Latest news with #ALPR
CBS News
5 days ago
- CBS News
When license plate readers get it wrong
In 2018, Brian Hofer and his younger brother were driving to visit their parents for Thanksgiving. It should have been a routine trip. But that evening they found themselves held at gunpoint by a group of law enforcement officers. The incident was the result of technology gone wrong. Hofer's vehicle had been flagged as stolen by an Automated License Plate Reader — ALPR — system. When he drove by, the reader alerted authorities. "Your life definitely is different after you have guns pointed at you," he said. This incident is one of over a dozen cases verified by CBS News during a six-month investigation into incidents of wrongful stops and even several instances of ALPR technology being abused. The consequences of ALPR errors can range from the inconvenient — such as mistaken toll booth charges — to the potentially dangerous, such as Hofer's armed detainment. In some instances the technology was improperly used by authorities, such as in Kansas, where law enforcement officers used license plate reader systems to stalk former partners in two separate incidents. In use since at least the late 1990s, automated license plate reader systems have advanced quickly in recent years. They now marry high-speed, high-resolution cameras with artificial intelligence to scan every license plate passing through a designated field of vision. The data is then compared against license plate numbers in databases. Thousands of agencies use these systems daily to scan plates in real time and identify potential matches. Departments use ALPRs as a crime-fighting tool to gather evidence for investigations and reduce crime as well as for traffic compliance. According to a survey from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, every police department overseeing more than one million citizens reported using the technology, as did 90% of sheriff's offices with 500 or more sworn deputies. Law enforcement officials told CBS News that the technology has allowed them to do their job more efficiently and has helped solve crimes ranging from stolen vehicles to missing persons cases. Pat Yoes, the national president of The National Fraternal Order of Police, an organization of hundreds of thousands of sworn law enforcement officers, said in an emailed statement to CBS News that ALPRs are "extraordinarily important in cases where there is an immediate threat to life or safety, as in an abduction or an armed threat driving to a target," adding that the information can be valuable in generating leads and closing cases. He said transparency is key. "The community should be made aware of the new technology, how it's used in the field, how it contributes to public safety, and how it addresses any privacy concerns," he said in the statement. "Technology like ALPRs is a valuable tool for many law enforcement agencies to make their communities safer." The rise of ALPR systems comes as law enforcement agencies across the country face staffing and recruiting challenges. A 2024 survey by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, a professional association, found that U.S. agencies are operating at a nearly 10% staffing deficit. ALPR technology is one way to help fill this gap in manpower. License plate reader errors may occur for a variety of reasons. In some cases, letters or numbers are interpreted incorrectly by the Optical Character Recognition, or OCR, software. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, common issues including glare or misaligned cameras could impact accuracy. CBS News found that mistakes are often due to a mix of machine and human or administrative errors. In Española, New Mexico, a 12-year-old was handcuffed after an ALPR camera misread the last number of a license plate on a vehicle driven by her older sister as a '7' instead of the '2' it actually ended with, according to a lawsuit filed against the city. A month later, in a separate incident, a 17-year-old honors student was held at gunpoint in Española on his way home from school after officers mistook his vehicle for one associated with an individual who was being sought in connection with a string of armed robberies. In Aurora, Colorado, in 2020, a mother and her family, including her 6-year-old daughter, were pulled over at gunpoint and forced to lie face down on hot pavement. Again, ALPR technology was central to the stop. Police mistakenly flagged their Colorado license plate as matching that of a completely different vehicle from a different state — a stolen motorcycle registered in Montana. The incident, captured on video and widely condemned, led to a $1.9 million settlement from the city in 2024. The ACLU warns ALPR cameras could infringe on civil rights and violate the Constitution's Fourth Amendment by encouraging unreasonable searches. Despite widespread use, there is no federal legislative framework for ALPR use. Hofer, who has been involved in privacy advocacy for over a decade, is now the executive director of Secure Justice, an organization that aims to reduce government and corporate overreach. He says manual verification is necessary to see whether ALPR "hits," or matches, are accurate. Even so, he said, such checks are insufficient because data errors could cause a plate to "match" an incorrect entry in a database. "There are billions of scans a day in America. If there's even just a 10% error rate, that means there are so many opportunities for abuse to happen," Hofer said. Some concerned citizens are taking action. Last year, residents of Norfolk, Virginia, filed a federal lawsuit against the city, and in Illinois, two residents have sued the Illinois State Police over ALPR systems, arguing that their use violates Fourth Amendment rights. The latter case was dismissed without prejudice in Denault contributed to this report.
