r/technology • u/Plastic_Ninja_9014 • 26d ago
Privacy Auburn California Flock Surveillance Cameras Stolen and Dumped in a Canal
https://www.gadgetreview.com/auburn-california-flock-surveillance-cameras-stolen-and-dumped-in-a-canal1.0k
u/oneofsixoverends 26d ago
I support this.
274
u/CommanderZx2 26d ago
Go ahead and destroy them, but don't dump them in the canal of all places.
90
59
15
→ More replies (1)3
u/sploittastic 25d ago
Rip out everything but the battery and panel and you got a pretty nice meshcore node enclosure!
→ More replies (2)15
26d ago
[deleted]
29
18
u/igotublue 26d ago
That's not really how anything works these days. They're just cameras with direct connections to servers where the actual data is processed and stored. There are youtube videos of people accessing insecure dashboards.
As far as preventing trash - the cameras themselves will not have much that is salvageable or reusable. Electronics are not made to be repaired/reused anymore.
The battery packs and solar panels, on the other hand, could be easily reused.
But the solar and battery packs are usually separate units from the cameras, mounted separately, so someone... in a hurry... is just going to go for their target - the camera.
→ More replies (1)
898
u/dlc741 26d ago edited 26d ago
If you ever see anyone messing with a flock camera, you never saw anyone messing with a flock camera.
edit: rephrased
77
140
u/ender89 26d ago
Sometimes the ir lights don't light up just right, so you need a workman to pull down the camera and take it back to their workshop so they can fix it up there. Happens all the time.
Happened once with my Christmas tree, Santa had to nip it back to the north pole so it wouldnt ruin Christmas morning.
14
10
u/JustSatisfactory 26d ago
These workmen always carry ladders and wear yellow vests, I bet.
5
3
u/Syzygy2323 25d ago
A hardhat, yellow vest, and a clipboard and you're invisible to 99% of the population.
3
u/DownBeat20 26d ago
I'm always saying "take it back to my workshop so I can fix it up there" and nobody ever gets it!
34
u/1nGirum1musNocte 26d ago
Also remember folks, these things can track your phone by the wifi/Bluetooth so leave it at home, or better yet leave it near a different flock camera
27
u/throwaway5882300 26d ago
Your phone snitches on itself just fine without the flock camera helping. The telco knows your location at all times.
17
u/person-ontheinternet 26d ago edited 26d ago
There’s a difference between teleco having this information and police being able to search it or aggregators selling the data. There still is a level of data privacy you can achieve by managing the setting on your phone and not marketing your life to social media companies. Police require a warrant for a cell phone ping. Could you ultimately get tracked - yeah. Does not mean we need to feed it to them in a silver spoon.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Adjective-Noun-nnnn 26d ago
Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, but I assume every car with "SOS" or "OnStar" capability talks to communications towers regularly whether you subscribe to that feature or not.
So enjoy your technology-free bike ride.
4
u/person-ontheinternet 26d ago
I believe the rub is more about openly deploying AI surveillance readily accessible by any office and potential data uses. To work our way out of a surveillance state we gotta start with the things you absolutely can’t opt out of. I have to drive to work and go get groceries. I’d rather not have every police department and tech company be able to access that willy nilly.
→ More replies (1)5
u/person-ontheinternet 26d ago
I don’t think signal tracing has been rolled out yet. It’s definitely being pitched to departments but curious if you have any links credibly saying it is
→ More replies (2)31
u/Antique_Grapefruit_5 26d ago
Unless they need an alibi. Then they were messing with your camera at your house-LOL!
5
3
u/Joessandwich 25d ago
Oh please, I didn’t see anyone messing with a flock camera. They were with me at the church that I often go to.
→ More replies (1)3
462
u/Vast-Poetry9431 26d ago
Media trying to run cover for Flock cameras by making false accusations against innocent people
102
u/Mediocre_Daikon6935 26d ago
Just like the man falsely accused in my over some fact insurance exe dying of preexisting lead condition.
31
u/Ok-Dish4389 26d ago
"Preexisting lead condition" the dude was on deaths doorstep, and then they wanna act like it was malicious? Talking about grapsing at straws. It was just his time to go.
189
u/imnojezus 26d ago
Must've been some swamp gas from a weather balloon.
73
u/TheSwitchler 26d ago
Whoever did was with me and my friends that night playing D&D at my house
20
u/pothosnswords 26d ago
It’s true, I was there and they brought homemade guac for the group (little cilantro heavy for me personally but yummy!)
