EFF says Flock safeguards leave basic risks intact

Electronic Frontier FoundationDigital-rights advocacy organization

Condemned

EFF said Flock's August changes included overdue measures but did not resolve the risks of collecting drivers' movements in a searchable network.

Responding to

Flock's August 2026 safeguards meaningfully address privacy and misuse concerns about its license-plate reader network.

“some cosmetic fixes that fail to address the fundamental dangers of this technology”

Analysis

Open source (opens in a new tab)EFF assesses Flock's August 2026 safeguards · Electronic Frontier FoundationOpening paragraphs and review of retention, offense filters and audits

Case updates

Do Flock's new safeguards answer the ACLU's concerns?

Get an email if Flock rolls out its remaining controls or changes its retention terms, or if the ACLU or police customers report how the safeguards work in practice.

Important updates only. Free. Confirm your email to start. Unsubscribe anytime. How we handle your email.

Graphic comparing Flock Safety's old 30-day data-retention default with its new seven-day default.
Credit: Flock Safety

Where this statement fits

Did Flock Safety's August 2026 privacy safeguards address concerns about its camera network?

Flock Safety announced new controls for its license-plate reader network on August 13, 2026. The ACLU said a shorter default retention period might help but argued that the broader package left major privacy risks unresolved. The dispute concerns the adequacy of Flock's safeguards, not whether the company announced them.

Read the full case

Source and context

Analysis

EFF assesses Flock's August 2026 safeguards (opens in a new tab) · Electronic Frontier FoundationOpening paragraphs and review of retention, offense filters and audits

About this source

EFF reviews Flock's announced changes, calls some overdue and argues that others fail to address risks inherent in the network.

Before the quotation

Matthew Guariglia analyzed Flock's announced retention, sharing and audit changes for EFF.

After the quotation

The article treats the shorter default retention period as consequential but says agencies can choose longer periods.

How this statement is classified

Condemned

The label describes this statement's response within the context above.

Why this label?

The adequacy of Flock's August package is at issue. EFF directly says the package leaves fundamental risks unresolved.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF says Flock safeguards leave basic risks intactDownload image (PNG)

The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.

Cite this record

Publisher
The Dispute Index
Title
EFF says Flock safeguards leave basic risks intact
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/2938-eff-said-flock-s-august-changes-included-overdue

Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.

The Dispute Index. "EFF says Flock safeguards leave basic risks intact". First published: 2026-09-28. Last updated: 2026-09-28. https://disputeindex.com/events/2938-eff-said-flock-s-august-changes-included-overdue