantir Technologies
  • Trae Stephens (Founders Fund partner) also built Anduril (defense contractor)
  • The “PayPal Mafia” vision: interconnected surveillance as “dual-use” product

ICE-Palantir Pipeline

ICE has spent $80+ million on Palantir contracts. Palantir runs ICE’s Investigative Case Management system, integrating:

  • Travel histories
  • Visa records
  • Biometric data
  • Social media monitoring
  • License plate data from systems like Flock

Official Statements

Wikipedia (Flock Safety entry):

“Flock data can be integrated into predictive policing platforms like Palantir.”

LAPD:

“Uses Palantir Gotham on a daily basis. It’s one of the first databases [officers] log into.”

LA County Official (dismissing privacy concerns):

“Consent is anachronistic.”

Sources:

ICE’s Use of Palantir

For Woodland’s immigrant community, this connection is critical to understand.

ICE relies heavily on Palantir to track and target immigrants:

  • $80+ million in ICE contracts with Palantir
  • Palantir runs ICE’s Investigative Case Management system
  • Integrates: Travel histories, visa records, biometric data, social media activity, financial transactions, and—when available—license plate data

When Flock data gets shared with federal agencies in violation of California law, it can flow into Palantir’s ICE databases.

This means:

  • Your daily routines become deportation evidence
  • Attending an immigrant rights meeting gets logged
  • Visiting a family member flags both of you
  • Your “patterns of life” get analyzed by AI

California’s SB 34 exists specifically to prevent this. But Flock has repeatedly violated that law.

**”It’s Not Confirmed” – Or Is It?

Flock and Palantir maintain they’re separate systems. Palantir won’t confirm it ingests Flock data directly.

But here’s what we know for certain:

  1. Palantir is designed to ingest any dataset – that’s its entire purpose
  2. Flock data is explicitly compatible with Palantir integration (documented)
  3. Many agencies use both systems – NYPD, LAPD, and others
  4. Palantir’s architecture is modular – it connects siloed databases automatically
  5. No technical barrier prevents integration – it’s simply a matter of configuration

The question isn’t “Can Palantir access Flock data?”
The question is: “What’s stopping it?”

And the answer is: Nothing, if the agency chooses to connect them.

Flock’s War on Transparency

CEO’s Inflammatory Email (December 2025)

When Staunton, Virginia considered canceling their contract, Flock CEO Garrett Langley sent an unsolicited mass email to thousands of law enforcement agencies:

“Let’s call this what it is: Flock, and the law enforcement agencies we partner with, are under coordinated attack.”

“The attacks aren’t new. You’ve been dealing with this for forever, and we’ve been dealing with this since our founding, from the same activist groups who want to defund the police, weaken public safety, and normalize lawlessness.“

“They’re producing YouTube videos with misleading headlines. They’re also trying to turn a public records process into a weapon against you and against us.”

Professional Response from Staunton Police Chief

Staunton Police Chief Jim Williams responded:

“As far as your assertion that we are currently under attack, I do not believe that this is so… What we are seeing here is a group of local citizens who are raising concerns that we could be potentially surveilling private citizens, residents and visitors and using the data for nefarious purposes.”

“These citizens have been exercising their rights to receive answers from me, my staff, and city officials, to include our elected leaders.”

“In short, it is democracy in action.”

Result: Staunton canceled their Flock contract. City statement: “The CEO’s narrative does not reflect the city’s values.”

Sources:

Legal Threats Against Transparency Projects

HaveIBeenFlocked.com:

  • Flock threatened website creator Cris van Pelt
  • Went after his web hosts
  • Claimed intellectual property violations
  • Said site “poses immediate threat to public safety”

Source:

DeFlock.me:

  • Open-source project mapping Flock camera locations
  • Received cease-and-desist letter from Flock (February 2024)
  • Project continues operating

Source:

Cities Canceling, Suspending, Pausing, Investigating Flock Contracts

California:

  • Los Altos Hills – Severed ties completely
  • Mountain View – Suspended all cameras (decision pending Feb 24, 2026)
  • Oakland – Rejected $2 million expansion
  • Richmond – Shutdown their system

Other States:

  • Staunton, VA – Canceled after CEO’s email
  • Woodburn, OR – 60-day suspension
  • Olympia, WA – Canceled contract
  • Mountlake Terrace, WA – Reviewing contract
  • Skamania County, WA – Considering cancellation

Sources:

The Crime Statistics Myth

Flock Safety claims their cameras reduce crime by 70% or more. Independent investigation tells a different story:

Forbes Investigation (2024): Journalist Cyrus Farivar investigated Flock’s claimed 80% reduction in residential burglaries in San Marino, California.

Finding: Burglaries actually slightly increased. Serious crimes remained nearly unchanged.

Pattern: Flock makes similar unsupported claims about crime reduction in Fort Worth, Dayton, and Lexington that don’t hold up under scrutiny.

Reality: Crime rates are affected by dozens of factors. Attributing reductions to a single technology—especially one that was installed during broader regional crime declines—is misleading at best.

For actual public safety: Illegal evidence gets thrown out in court. Systems that violate California law jeopardize prosecutions, not enhance them.

Source:

Complete Sources List

California Law & Official Guidance

Mountain View Violations

Other California Violations

Security Failures

HaveIBeenFlocked Investigation

CEO Email & Staunton Response

Palantir Connection

Transparency Projects