ON
← Back to feed
The Pentagon gets flocked in a no-bid contract. What could go wrong?
United States🏛️ PoliticsProgressiveOverlooked by conservatives10 days ago

The Pentagon gets flocked in a no-bid contract. What could go wrong?

The article discusses concerns surrounding the Pentagon's use of Flock cameras, which are automated license plate readers installed in Pentagon parking lots. These cameras, part of a broader effort to enhance security, have raised alarms due to potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could allow unauthorized access to sensitive data about national security personnel. Critics argue that Flock's devices may be susceptible to hacking, exposing the movements of defense officials and posing a national security risk. Privacy advocates and lawmakers, including Senators Ron Wyden and Raja Krishnamoorthy, have expressed alarm over these risks, with Wyden criticizing the installation of internet-connected cameras in a high-security location. The Pentagon's procurement process involved a no-bid contract with M.C. Dean Inc., raising questions about transparency and oversight in the acquisition of security technologies.

The Pentagon has contracted the installation of Flock cameras under a no-bid contract, raising concerns about potential security risks and privacy violations. At least nine Flock automated license plate readers (ALPRs) are currently monitoring traffic lanes leading to the Pentagon’s parking lots, including those used by defense department personnel. These cameras aim to help security forces identify vehicles that may pose a threat. However, critics argue that the devices' alleged vulnerabilities could allow unauthorized users to access sensitive information about national security officials. Concerns about Flock’s cybersecurity practices have led to public backlash, including protests and contract cancellations. Some individuals have raised alarms about the possibility of these devices being exploited by hackers or foreign adversaries. In response, Flock has claimed that its systems have “never been hacked.” Nevertheless, critics challenge this assertion, citing multiple methods through which the devices could be accessed by unauthorized users. These concerns prompted two members of Congress, Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), to request an investigation into Flock’s cybersecurity practices. Wyden expressed skepticism about the Pentagon’s decision to deploy the cameras, suggesting that sharing such data with adversarial nations would be akin to sending it directly to China, Russia, and Iran. In late 2021, the Defense Department awarded a contract to M.C. Dean Inc., a Virginia-based firm, to enhance the Pentagon’s electronic and physical security systems. This contract is structured as an “Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity” agreement, allowing the DOD to issue smaller contracts directly to M.C. Dean whenever new requirements emerge. Although the Pentagon does not have a direct relationship with Flock Safety, it has acquired Flock’s products through these delivery orders. The desire for increased security is evident, given the Pentagon’s history of targeted attacks since the September 11, 2001, tragedy. One notable incident occurred almost a year after M.C. Dean began its work, when a Virginia man attempted to drive through the Pentagon’s checkpoints and was intercepted by security forces. He confessed to trying to “kill people,” and the incident underscored the importance of measures like the active vehicle barriers and traffic arms that M.C. Dean was tasked with implementing. Despite these efforts, some aspects of the contract have sparked questions about whether increased spending translates to greater security. In May 2023, the DOD issued a delivery order to M.C. Dean indicating its intent to proceed with further installations. Meanwhile, a cybersecurity researcher named Joshua Michael has compiled a comprehensive map of Flock’s surveillance network, revealing over 170,000 cameras and more than 130,000 associated devices across the United States. This map, based on data from Flock’s own records, highlights the extent of the company’s presence, including clusters near major airports and within detention centers. Michael noted that these devices enable foreign entities to monitor the movements of government officials without the need for espionage. His findings were presented during a Senate Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism hearing. Michael discovered a method to access Flock’s location data by exploiting publicly accessible endpoints on the company’s servers. He informed Flock of his findings through multiple attempts, but received no response. His research underscores ongoing concerns about the transparency and security of Flock’s surveillance infrastructure.

How this report was made. Objective News wrote this report from 2 source articles, using AI-assisted synthesis under our methodology. It is our own text, not a copy of any single outlet. Read our methodology.

Responsible editor: Matej BašaSpotted an error? Report it

2 reports

The Intercept logoThe InterceptIndependentProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 8011 days ago
Flock Wants the Most Detailed Map of Its Surveillance Cameras Taken Offline

A cybersecurity researcher named Joshua Michael created a detailed map revealing over 300,000 Flock surveillance devices across the United States, significantly exceeding previously reported numbers. The map, based on Flock's internal data archived in December 2025, includes cameras, acoustic sensors, and networking equipment used in Flock's surveillance system. The findings were presented during a Senate Subcommittee hearing on Floc k's activities. The map highlights the extent of Flock's surveillance capabilities, including installations near critical infrastructure like the FBI headquarters and within detention facilities. While Flock has not responded to inquiries, the research underscores growing concerns about the scale and implications of private-sector surveillance networks.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames Flock's surveillance practices as a significant national security concern, emphasizing the potential risks to privacy and civil liberties. It highlights the extensive reach of Flock's network and suggests that such capabilities could be exploited by foreign entities, implying a 'm

Why factuality: no official source document/info detected

Why objectivity (80): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting facts and quotes from the researcher and the Senate hearing without overtly expressing judgment. It reports on the findings and implications without injecting strong personal opinions or emotional language, though it does highlight the significance of

Responsible Statecraft logoResponsible StatecraftParty-alignedProgressiveFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 6510 days ago
The Pentagon gets flocked in a no-bid contract. What could go wrong?

The article discusses concerns surrounding the Pentagon's use of Flock cameras, which are automated license plate readers installed in Pentagon parking lots. These cameras, part of a broader effort to enhance security, have raised alarms due to potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could allow unauthorized access to sensitive data about national security personnel. Critics argue that Flock's devices may be susceptible to hacking, exposing the movements of defense officials and posing a national security risk. Privacy advocates and lawmakers, including Senators Ron Wyden and Raja Krishnamoorthy, have expressed alarm over these risks, with Wyden criticizing the installation of internet-connected cameras in a high-security location. The Pentagon's procurement process involved a no-bid contract with M.C. Dean Inc., raising questions about transparency and oversight in the acquisition of security technologies.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the controversy around Flock's cybersecurity vulnerabilities as a significant national security risk, emphasizing the potential exposure of sensitive data and the involvement of lawmakers who criticize the company's track record. While the article presents both sides (Flock's deni

Why factuality: no official source document/info detected

Why objectivity (65): The tone of the article leans toward critical and cautionary, emphasizing the potential risks of using Flock's technology. It presents the concerns raised by critics and privacy advocates but does not balance these views with counterarguments or perspectives from Flock or government officials. The l

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.

Become a Supporter

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €4/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories