Florida cops say they don’t know who owns 11 unpermitted Flock cameras

佛罗里达州警方称不知晓 11 台未经许可的 Flock 摄像头归谁所有

Florida cops are facing questions after a mandate to remove all Flock cameras tracking cars on St. Lucie County roads led local police to uncover more than a dozen suspicious cameras operating without permits. 在佛罗里达州圣卢西县（St. Lucie County），一项要求拆除所有用于追踪道路车辆的 Flock 摄像头的指令，促使当地警方发现了十几台未经许可运行的可疑摄像头，这让警方正面临各方质询。

Local residents told The Washington Post that they were alarmed that no one knows who owns many of the mysterious cameras. Of the 14 cameras found, 11 had no obvious owners, raising concerns about who has access to sensitive data that bad actors could abuse. 当地居民告诉《华盛顿邮报》，没人知道这些神秘摄像头中许多台的归属，这让他们感到恐慌。在发现的 14 台摄像头中，有 11 台没有明确的所有者，这引发了人们对谁能获取敏感数据以及不法分子可能如何滥用这些数据的担忧。

After the cameras were discovered, St. Lucie County Commissioner James Clasby told a local news outlet that there’s “potential for non-law enforcement to have cameras out there, and I’m not OK with that.” But the St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office ended up claiming three of those cameras, then refused to explain why they never obtained the required permits. The office did not immediately respond to Ars’ request to clarify whether it ever accessed data recorded by the cameras. 摄像头被发现后，圣卢西县专员詹姆斯·克拉斯比（James Clasby）告诉当地一家新闻媒体：“非执法部门也有可能在外面安装摄像头，我对此无法接受。”然而，圣卢西县治安官办公室最终认领了其中的三台摄像头，但拒绝解释为何从未获得必要的许可。该办公室没有立即回应 Ars 关于其是否曾访问过这些摄像头所记录数据的澄清请求。

In Florida, police have repeatedly been caught misusing Flock cameras, sometimes tracking single cars hundreds of times for personal reasons. One officer in Fort Pierce, Josepher Crutchfield, accessed a Flock database 382 times while stalking an ex-girlfriend, the Post noted, while another cop, Christopher Goodson, reportedly nearly doubled that number of searches while looking for his estranged wife. Two Pinellas County cops were arrested for invasive Flock tracking, with one, Travis Stanton, found searching a minor and the other, Karl Gwynne, stalking a woman he wanted to date. Across the US, the Post has found at least 50 cases of similar police misuse. 在佛罗里达州，警方多次被曝滥用 Flock 摄像头，有时甚至出于个人原因对同一辆车进行数百次追踪。《华盛顿邮报》指出，皮尔斯堡（Fort Pierce）的一名警官约瑟夫·克拉奇菲尔德（Josepher Crutchfield）在跟踪前女友时，曾 382 次访问 Flock 数据库；而另一名警官克里斯托弗·古德森（Christopher Goodson）在寻找分居的妻子时，据报道搜索次数几乎是前者的两倍。皮内拉斯县（Pinellas County）的两名警察因侵入性使用 Flock 追踪而被捕，其中特拉维斯·斯坦顿（Travis Stanton）被发现搜索一名未成年人，而卡尔·格温（Karl Gwynne）则在跟踪一名他想约会的女性。据《华盛顿邮报》统计，全美范围内至少已发现 50 起类似的警方滥用案例。

As the problem has escalated, Flock has claimed that it has added safeguards to prevent police misuse of its databases, but experts warn they’re ineffective. For St. Lucie County residents who frequently pass the unpermitted cameras, privacy concerns remain, as the county is giving owners 30 days to remove the cameras, seemingly with no questions asked. 随着问题升级，Flock 声称已增加防护措施以防止警方滥用其数据库，但专家警告称这些措施无效。对于经常经过这些未经许可摄像头的圣卢西县居民来说，隐私担忧依然存在，因为县政府给予了所有者 30 天的时间来拆除摄像头，且似乎不会追究任何责任。

One camera already came down, a Post reporter confirmed, after St. Lucie County’s interim administrator Mayte Santamaria explained that the county put up “bright red” notices. Cops remain uncertain if the cameras are actively collecting data, the Post reported. Until the deadline arrives—which for some cameras could be as late as October 20—county spokesperson Erick Gill told the Post that “staff plan to start placing plastic bags over the cameras.” 据《华盛顿邮报》记者证实，在圣卢西县临时行政官梅特·圣玛丽亚（Mayte Santamaria）解释说县政府已张贴“亮红色”通知后，已经有一台摄像头被拆除。据报道，警方仍不确定这些摄像头是否在积极收集数据。县发言人埃里克·吉尔（Erick Gill）告诉《华盛顿邮报》，在截止日期（部分摄像头可能延至 10 月 20 日）到来之前，“工作人员计划开始用塑料袋罩住这些摄像头”。

