Hackers say they have stolen internal software and source code from Flock Safety, the company whose automated license-plate reader (ALPR) cameras are used by thousands of police departments across the United States. The material, described by those claiming responsibility as company build tools and backend code, reportedly reveals in granular detail how Flock’s cameras capture, store and share vehicle and location data with law enforcement agencies.
News of the breach began circulating this week on hacking and technology forums, where excerpts of the alleged stolen material were posted alongside claims that the code shows how Flock’s system flags vehicles, logs search queries, and routes data between local police departments and outside agencies. Flock Safety has not confirmed the full scope of the incident but acknowledged it is aware of the claims and is investigating.
What the Leaked Material Reportedly Shows
According to researchers who have reviewed portions of the leaked files, the code offers a rare inside look at the architecture behind Flock’s nationwide camera network, which the company says spans thousands of communities. The system automatically photographs passing vehicles, reads license plates, and logs details such as location, time and vehicle characteristics like color and body type.
Security researchers say the leaked material appears to detail:
- How individual police agencies configure searches across Flock’s shared camera network
- The categories officers select when justifying a search, a feature that has drawn scrutiny before
- Backend systems used to store and retrieve historical vehicle-tracking data
Flock’s network has already faced criticism for how loosely some searches are justified. NarwhalTV previously reported that officers in Illinois used Flock cameras more than 1,200 times to investigate loitering, and that some officers around the country have typed flippant justifications like “LMAO” into search-reason fields. If the leaked code confirms how easily those fields can be manipulated or left unverified, it could intensify scrutiny of the company’s audit practices.
Company Response
Flock Safety, based in Atlanta, has grown rapidly since its founding in 2017, positioning itself as a public-safety partner to local governments rather than a traditional surveillance vendor. The company has said its cameras have helped solve thousands of crimes and that access to its data is restricted to authorized law enforcement users.
“We take the security of our systems seriously and are actively investigating these claims,” a Flock Safety spokesperson said in a statement responding to inquiries about the alleged breach. The company added that it had not yet confirmed whether any customer or citizen data was directly exposed.
Cybersecurity analysts note that even if the stolen material is limited to internal software rather than raw surveillance footage, exposure of the underlying code could still be significant. Understanding how a tracking system is built can reveal vulnerabilities, undocumented data-sharing pathways, or gaps in oversight that are otherwise invisible to the public and to the police departments that rely on the technology.
A Pattern of Scrutiny
The alleged breach lands amid a broader national debate over the expansion of automated surveillance infrastructure. Flock’s cameras have been installed in cities and towns of nearly every size, often with limited public debate before contracts are signed. Even communities that have moved to restrict the technology have found it difficult to fully remove; NarwhalTV reported that a California city found Flock cameras reinstalled after officials believed the program had been cancelled.
Privacy advocates argue incidents like this reinforce long-standing concerns about centralizing vast amounts of location data in a single private company’s systems, then sharing that data widely across law enforcement networks with inconsistent oversight. Civil liberties groups have repeatedly pushed for stronger audit trails, clearer retention limits, and public reporting on how ALPR data is used and by whom.
What Happens Next
Flock Safety said its investigation is ongoing and that it is working to determine the scope of any exposure. Law enforcement agencies that rely on Flock’s network are likely to seek assurances from the company about whether operational data, search logs, or customer credentials were compromised.
For now, the incident adds another data point to a growing list of episodes raising questions about accountability in the fast-expanding market for automated surveillance tools. As police departments continue to adopt camera networks marketed as public-safety aids, incidents like this alleged breach are likely to keep pressure on lawmakers and regulators to define clearer rules for how such systems are secured, audited and disclosed to the public.
NarwhalTV will continue to follow developments as Flock Safety releases further details about the scope of the alleged breach and any steps taken to notify affected law enforcement partners.
