Every Thursday of the week, Bastian’s Night is broadcast from 21:30 CEST (new time).

Bastian’s Night is a live talk show in German with lots of music, a weekly round-up of news from around the world, and a glimpse into the host’s crazy week in the pirate movement.

If you want to read more about @BastianBB: –> This way

piratesonair.net/bastians-nigh…

This Thursday, the Cambridge Pole & Conduit Commission will consider Flock’s requests to put up 15 to 20 surveillance cameras with Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technologies around Cambridge. The Cambridge City Council, in a 6-3 vote on Feb. 3rd, approved Cambridge PD’s request to install these cameras. It was supposed to roll out to Central Square only, but it looks like Cambridge PD and Flock have asked to put up a camera at the corner of Rindge and Alewife Brook Parkway facing eastward. That is pretty far from Central Square.

Anyone living within 150 feet of the camera location should have been mailed letters from Flock telling them that the can attend the Pole & Conduit Commission meeting this Thursday at 9am and comment on Flock’s request. The Pole & Conduit Commission hasn’t posted its agenda or the requests it will consider on Thursday. If you got a letter or found out that you are near where Flock wants to install one of these cameras, please attend the meeting to speak against it and notify your neighbors.

The Cambridge Day, who recently published a story on us, reports that City Councilors Patty Nolan, Sumbul Siddiqui and Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler have called for reconsidering introducing more cameras to Cambridge. These cameras are paid for by the federal Urban Area Security Initiative grant program and the data they collect will be shared with the Boston Regional Information Center (BRIC) and from there to ICE, CBP and other agencies that are part of Trump’s new secret police already active in the Boston area.

We urge you to attend this meeting at 9am on Thursday and speak against the camera nearest you, if you received a letter or know that the camera will be within 150 feet of your residence. You can register in advance and the earlier you register, the earlier you will be able to speak. Issues you can bring up:

• A Texas sheriff recently searched ALPR data to identify the location of a Texas woman who sought an out-of-state abortion. We will see more efforts like this as conservative state legislatures criminalize abortion and attempt to force their views on us;
• The Cambridge Police Department has stated in a public hearing that they use license plate readers to monitor traffic in the vicinity of protests. People exercising their 1st Amendment right to peaceful protest should not fear that they will end up in a local, commonwealth or federal database because their car was near a protest;
• Last year, Boston shared its ALPR data 37 times with federal agencies and state police in other states. The Flock ALPR database is available nationaly and Flock has a pilot contract with Customs and Border Patrol to send them ALPR data directly;
• In the past, ALPR companies have not done a good job keeping their data secure. In Boston, there was a leak of ALPR data on 68,924 scans of 45,020 unique vehicles which caused the Boston Police Department to suspend ALPR data collection in 2013.

We urge affected Cambridge residents to speak at Thursday’s hearing at 9am. If you plan to attend or can put up flyers in your area about the cameras, please email us at info@masspirates.org.

masspirates.org/blog/2025/09/1…

404 Media

2025-08-25 20:56:35

CBP Had Access to More than 80,000 Flock AI Cameras Nationwide

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regularly searched more than 80,000 Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras, according to data released by three police departments. The data shows that CBP’s access to Flock’s network is far more robust and widespread than has been previously reported. One of the police departments 404 Media spoke to said it did not know or understand that it was sharing data with CBP, and Flock told 404 Media Monday that it has “paused all federal pilots.”

In May, 404 Media reported that local police were performing lookups across Flock on behalf of ICE, because that part of the Department of Homeland Security did not have its own direct access. Now, the newly obtained data and local media reporting reveals that CBP had the ability to perform Flock lookups by itself.

Last week, 9 News in Colorado reported that CBP has direct access to Flock’s ALPR backend “through a pilot program.” In that article, 9 News revealed that the Loveland, Colorado police department was sharing access to its Flock cameras directly with CBP. At the time, Flock said that this was through what 9 News described as a “one-to-one” data sharing agreement through that pilot program, making it sound like these agreements were rare and limited:

“The company now acknowledges the connection exists through a previously publicly undisclosed program that allows Border Patrol access to a Flock account to send invitations to police departments nationwide for one-to-one data sharing, and that Loveland accepted the invitation,” 9 News wrote. “A spokesperson for Flock said agencies across the country have been approached and have agreed to the invitation. The spokesperson added that U.S. Border Patrol is not on the nationwide Flock sharing network, comprised of local law enforcement agencies across the country. Loveland Police says it is on the national network.”

New data obtained using three separate public records requests from three different police departments gives some insight into how widespread these “one-to-one” data sharing agreements actually are. The data shows that in most cases, CBP had access to more Flock cameras than the average police department, that it is regularly using that access, and that, functionally, there is no difference between Flock’s “nationwide network” and the network of cameras that CBP has access to.