CTV News
6 days ago
- CTV News
Stolen vehicle, illegal drugs seized, suspects arrested in road stop
A Windsor Police Service cruiser is seen in this image from October 2018. (Source: Windsor police) The Windsor Police Service has seized a stolen vehicle and illegal drugs and arrested two suspects, thanks to automated license plate recognition (ALPR) technology. Just after 11 p.m. on Saturday, an officer got an ALPR alert while in the 3300 block of Walker Road, notifying of a stolen plate. An investigation ensued and the WPS confirmed the 2013 pick-up truck was reported stolen in Essex. A traffic stop was conducted by officers and both the driver and passenger were arrested. Officers seized 34 grams of crystal methamphetamine, two digital scales, two knives, brass knuckles, and cash from the truck. A 39-year-old woman is now facing charges for possession of a scheduled substance for trafficking, possession of property obtained by crime, and possession of a prohibited weapon. A 62-year-old man is charged with possession of property obtained by crime.
Boston Globe
22-07-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Surveillance tech company Flock Safety opens offices in Boston
The Boston office, opened Tuesday, is Flock's first expansion outside of its home in Atlanta. The new office will focus on sales and engineering. Advertisement Flock's co-founder and chief people officer Paige Todd said that opening a new location in Seaport was an easy decision. The company recently hired senior sales officers from Boston, who advocated for an office in the city. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Flock Safety co-founder and chief people officer Paige Todd AMY JONATHAN EAKIN_ Boston, they said, offered its access to university graduates and technology partners, especially in artificial intelligence and engineering. Flock's largest rival, the taser maker Axon, also opened an office in Boston last year. 'It's always a good sign to see a company is choosing to expand in Boston,' Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce spokesperson Casey Baines said in an interview. 'Our talent and workforce is going to benefit.' Flock was founded in 2017 by Georgia Tech alums, Garrett Langley, and Matt Feury, and Todd, initially building surveillance cameras by hand. The company later created a platform that centralizes data collected from Flock's cameras and makes the data easy to share with other user Advertisement Donald Maye, head of operations at the tech research company IPVM, said Flock has modeled its technology after social media platforms, which become more powerful as more users join. More than 5,000 law enforcement agencies use Flock's platform, according to the company. 'They aggressively invest in sales and marketing,' Maye said. 'They used the engine of developing relationships with police departments and using those relationships to sell other police departments.' Flock's ALPR cameras are scattered across the state and country and are monitored by local law enforcement agencies. Those agencies can 'opt-in' to share or receive data from other agencies — including from other states — creating a 'network' of centralized license plate data. Flock says the system automatically erases that data after 30 days, although it may keep it for further investigations. Flock provides flexibility to how law enforcements choose to use the technology, Todd said. If an agency decides it wants data to be erased after seven days, it could change the settings to do so. Agencies can also opt-in for a 'transparency portal,' a public webpage with general information on the agency's use of Flock devices, such as how many cameras they use and how many motor vehicles are logged in each month. Some agencies also allow access to their audit logs, which show each time an officer looks up information in the Flock system. Todd said Flock is aware of the controversial aspect of their products. Advertisement 'It is a daily conversation,' Todd said. 'How do we ensure privacy is protected while also giving law enforcement the tools they need to solve crime?' The American Civil Liberties Union calls the technology's ability to track every person regardless of whether they committed a crime unconstitutional. Without clear state policies, law enforcement agencies can abuse the centralized system, said Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty Program at ACLU Massachusetts. Officers with access to the system can search for any license plate they desire, even without a warrant. Officers could use the system to track women who travel out-of-state to seek abortion care, look up undocumented individuals, or even — as in one reported case — track an ex-wife, said Crockford. 'Privacy is not controversial,' said Crockford. 'I have no problems with companies doing business in Boston. I just want to make sure that lawmaking and public policy is done in the interest of residents and the public.' Flock has recently expanded its products beyond its cameras. It also developed gunshot sound detection sensors and in April invested in a drone system to aid in car pursuits. Todd said the company is looking to collaborate with other tech companies in Boston as it continues to grow. In New England, only Massachusetts and Rhode Island are without laws regulating the use of license plate recognition systems. Earlier this year, state Representative Steven Owens, Democrat of Watertown, filed the Drivers Privacy Act, which would limit how long data could be stored and prevent agencies from tracking activity protected by the First Amendment. Yogev Toby can be reached at
Time Business News
17-07-2025
- Automotive
- Time Business News
How does traffic camera work and can they be fooled?
