Isaacs welcomes case numbers but wants legal mandates

Max IsaacsNYU Policing Project director of technology law and policy

Mixed or conditional

Max Isaacs welcomed Flock's case-number requirement but said safeguards should be mandated by law and its automated auditing needs evidence before replacing human review.

Responding to

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

“this kind of safeguard should be required by law”

Interview

Open the original interview (opens in a new tab)Washington Post interviews on Flock's August safeguardsMax Isaacs and Marci Bakely interview passages

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

Interview

Washington Post interviews on Flock's August safeguards (opens in a new tab)Max Isaacs and Marci Bakely interview passages

About this source

Original interviews assess the case-number requirement, automated auditing and whether the announced controls will reduce misuse.

Before the quotation

The Washington Post interviewed Isaacs about Flock's announced search and audit controls.

After the quotation

He questioned why the case-number requirement had not been built in sooner.

How this statement is classified

Mixed or conditional

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

Why this label?

The August package is at issue. Isaacs sees a useful change but says company policy and an unproven audit tool are insufficient.

Recorded on
Published here

More from this case

Read the full case

Share or embed this statement

Quote card: Max Isaacs, Isaacs welcomes case numbers but wants legal mandatesDownload 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
Isaacs welcomes case numbers but wants legal mandates
First published
Last updated
Permalink
https://disputeindex.com/events/2941-max-isaacs-welcomed-flock-s-case-number-requirement

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

The Dispute Index. "Isaacs welcomes case numbers but wants legal mandates". First published: 2026-09-28. Last updated: 2026-09-28. https://disputeindex.com/events/2941-max-isaacs-welcomed-flock-s-case-number-requirement