Flock Safety used live cameras in a Dunwoody, GA children’s gymnastics room, pool, and Jewish community center as sales demos, confirmed by access logs obtained via public records request.
Key Takeaways
A resident’s public records request surfaced Flock access logs showing employees viewed cameras at the MJCCA children’s gymnastics room, pool, fitness centers, and a school during sales demos.
Flock’s own FAQ states “nobody from Flock Safety is accessing or monitoring your footage” – directly contradicted by the confirmed demo access.
Flock’s surveillance network in a single city aggregates not just city-purchased cameras but also cameras from private businesses, all accessible through one system.
After the story broke, Flock agreed to restrict future demos to public locations like retail parking lots, but Dunwoody renewed its contract anyway.
Flock’s transparency defense – that access logs exist and can be FOIA’d – is the only structural accountability mechanism in place.
Hacker News Comment Review
Commenters flagged the absence of a dedicated demo environment as a basic engineering failure; the consensus is Flock is reacting rather than planning, with no proper data access controls.
A recurring concern is that Flock is systematically lowering friction for mass real-time surveillance access, making abuse a scaling problem rather than an isolated incident.
YC’s continued backing of Flock drew pointed criticism, with commenters questioning institutional accountability given the pattern of privacy violations.
Notable Comments
@jmward01: Argues the core danger is cost-free, consequence-free access – not the existence of cameras – and that Flock is dismantling the friction that historically limited surveillance abuse.
@throwway120385: “Flock is building the Telescreen from 1984.”