Traffic cameras are a common sight on highways and city streets, used to monitor traffic flow and enforce laws. Many drivers wonder how traffic cameras work and whether there are ways to bypass or obscure them. While traffic cameras are designed to capture violations such as speeding, red-light running, and illegal turns, some technologies claim to reduce their effectiveness. In this article, we'll explore the science behind highway traffic cameras and examine whether methods like nanofilm for license plate solutions actually work. Traffic cameras use various imaging and sensor technologies to capture and record violations. These systems operate automatically, often without human intervention, making them highly efficient for law enforcement. High-Speed Photography: Cameras take multiple pictures within milliseconds to ensure a clear image of the vehicle and license plate. Cameras take multiple pictures within milliseconds to ensure a clear image of the vehicle and license plate. Infrared and Low-Light Imaging: Many cameras use infrared light to capture plates even in poor lighting conditions or at night. Many cameras use infrared light to capture plates even in poor lighting conditions or at night. Radar and Inductive Loop Sensors: Speed cameras use radar to measure vehicle speed, while red-light cameras rely on inductive loop sensors embedded in the road to detect when a vehicle enters an intersection illegally. Speed cameras use radar to measure vehicle speed, while red-light cameras rely on inductive loop sensors embedded in the road to detect when a vehicle enters an intersection illegally. Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR): Some cameras use ALPR technology to scan and automatically log plate numbers in databases. Some cameras use ALPR technology to scan and automatically log plate numbers in databases. Advanced Machine Learning: Modern traffic cameras incorporate AI-driven software to detect patterns, classify vehicle types, and recognize repeat offenders. There are different types of highway traffic cameras, each serving a specific purpose. Speed Cameras: Used to detect vehicles traveling over the speed limit. Used to detect vehicles traveling over the speed limit. Red-Light Cameras: Capture vehicles that enter intersections after the signal has turned red. Capture vehicles that enter intersections after the signal has turned red. Toll Cameras: Installed on highways to monitor toll violations and ensure payment compliance. Installed on highways to monitor toll violations and ensure payment compliance. Surveillance Cameras: Used for general traffic monitoring and congestion management. Used for general traffic monitoring and congestion management. Bus Lane and HOV Cameras: Enforce restricted lane usage by identifying unauthorized vehicles. Enforce restricted lane usage by identifying unauthorized vehicles. Mobile Traffic Cameras: Temporary enforcement cameras placed in different locations to catch violators. Many products claim to obscure license plates from traffic cameras, including nanofilm ecoslick license plate solutions and number plate film. But do these methods actually work? A nanofilm for license plate is a specialized material designed to make license plates harder to read under certain conditions. These films work by reflecting or distorting light, potentially interfering with the camera's ability to capture a clear image. Pros: Can make it more difficult for some types of cameras to capture a legible plate. Easy to apply and remove without permanent modifications. Resistant to environmental wear such as rain and dirt. Aside from number plate film solutions – some drivers attempt different tactics to evade detection, including: License Plate Covers: Clear or tinted covers designed to blur plate visibility. Clear or tinted covers designed to blur plate visibility. Reflective Sprays: Claim to cause glare when a camera flash is used. Claim to cause glare when a camera flash is used. Mechanical Plate Flippers: Devices that allow the driver to flip or conceal their plate. Instead of attempting to fool traffic cameras with questionable modifications, drivers can adopt safer and legal alternatives: The best way to avoid tickets is to follow the law. Speed cameras and red-light cameras are only triggered when violations occur. Many municipalities publish lists of active camera locations. GPS apps often provide real-time alerts when approaching a traffic camera. Dashcams with GPS integration can also alert drivers about speed zones and enforcement areas. Dirt, damage, or misalignment can result in incorrect citations. Ensure your plate is clean and clearly visible to avoid unnecessary issues. Always replace old or faded plates that may be difficult for cameras to read. Ensure your plate is properly illuminated at night to prevent misreads. Understanding how traffic cameras work is essential for drivers looking to minimize their chances of receiving fines. While technologies like nanofilm ecoslick license plate solutions and number plate film claim to obscure plates, they often have limited effectiveness and may be illegal. Instead of attempting to fool traffic cameras, drivers should focus on safer and legal alternatives, such as following traffic laws and staying informed about camera locations. By doing so, they can drive with confidence while avoiding unnecessary fines. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Boston Globe
12-07-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
‘Dragnet warrantless surveillance': Advocates raise concerns over license plate tracking database