According to data obtained from the Boulder, Colorado Police Department by William Freeman, the creator of a crowdsourced map of Flock devices called DeFlock, CBP ran at least 118 Flock network searches between May 13 and June 13 of this year. Each of these searches encompassed at least 6,315 individual Flock networks (a “network” is a specific police department or city’s cameras) and at least 82,000 individual Flock devices. Data obtained in separate requests from the Prosser Police Department and Chehalis Police Department, both in Washington state, also show CBP searching a huge number of networks and devices.

A spokesperson for the Boulder Police Department told 404 Media that “Boulder Police Department does not have any agreement with U.S. Border Patrol for Flock searches. We were not aware of these specific searches at the time they occurred. Prior to June 2025, the Boulder Police Department had Flock's national look-up feature enabled, which allowed other agencies from across the U.S. who also had contracts with Flock to search our data if they could articulate a legitimate law enforcement purpose. We do not currently share data with U.S. Border Patrol. In June 2025, we deactivated the national look-up feature specifically to maintain tighter control over Boulder Police Department data access. You can learn more about how we share Flock information on our FAQ page.”

A Flock spokesperson told 404 Media Monday that it sent an email to all of its customers clarifying how information is shared from agencies to other agencies. It said this is an excerpt from that email about its sharing options:

“The Flock platform provides flexible options for sharing:

National sharing

1. Opt into Flock’s national sharing network. Access via the national lookup tool is limited—users can only see results if they perform a full plate search and a positive match exists within the network of participating, opt-in agencies. This ensures data privacy while enabling broader collaboration when needed.
2. Share with agencies in specific states only
   
   1. Share with agencies with similar laws (for example, regarding immigration enforcement and data)

   
   

3. Share within your state only or within a certain distance
   
   1. You can share information with communities within a specified mile radius, with the entire state, or a combination of both—for example, sharing with cities within 150 miles of Kansas City (which would include cities in Missouri and neighboring states) and / or all communities statewide simultaneously.

   
   

4. Share 1:1
   
   1. Share only with specific agencies you have selected

   
   

5. Don’t share at all”

In a blog post Monday, Flock CEO Garrett Langley said Flock has paused all federal pilots.

“While it is true that Flock does not presently have a contractual relationship with any U.S. Department of Homeland Security agencies, we have engaged in limited pilots with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), to assist those agencies in combatting human trafficking and fentanyl distribution,” Langley wrote. “We clearly communicated poorly. We also didn’t create distinct permissions and protocols in the Flock system to ensure local compliance for federal agency users […] All federal customers will be designated within Flock as a distinct ‘Federal’ user category in the system. This distinction will give local agencies better information to determine their sharing settings.”

A Flock employee who does not agree with the way Flock allows for widespread data sharing told 404 Media that Flock has defended itself internally by saying it tries to follow the law. 404 Media granted the source anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the press.

“They will defend it as they have been by saying Flock follows the law and if these officials are doing law abiding official work then Flock will allow it,” they said. “However Flock will also say that they advise customers to ensure they have their sharing settings set appropriately to prevent them from sharing data they didn’t intend to. The question more in my mind is the fact that law in America is arguably changing, so will Flock just go along with whatever the customers want?”

The data shows that CBP has tapped directly into Flock’s huge network of license plate reading cameras, which passively scan the license plate, color, and model of vehicles that drive by them, then make a timestamped record of where that car was spotted. These cameras were marketed to cities and towns as a way of finding stolen cars or solving property crime locally, but over time, individual cities’ cameras have been connected to Flock’s national network to create a huge surveillance apparatus spanning the entire country that is being used to investigate all sorts of crimes and is now being used for immigration enforcement. As we reported in May, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been gaining access to this network through a side door, by asking local police who have access to the cameras to run searches for them.

9 News’s reporting and the newly released audit reports shared with 404 Media show that CBP now has direct access to much of Flock’s system and does not have to ask local police to run searches. It also shows that CBP had access to at least one other police department system in Colorado, in this case Boulder, which is a state whose laws forbid sharing license plate reader data with the federal government for immigration enforcement. Boulder’s Flock settings also state that it is not supposed to be used for immigration enforcement.

This story and our earlier stories, including another about a Texas official who searched nationwide for a woman who self-administered an abortion, were reported using Flock “Network Audits” released by police departments who have bought Flock cameras and have access to Flock’s network. They are essentially a huge spreadsheet of every time that the department’s camera data was searched; it shows which officer searched the data, what law enforcement department ran the search, the number of networks and cameras included in the search, the time and date of the search, the license plate, and a “reason” for the search. These audit logs allow us to see who has access to Flock’s systems, how wide their access is, how often they are searching the system, and what they are searching for.