That small step could help obscure footage to prevent invasive tracking, but one resident, Ty Grant, told the Post that concerns remain—even about the camera that was promptly removed. For people potentially recorded by the cameras, it’s imperative that cops try to figure out who owns them, Grant said. “That makes me feel very unsafe,” Grant said. 这一小步或许有助于遮挡画面以防止侵入性追踪，但居民泰·格兰特（Ty Grant）告诉《华盛顿邮报》，担忧依然存在——即使是对那台被迅速拆除的摄像头也是如此。格兰特表示，对于那些可能被摄像头记录的人来说，警方必须设法查明摄像头的所有者。“这让我感到非常不安全，”格兰特说。

Todd Richter, who manages a fishing supply shop located across the street from a different camera, told the Post that he has no issue with Flock’s automated license plate readers, so long as it’s clear who’s accessing them. “I’m not happy about it unless I know who it is,” Richter said, “and I don’t.” 托德·里希特（Todd Richter）在另一台摄像头对面的渔具店工作，他告诉《华盛顿邮报》，只要明确是谁在访问数据，他并不反对 Flock 的自动车牌识别系统。“除非我知道是谁在操作，否则我对此感到不快，”里希特说，“而现在我并不知道。”

Flock’s web of mystery cameras

Flock 的神秘摄像头之网

St. Lucie County officials appear determined to give the camera owners time to take them down before moving forward with investigations to unmask them. Gill told the Post that Flock will be contacted if the county’s 30-day deadline passes and cameras remain up. It’s possible that Flock dropped the ball on submitting permitting requests for either private or police use of the mysterious cameras. 圣卢西县官员似乎决心在进行调查以揭开摄像头所有者身份之前，先给他们时间自行拆除。吉尔告诉《华盛顿邮报》，如果 30 天期限已过而摄像头仍未拆除，县政府将联系 Flock。Flock 很可能在提交这些神秘摄像头的私人或警方使用许可申请时出现了疏漏。

That has happened for years, as a 2024 Forbes investigation reported, and the Post has noted other more recent examples. Last December, Flock installed two cameras in Cambridge, Massachusetts, without telling anyone, after local officials had banned the technology. And just last month, officials in Millcreek, Utah, were baffled to find an unknown camera installed on city property that neither the city nor police requested. 正如《福布斯》2024 年的一项调查所报道的那样，这种情况多年来一直存在，《华盛顿邮报》也指出了其他更近期的例子。去年 12 月，在当地官员明令禁止该技术后，Flock 仍在马萨诸塞州剑桥市私自安装了两台摄像头。就在上个月，犹他州米尔克里克（Millcreek）的官员们惊讶地发现，在未经市政府或警方要求的情况下，市政财产上被安装了一台不明摄像头。

About an hour from the most recent batch of sketchy cameras, officials in Palm Bay, Florida, suspended their camera system after finding that Flock continually installed cameras and then failed to request final inspections. In that case, city officials ended up approving Flock’s permits. 在距离最近这批可疑摄像头约一小时车程的地方，佛罗里达州棕榈湾（Palm Bay）的官员在发现 Flock 不断安装摄像头却未申请最终检查后，暂停了其摄像头系统。在那起案例中，市政府官员最终批准了 Flock 的许可。

St. Lucie County commissioner Clasby told local media he thinks that “not knowing who” the cameras belong to is “another issue” beyond police misuse and data privacy that Flock must address. Already battling backlash—particularly in Florida, the only state to ban cameras on state roads—Flock appears motivated to connect with the county before the 30-day notice period expires. 圣卢西县专员克拉斯比告诉当地媒体，他认为除了警方滥用和数据隐私问题外，“不知道摄像头归谁所有”是 Flock 必须解决的“另一个问题”。Flock 目前正面临强烈抵制——特别是在佛罗里达州，该州是唯一禁止在州道上使用此类摄像头的州——因此，Flock 似乎有动力在 30 天通知期满前与县政府取得联系。

A Flock spokesperson told the Post that the company already reached out to officials to discuss the unpermitted cameras. That spokesperson seemed to downplay the controversy, saying that permitting requirements “vary by jurisdiction and are not necessary in every location.” Ars reached Gill to confirm that St. Lucie County began talks with Flock this week. Flock 的一位发言人告诉《华盛顿邮报》，公司已联系相关官员讨论这些未经许可的摄像头。该发言人似乎在淡化争议，称许可要求“因司法管辖区而异，并非在每个地点都是必要的”。Ars 联系了吉尔，确认圣卢西县已于本周开始与 Flock 进行会谈。

According to Gill, Flock is juggling many requests right now, since there are demands to remove cameras throughout the state. As Flock assesses the cases, Gill said that county “staff is still working on the best possible way to make sure the cameras are removed by the permittee before the deadline. Once the deadline has passed, staff will be working to safely remove the cameras and/or add coverings, so that they are unable to capture video.” 据吉尔称，Flock 目前正忙于处理许多请求，因为全州范围内都有拆除摄像头的要求。在 Flock 评估这些案例的同时，吉尔表示，县政府“工作人员仍在研究最佳方案，以确保许可持有者能在截止日期前拆除摄像头。一旦截止日期过后，工作人员将着手安全拆除摄像头和/或添加遮盖物，使其无法捕捉视频。”