'This is hugely concerning from a privacy and civil liberties perspective, particularly in communities that have some welcoming city or Trust Act law on the books that restricts information sharing pertaining to immigration,' said Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts. Advertisement In a statement, Flock Safety said that departments must opt-in to share any data from their cameras with the broader network. Departments can choose to keep their data to themselves, share with specific other agencies, set geographic limits, or contribute to a national database, Flock Safety chief executive Garrett Langley Advertisement 'Each city should lay out acceptable and unacceptable use cases for [the system], as determined by the laws and values of its jurisdiction,' Langley wrote. 'And law enforcement agencies should regularly conduct audits to ensure all users are complying with the letter and spirit of those policies.' The Flock Safety data was acquired by the ACLU of Massachusetts following a public records request and shared with the Globe. It shows that 88 police departments in Massachusetts requested information from it over the past 12 months. It is unclear how many of those departments have cameras that share data nationwide, and Flock Safety did not respond to a request for that information. Michael Bradley, executive director of the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, described automatic plate readers as a 'proven public safety tool' typically governed by departmental policies that restrict access to authorized personnel and limit data retention. 'They help locate stolen vehicles, identify vehicles associated with missing or endangered individuals, and support investigations involving violent crime, organized theft, and more,' Bradley wrote in an email. 'When properly used, ALPR systems allow law enforcement to act swiftly and effectively, often in time-sensitive situations, without intruding on the public's civil liberties.' Unlike at least 16 other states, including Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire, Massachusetts has no law specifically regulating the use of ALPR systems. But the expansion of large-scale ALPR networks has prompted efforts to regulate the technology on Beacon Hill. In February, Watertown Representative Steven Owens filed legislation that would prohibit agencies from disclosing ALPR data, except as required by a judicial proceeding, and bar police from using plate recognition systems to track activity protected by the First Amendment. Advertisement The legislation would also set a 14-day limit for retaining ALPR data, unless it is needed for a specific criminal investigation. The legislation has been referred to the Joint Committee on Transportation. The ACLU of Massachusetts has endorsed the legislation, saying it strikes the right balance between recognizing the public safety utility of ALPR systems and protecting driver privacy. 'We have compromised, essentially,' Crockford said. 'It's our view that ideally, this information shouldn't be collected at all.' Holly Beilin, Flock Safety's director of communications, said the company supports 'the goals of legislation that would strengthen privacy protections and look forward to working with the legislature on this important issue.' The 88 agencies listed in the Flock dataset cover municipalities across the state, and range from urban agencies like the Springfield and Lowell police departments to suburbs and small towns. In Bellingham, a Norfolk County town of 17,000 people, the police department signed a deal to have Flock install cameras in 2023, Police Chief Ken Fitzgerald said in an interview. Fitzgerald said one perk of the system is that Flock operates the cameras and maintains the images they capture, cutting down on the administrative burden for the department. 'The nice portion of this for us, I suppose, is that government is not taking pictures or storing pictures of anyone,' he said. 'This is a private company.' That same privatization is worrisome for civil liberties advocates, who have voiced concerns that Flock is not accountable to the Massachusetts public. 'It is dragnet warrantless surveillance that targets all motorists,' Crockford said. 'Not people suspected of criminal activity, but anyone.' In 2020, the Advertisement But the Supreme Judicial Court cautioned that if a larger network of cameras existed, that could track a driver's movements in more detail, it could trigger constitutional protections against warrantless searches. 'In declining to establish a bright-line rule for when the use of ALPRs constitutes a search, we recognize this may bring some interim confusion,' Justice Frank M. Gaziano wrote in the decision. 'We trust, however, that as our cases develop, this constitutional line gradually and appropriately will come into focus.' Five years later, that focus remains elusive, legal analysts said. The SJC has not clarified its ruling, as more sophisticated ALPR networks have reached the market, and there is no Massachusetts legal challenge poised to raise those questions. Dan Dolan, a criminal defense lawyer and professor at New England School of Law, said the SJC's ruling was based on the narrow facts of that case, where a small set of cameras only tracked movements over the Bourne and Sagamore bridges. 'There was certainly, to me, no question they said those devices may constitute some sort of constitutional violation, depending on the amount of data being collected,' Dolan said.