The audit logs show that whatever system Flock is using to enroll local police departments’ cameras into the network that CBP is searching does not have any meaningful pushback, because the data shows that CBP has access to as many or more cameras as any other police department. Freeman analyzed the searches done by CBP on June 13 compared to searches done by other police departments on that same day, and found that CBP had a higher number of average cameras searched than local police departments.

“The average number of organizations searched by any agency per query is 6,049, with a max of 7,090,” Freeman told 404 Media. “That average includes small numbers like statewide searches. When I filter by searches by Border Patrol for the same date, their average number of networks searched is 6,429, with a max of 6,438. The reason for the maximum being larger than the national network is likely because some agencies have access to more cameras than just the national network (in-state cameras). Despite this, we still see that the count of networks searched by Border Patrol outnumbers that of all agencies, so if it’s not the national network, then this ‘pilot program’ must have opted everyone in the nation in by default.”

CBP did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Texas Cop Searched License Plate Cameras Nationwide for a Woman Who Got an Abortion

The sheriff said the woman self-administered the abortion and her family were concerned for her safety, so authorities searched through Flock cameras.

^{Joseph Cox (404 Media)}

Federal attacks on free speech are rightfully getting most of the headlines, but Georgia’s unprecedented attempt to prosecute dozens of “Stop Cop City” protesters as members of a racketeering enterprise was as frivolous as the worst of the Trump administration’s antics.

This week’s dismissal of conspiracy charges against these opponents of the Atlanta police training facility is welcome news. But it’s alarming that these charges lingered over 61 people’s heads for two years. And their ordeal likely isn’t over.

Ridiculous indictment

Rather than filing charges aimed at individual alleged acts of arson, vandalism, or other actual crimes, prosecutors tried to rope together dozens of activists into one sprawling case under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The indictment didn’t even attempt to connect the dots between most defendants’ constitutionally protected speech and a handful of defendants’ alleged bad acts.

Why would prosecutors want to do that instead of just charging the lawbreakers? Primarily, because the prosecution wasn’t intended to punish illegality but to kill a movement. Charging only those who broke actual laws wouldn’t achieve that aim, so they got to work making up new ones.

Secondarily, because they’re vindictive dirtbags. To prove it, they chose the date of George Floyd’s murder as the start date of their fabricated “conspiracy,” even though plans for Cop City hadn’t even been announced yet when Floyd was killed.

Prosecutors pointed to the defendants’ alleged anarchist political philosophy, their publications, their social media posts, their constitutionally protected recording of police, their use of encryption and VPNs to communicate securely, and even their holding news conferences and talking to reporters — all as “proof” that they were each part of a criminal enterprise.

The theory goes that, if one anarchist writes an essay about the environmental impact of Cop City and another anarchist sets a police car on fire, then both anarchists effectively struck the match together. Or something like that. It’s too incoherent to make any sense of.

Chilling effect on both journalists and sources

By the prosecution’s logic, journalists who covered the protests could be portrayed as helping to “advance” a RICO conspiracy simply by giving activists a platform. Write about the movement, and you (and your sources) might become part of the case file. This time, they only went after writers who participated in the Stop Cop City movement, but what about next time?

The harm extends beyond direct impact on reporters. Newsmakers and whistleblowers will surely be wary of talking to journalists if they know prosecutors view doing so — and particularly doing so securely via encrypted messaging — as an act in furtherance of a conspiracy.

This week’s win doesn’t undo the harm, either to free speech or to the defendants’ lives (many say they’ve been unable to find housing or jobs due to the long-pending case). The court’s forthcoming dismissal order seems likely to be limited to procedural grounds — prosecutors neglected to get required authorization from the governor to bring the charges. Deputy Attorney General John Fowler, the lead prosecutor on the case, said he’ll appeal.

Prosecutors must know they’re unlikely to ultimately secure a conviction, much less one that higher courts will uphold. Even if the appellate courts give them a path to get past this week’s procedural dismissal, they’ll still have to reckon with the Constitution and the fact that their legal and factual theories are as flimsy as they come.

But the longer they can stretch the case out, the longer uncertainty will linger about whether a law intended to counter organized crime can be distorted to stifle protest movements. And the more reluctant critics of Cop City will be to speak to journalists whose reporting might clarify the goals of their movement and contradict law enforcement narratives.