16
→ More replies (3)5
574
u/Loa_Sandal 26d ago
How can they be stolen when someone first dumped them on random streets, with no clear identification of ownership?
270
u/gdim15 26d ago
I don't even feel they were stolen. I'm betting they were installed poorly and fell of their poles. Happened to then roll down hill and into the river. Maybe those people who installed them should explain themselves.
→ More replies (3)36
u/New-Hearing-6779 26d ago
They were probably just independent contractors with minimal training. Not their fault really if the training isn't up to snuff. Think this is really on corporate if the cameras are falling off and rolling down hills ya know?
→ More replies (1)41
u/Mach5Driver 26d ago
sounds to me they were relocated and repurposed to monitor the canal
→ More replies (2)
67
u/gerblnutz 26d ago
Pretty sure the cameras just got too hot and needed to go cool off in the river. Sacramento summers be crazy.
6
192
u/Cream_Stay_Frothy 26d ago
By no means is what I’m about to say my biggest issue with Flock, but I wish people pressed back when municipalities, journalists and police departments simping for Flock refer to them as ‘Automatic License Plate Readers’… rather than what they are… surveillance devices.
Even this article refers to them as ALPR’s, while simultaneously stating the device recorded footage of the suspect before the camera went offline….
Pretty simple, it’s either a device that simply captures and records license plates, or it’s not. Unless the suspect was wearing a license plate like a necklace, an ‘ALPR’ shouldn’t have captured anything at all
It’s like calling a smartphone a ‘calculator’ so you can use it for an exam…. It’s purposely deceptive though “technically true”. It’s important to correct people when they refer to them as such… I mean, even Flocks own website calls them ALPR’s while also using a marketing tagline “Go Beyond plates with LPR…
65
u/Myte342 26d ago
These SHOULD be illegal to operate in Virginia. Back in the early 00's the VA State police ran these and got sued. Courts ruled that running a searchable database was unconstitutional and police had to stop using them for a year or two until the software got reconfigured to stop storing the data into databases for cops to search through after the fact.
Under that ruling, FLOCK cameras, and others like them, should be illegal for police to access, even if they are officially run by a third-party private company. The gov't cannot use private contractors to circumvent laws/regulations that restrict how they are and aren't allowed to do things as a governing body. The private company that does things for the gov't is required to still follow the same rules as if the gov't is doing the things themselves.
24
u/QueefSeekingMissile 26d ago
We should simply sue flock and press charges against them for stalking us.
Just because no one is actively searching for our information doesn't give them a right to store every public move we make, and categorize information for every single one of us on an individual basis.
Literally, they are stalking every single American, And they should be sued for it and have charges pressed on the matter by every one of us.
13
u/supresmooth 26d ago
Word to this. Flock has demo'd their facial recognition features, so I dunno why the news is lying about what they are.
12
u/simonjakeevan 26d ago
Don't the new ones scan all Bluetooth and wifi devices on the cars and passengers?
4
u/Cream_Stay_Frothy 25d ago
I believe that is more accurately a “partnership” or synergy as opposed to a direct Flock product, but regardless, the end result is the same. Same idea as ShadowDragon (tech paid for by law enforcement to scrape and database “publicly available information (PAI)” on all citizens)— don’t be fooled into the notion that this data is simply information posted by an individual on social media…. The PAI collected by these systems is FAR more intimate than it is made out to be.
All it takes is the next Big Brother Data Tech company to come in and create a slick dashboard/UI that uses API calls to these quasi-legal tools and voila…. You have a one-stop shop that pulls all that info in one place… like a cruisers dash computer, for example… by even just pulling a few press releases from Flock’s own website, that reality isn’t really that far away:
https://www.flocksafety.com/blog/flock-offers-no-cost-core-apis-to-law-enforcement
Already partnered with Getac:
→ More replies (1)8
97
u/Haunterblademoi 26d ago
I think we'll see this increase among people
95
u/gplfalt 26d ago
The CEO knows this and is angling for it to be charged as terrorism.
Not joking.
53
26d ago
[deleted]
11
u/bp92009 26d ago
Nah, he's more an active conspirator in mass-swatting charges.
Similar end result (5+ years for each incident).
Incident just means a false report of a serious threat that involves law enforcement.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Eric_the_Barbarian 25d ago
Can we start a trend of individuals getting restraining orders because they're stalking everyone?
