A recent discovery highlights a concerning directive within law enforcement in Wapello County, Iowa, regarding the use of **Flock Safety** ALPR cameras. A usage policy for these automated license plate reader cameras explicitly instructs police to maintain secrecy about their deployment. The policy document states, in no uncertain terms: “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE TO THE OCCUPANTS OF THE VEHICLE,” and further, “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE IN YOUR REPORT OR COMPLAINT UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.” This instruction to conceal the use of a widespread surveillance technology raises significant questions about transparency and public accountability. For IT security professionals and privacy-conscious users, this echoes a familiar pattern. The situation draws parallels to the controversies surrounding **IMSI-catchers**—devices like the **Stingray**—which were used by law enforcement decades ago to intercept mobile phone communications. In those instances, police departments often went to extreme lengths to hide their existence and usage, leading to prolonged legal and ethical debates. The push for secrecy around ALPR usage could erode public trust and complicate legal challenges, particularly when the data collected by these cameras is used in arrests or investigations. Understanding the full scope and policy of such surveillance tools is crucial for safeguarding civil liberties in an increasingly monitored environment.