Full transcript
Law enforcement agencies across the country use AI-powered cameras
to scan billions of vehicles each month, often without drivers even
knowing they're being recorded. Supporters say the technology helps
solve crimes. Critics warn it's a rapid expansion is creating a nationwide
surveillance network, raising questions about the balance between
public safety and personal privacy. Paul Salman dives into that debate.
A quiet Saturday afternoon last September, Denver resident Chrisanana
Elser gets an alert from her doorbell camera. A nearby Columbine
Valley police officer has come calling. You know why I'm here? No,
he pulled out a picture of my truck and accused me of stealing a
package. We have cameras everywhere in that town. You can't get a
breath of fresh air in or out without us knowing. Police operated
cameras had recorded her driving near the scene of the crime. Only
problem, she had nothing to do with it. They caught me 20 times driving
through the neighborhood that we drive through to go to work every
day. Police had simply matched their video with doorbell footage
of the theft showing a blonde like Elser. Well, can I see this video?
If you go to court, you can. If you're going to deny it, I'm not
going to extend you any courtesy. If you're going to lie to me, I
am not going to extend you any courtesy. It was shocking to have
somebody come in so strong and reply on the digital evidence. Small
black cameras mounted on utility poles began appearing around the
neighborhood in 2024, but so what? says Elser? I took the stance
that everybody else takes that, ah, big deal, it's up there if I'm
not doing anything wrong, then my, why am I worried about it?
Turns out these cameras extend far beyond Denver today. More than
100,000 are installed across all 50 states. According to crowdsourced
data from anti-surveillance organizations. The vast majority owned
by security tech company Flock Safety. Let's shape a safer future
together. We build hardware and software that helps cities solve
crime. Flack's Josh Thomas says they make other devices to detect
gunshots, for instance, but our bread and butter product is a license
plate reader. We are pinpoint focus on the back of a vehicle to identify
the make, model, color, the license plate, the state of the license
plate. Time stamps, locations, but Flock's AI-powered cameras also
record bumper stickers, dents. to match against local and national
law enforcement hot lists. So when there's a wanted person, an outstanding
warrant, a hit and run, a missing person, they will add those license
plates to the list. So in real time, if one of those vehicles drives
by a flock safety device, we'll send an alert to local law enforcement.
The data is also stored on a searchable cloud database for 30 days.
and so misuse can happen as with Chrisanna Elser, among others documented
in local reporting, but it's rare, says Thomas. What's far more common,
he says, the technology helps solve crimes. They're helping solve
somewhere between 800,000 to a million crimes every calendar year.
So, roughly about 20 to 25% of all reported crime in America is being
solved in some way or another with flock technology. You can always
take the stories of the worst case scenario. but what's unfortunately
and doesn't seem to get hit a lot are the stories of the best case
scenario. Todd Chamberlain, chief of police in Aurora, Colorado,
and there are some stories where lives have been changed through
the use of this technology, as in Denver last December. A woman had
put her child, a 14 month old baby, into her vehicle. She had her
car idling. Uh, somebody came along, saw an opportunity to steal
that car and that mother was basically left watching her car drive
away with her 14 month old baby in it. Flock tracked the car, reunited
mother and child. Without that flock technology, we might not have
found that for 2 or 3 days later. That technology saved that 14 month
old baby's life. So on balance, technology for the good, well, Chris
Anna Elsa, for one, might disagree, and Flack allows search data
to be shared with police nationwide, potentially tracking Chrisanana
Elsers anywhere. When you have a national database of these cameras
that can be queried by law enforcement without a warrant. That qualitatively
shifts something about the surveillance. Joseph Cox is a journalist
with 404 Media. This isn't a small beat local police officer just
looking into local crimes necessarily. You can have an officer on
the other side of the country, search for vehicles on the other side
of the country as well. On behalf of ICE, for example, and that has
clearly worried a lot of people who are now having a conversation
about, do we actually want these cameras in our community
A few weeks ago, using a commercial search engine, I very easily
found the administration interfaces for dozens of flock safety cameras,
and last December, YouTuber Ben Jordan gained access to over 60 flock
video feeds in cities across the country. All this is relying on
is knowing where exactly to look. And with that, we were able to
see just how powerful some of these cameras are. But Fox Thomas says
the leak was caused by cameras mistakenly configured to be public
fa cing rather than private feeds. We have hundreds of thousands
of sensors out in the world. A very, very small number had a public
facing IP address. He did find us. In the second we found us, within
48 hours, all of those were changed, which is either reassuring or
not. There are YouTube videos that can teach you how to hack these
cameras. Meanwhile, opposition is growing. If this camera sees you,
you will be put on a database alongside every other law-abiding resident
of the city. We are asking for the flock contract to be terminated
in full. In the past year, dozens of cities have canceled contracts
following public backlash, and Flack now says it's willing to talk
about how its tech should be regulated. There's kind of no denying
that it has clear benefits to cities. But the question, I think,
is a very real one, which is, what's the tradeoff we're making in
society? Are we comfortable with that level of trade-off. And I think
those are fair questions to ask. Back in Denver, Chris Hana Elser
parried the charges against her with surveillance tech of her own.
I gave him a Google map of where I was. I gave him the video from
my truck that showed where I drove, gave him the video of the business
I was at. She spent real money on tech defense.
Why? If there's digital evidence out there that somebody has a view,
you should have your own digital evidence. You mean this is like
spy versus spy or it was all kind of like what do I have in my arsenal
to prove myself innocent. Her own digital evidence ultimately cleared
her, which is why she suggests that you, me, and everyone should
have an arsenal of our own. But that's assuming, of course, that
we can afford it. The PBS Newshour Paul Salman.