Plenty of experts have explained how RICO laws are rife with abuse, even when used for their intended purpose. The Cop City case makes clear that the need for reform isn’t just a criminal justice issue; it’s a free speech one as well.

freedom.press/issues/cop-city-…

Dear Friend of Press Freedom,

For 171 days, Rümeysa Öztürk has faced deportation by the United States government for writing an op-ed it didn’t like, and for 90 days, Mario Guevara has been imprisoned for covering a protest.

Our newsletters are taking a short break next week, but we’ll be back. Explore our archive for more press freedom stories.

Take action to stop attacks on journalists and transparency

People often ask how to support the causes we fight for other than donating. Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) has a new action center to allow you to do just that by writing or calling members of Congress to tell them that the public cares about press freedom.

This week we launched the first two actions — one to tell lawmakers to stop the decimation of the Freedom of Information Act and the other to encourage them to do something (besides the same old empty expressions of concern) about the massacre of journalists in Gaza. We plan to expand the action center, including by taking on locally targeted initiatives. Please use this easy, new tool to help us make a difference — and still donate if you can, of course.

CBS’s real bias monitor is Donald Trump

CBS announced this week that it’s hiring Kenneth Weinstein — a career partisan — as its “bias ombudsman.” FPF Director of Advocacy Seth Stern wrote for The Guardian that while CBS has a constitutional right to monitor bias as it sees fit, it’s a different story when the government gets involved.

The creation of the ombudsman role was one of many capitulations CBS’s owners made to the Trump administration to persuade the Federal Communications Commission to approve the Paramount-Skydance merger. And based on comments from the administration, it fully intends to use its foothold inside CBS’s newsroom to bend its reporting to its liking. Read more here.

‘Cop City’ case’s threat to press freedom persists despite win

Federal attacks on free speech are rightfully getting most of the headlines, but Georgia’s unprecedented attempt to prosecute dozens of “Stop Cop City” protesters as members of a racketeering enterprise was as frivolous as the worst of the Trump administration’s antics.

This week’s dismissal of conspiracy charges against these opponents of the Atlanta police training facility is welcome news. But it’s alarming that these charges lingered over 61 people’s heads for two years. Their ordeal likely isn’t over, and neither is the chilling effect on journalism and whistleblowing that the case has caused. Read more here.

Will 9/11 records be declassified?

Next year marks the 25th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, and “a substantial body of records” about the event remains classified.

In theory, these records should automatically be declassified when they turn 25 in 2026. But this won’t happen with the 9/11 records, just as it hasn’t happened with other historically significant records, like the John F. Kennedy assassination records, which the public had to wait over 60 years to read.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Read more in The Classifieds.

Judge isn’t buying excuses for attacks on LA reporters

A group of journalists and others won a preliminary injunction in federal court on Sept. 11, 2025, placing new restrictions on the Los Angeles Police Department’s violent tactics while policing protests. The day before, they won a similar order against the Department of Homeland Security.

U.S. District Judge Hernán Vera outlined the decades-long history of press freedom abuses at protests in LA and said that “the First Amendment demands better.” We couldn’t agree more. Read more from FPF’s U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.

What we’re reading

Investigative reporter told to stop contacting police in California city (U.S. Press Freedom Tracker). You’d think police would’ve learned to stop messing with journalist Ben Camacho after the City of Los Angeles had to cut him a check for wasting his time with a frivolous lawsuit for publishing public records that they gave him.

China didn’t want you to see this video of Xi and Putin. So Reuters deleted it (The Intercept). When news outlets don’t resist censorship, “journalism’s independence “sinks to the lowest common denominator whenever news of global importance breaks in a country governed by a repressive regime,” Stern told The Intercept.

A tipping point at CBS News (Columbia Journalism Review). An alarming account of corporate meddling in CBS News’ editorial decisions, under new and old ownership alike, to appease the Trump administration and avoid criticizing Israel. And with CBS’s ownership now looking to buy CNN’s parent company, it’s unlikely to stop.

Cindy Cohn is leaving EFF, but not the fight for digital rights (WIRED). A giant in the civil liberties field! We all owe a debt of gratitude to Cindy Cohn for her indelible leadership at the Electronic Frontier Foundation for so many years (and for being our legal counsel at FPF since our founding in 2012).

Kansas prisons reject newspaper subscriptions, blindsiding publishers and cutting off information (Kansas Reflector). We can’t wait to hear Kansas prison officials explain how newspaper subscriptions threaten incarcerated people’s safety.

Boos of Donald Trump heard on ABC’s broadcast of US Open. Good (USA Today). Shame on the U.S. Tennis Association for demanding broadcasters to censor crowd reactions to Trump’s attendance of the U.S. Open men’s tennis final in New York on Sunday.

Register for our upcoming event.

freedom.press/issues/help-us-s…