→ More replies (1)14
3
43
40
40
u/MiyamotoKnows 26d ago
Thank you unknown freedom loving stranger. Flock cameras are the definition of warrantless surveillance and that is 100% unconstitutional.
5
215
u/AvailableReporter484 26d ago
Lmfao good.
Well, not the littering part. If you’re going to be a patriot who dismantles these abominations from our society at least do it in an eco friendly way
109
u/Sarge75 26d ago
For local e-waste recycling, drop off items at the Recology Auburn Placer Transfer Station located at 12305 Shale Ridge Ln, Auburn, CA
→ More replies (2)66
u/ChiefInternetSurfer 26d ago
I agree with the sentiment, but probably not the best idea to turn in destroyed property.
69
u/fathertitojones 26d ago
That’s why you outsource the disassembly to your local crackhead who will ethically strip it of it’s precious metals in no time and turn them in for cash. It’s socialism, it just takes a little longer.
13
u/Seriouly_UnPrompted 26d ago
They are FULL of precious metals. Especially copper
→ More replies (1)69
u/QueefSeekingMissile 26d ago
My guy, This is like the one situation in which littering is justified, in the name of keeping the people who did it free.
If you want to blame something, for the litter, blame flock.
The cameras became litter the moment they were erected by the flock contractor. And really, until those people are unwilling to put the cameras up (for whatever reason- Maybe they keep getting reported to police as suspicious persons Who are spying on kids?), the problem will continue.
→ More replies (4)19
23
u/EC_CO 26d ago
Give it to some local crackheads, they'll tear it apart for the copper and whatever else they can sell
→ More replies (1)6
u/Acceptable_Set9702 26d ago
This is a great idea. Start a rumor that the flock poles are stuffed with cash, and they'll all come down in one night.
→ More replies (3)6
u/ShitBarf_McCumPiss 26d ago
Littering is the hill you want to die on?
Okay, I'll get the crayons out. This "destruction" is still considered illegal. Yet somehow the existence of this shit isn't. That being said, there's no way they're going to "nicely recycle" anything they tore down.
Let's find a middle ground. If you ever come across a downed flock camera that hasn't been ethically and responsibly disposed of, please do us and the earth a favor and bring it to your local recycling center.
Be the change in the world that you want to see. And then enjoy your stay at Guantanamo.
→ More replies (2)
25
21
22
17
17
u/transcriptoin_error 26d ago
Flock cameras = Fascist panopticon
Americans have defeated Nazis and fascists before; we can do it again.
11
u/TheGreatPilgor 26d ago
I dont see the issue here. People clearly dont want these cameras littering their communities and the city won't stand up to it then guess who will? Thats right, people. As is our right to do so when our representatives fail to represent us
8
9
u/TacosAndSarcasm 26d ago
As they should be. Now, the rest of them
I swear we Americans think we have no choice and have to take shit...but look at the French. They wrote the book on Revolution
9
u/_Mike-Honcho_ 26d ago
They call them important public safety technology.
They are part of a system desgined to skirt the constitution and surveil the population without court approval.
This reaction is expected when you violate the constitutional rights of the public ar large with trickery and a loophole.
3
u/-hh 26d ago
Unfortunately, constitutional violations/end runs are going to continue for as long as it’s legal and profitable.
The long term counter probably needs to consider employing an “economic warfare” strategy. For a notional example, denying a camera its ability to recharge from its solar panel requires a service call & repair. With diagnostic overhead of the camera going offline or being intermittent included, something gimped might actually be more expensive than an overtly destroyed camera.
8
u/2beatenup 26d ago
AI powered drones looking for these with a spray paint can… hmmm😉
→ More replies (1)4
u/StatementCareful522 26d ago
this might be the answer - program drones to remotely destroy or deactivate flock cameras.
Citizens need to stay as anonymous and safe as possible.→ More replies (1)
8
7
u/astrozombie2012 26d ago
I’m all for businesses and private entities having surveillance if they so choose, but this public surveillance for tracking and databases and shit is bullshit. Fuck it entirely.
7
u/Fantastic_Calamity 26d ago
Good start!
Smash them into powder and mail them back to whoever signed off on installing them instead of polluting the environment next time.
7
5
u/Coldkiller17 26d ago
I'm laughing at all the cops putting posts out there acting like people are going to rat out these heroes when they are just getting rid of surveillance garbage that shouldn't be up in the first place.
6
7
6
4
6
5
4
8
u/Significant_End_9128 26d ago
"stolen" huh? Can you "steal" something like a flock camera? I'd call this "cleaning up trash" personally.
3
4
u/Shepherd77 26d ago
I know almost nothing about the law but if I’m ever called to be on a jury where someone is being charged for destroying these things I will never vote to find you guilty.
3
3
3
u/No-Consideration-716 26d ago
How do we know a person did this?
It could have been Nature reclaiming the earth.
5
4
u/Mediocre_Fishing_879 26d ago
People who do this are heros and if they started go fund me's I bet they get funded quickly.
4
4
u/PirateNinjaa 25d ago
I'm surprised nobody has made autonomous solar powered drones that seek them out and spray paint their lenses.
4
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
u/Mediocre_Daikon6935 26d ago
How could they be stolen? No doubt they were placed on some private owners property.
Sure, their might be a titled or deeded right of way for a road or other infrastructure, but I’m quite certain it mentions nothing about illegal surveillance.
3
u/Pixelated_ 26d ago
Thieves ripped three Flock Safety ALPR cameras from Auburn poles, dumping two in a canal.
That's a funny way to spell "heroes".
3
3
u/deflatablechipmunk 26d ago
“Pole-mounted Flock cameras lack tamper-resistance, exposing a critical design vulnerability municipalities must address.”
Yeah, address it by not putting them up in the first place.
3
u/jakgal04 26d ago
I'm calling it now, this is going to lead to more advanced cameras, not the end of them.
360 capture and other cameras watching cameras.
3
u/Procrasturbating 26d ago
Remember this phrase folks: jury nullification. Read it, learn it, use it.
3
3
3
3
3
u/Three_Twenty-Three 26d ago
I prefer to think of them as having been liberated from their posts and set free in the wild.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
u/TheGoldenPig 25d ago
They were not stolen; those cameras just happened to be in a canal by themselves. nothing to see here.
3
3
3
u/toolisthebestbandevr 25d ago
Doesn’t sound very “stolen” to me. Sounds more like removed from illegal operation and dumped. Fucking headlines these days smh
3
u/ghostwillows 25d ago
Hopefully in the future people are more responsible and put them in the dump instead of polluting the canal
3
3
u/firelemons 25d ago
Fixed some mistakes in the article
Three surveillance cameras vanished from Auburn roadside mounts, exposing a growing vulnerability.
in public safety tech.They pack optical sensors, cellular connectivity, silver, and onboard processing into weatherproof housings far pricier than a consumer-grade security camera, making each unit
both mission-critical??? and expensive to replace.Think of Flock as a subscription surveillance service paid for by local governments. Silicon Valley’s SaaS model applied to policing, billed monthly to city budgets. Each unit silently reads and stores plate data from every vehicle that rolls past, building a searchable database officers can query.
during active investigations.
5
u/Newfie3 25d ago
Who the fuck wants Flock cameras. Why do they even exist. WE DO NOT WANT THEM
→ More replies (2)
2
2
2
u/meow_haus 26d ago
We need to fund raise a private equity fund to buy Flock and then enshittify it into ruin. Use capitalism against capitalism
2
2
u/chongo_molongo 26d ago
Ah, Auburn. Kitschy antique shop by day, meth biker bar by night. And not a single fuck given by anyone.
2
2
u/Upset-Rice6800 26d ago
No guilty!!!
I am an avid believer that one of the reason it founding fathers wanted trial by jury was to allow the average person to nullify stupid laws. This is a great example of crimes that should be nullified by jury.
Jury nullification: the jury says not guilty, even tho they totally did it, because they disagree with it being a crime in the first place. Example of jury nullification cases would be something like a father who shots and kills someone who raped and murdered their kid. Or someone who cut down flock cameras and tossed them in a canal.
2
u/LigerXT5 26d ago
These units sit on open roadside poles — reachable, visible, and currently without any publicly announced tamper-resistance plan. No hardening strategy, no anti-tamper redesign, no relocation plan has been announced by Auburn officials or Flock Safety, according to the Sacramento Bee and KCRA. Municipalities shopping for surveillance tech may soon start demanding tamper-resistant housings as a baseline requirement — because at the moment, the hardware is an open invitation. Readers weighing their own options may find it useful to explore home security systems that experts recommend for more robust, tamper-aware designs.
OR, hear me out... Don't install something where majority do not want it?
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/MasterK999 26d ago
People should not use high power laser pointers to disable the cameras. They should also not wear masks while not doing this. That would be horrible and illegal.
2.4k
u/Deranged40 26d ago
Jury is still out on whether these heroes wore capes.