Today (in my DWG role) I blocked two users who were adding hundreds of apparently fake surveillance nodes, with the DeFlock app, in Texas. It appears that the city, which had not put up any Flock cameras, had to field angry inquiries from citizens about “all that surveillance going on” when it was, in fact, just a couple of vandals.
While vandalism is an everyday issue in OSM, this is by far not the first time we had to roll back someone’s fictional DeFlock edits. OSM is getting into the crossfire between opponents of surveillance cameras and those who would like to sabotage such opposition.
It would be good if the makers of the DeFlock app could add some anti-vandalism features themselves, like perhaps
limiting the number of cameras someone can add in one day especially when their account is new;
doing a plausibility check by comparing the locations added to OSM data (is it likely that 20 Flock cameras surround a playground along a footpath - actual example!);
requesting that people back up their additions with photos which can then be reviewed by other mappers;
employing staff to check contributed data (or to write software that does)
If we cannot get this under control, there might come a time where we will have to say to DeFlock, sorry but we can’t be your data storage backend any more, please build your own database so that the vandalism that DeFlock attracts doesn’t tarnish OSM’s reputation.
This makes me raise my eyebrows. Mapping surveillance is one of the most popular ways people have discovered OpenStreetMap in the past year or two in the United States. It seems out of character for our community to threaten not to store map data in OpenStreetMap.
Has the DWG reached out to DeFlock? I know that the author is active in the OSMUS Slack. Perhaps it would be more productive to have that conversation, and document it, before making threats like the above.
I have been out of town the past 2-3 weeks but we did take some decisions away from the previous mentioned thread and will be implementing them asap. That will include changes to the app. We are also still improving our data monitoring tool and are still looking for more folks willing to lend a hand watching it.
And I’ve created an OSM-DeFlock admins chat on Signal; still filling that out but would love to have a DWG person or two in there as well.
We’ve talked about limiting the number of cameras someone can submit, but I’d almost rather these accounts stand out in that way on our monitoring tool. Suppressing the volume of nodes could actually make it harder to spot bad data being submitted. Happy to hear thoughts/suggestions though.
The plausibility check is something our moderation tool does right now (albeit after the fact); integrating that into the app would take considerable effort, at least until we add vector tiles. Also potentially has the same issue as above, helping bad data blend in.
Images has been on the roadmap for a while. It’ll end up being a lot of garbage as well, but easier to spot. It’ll require a second login/auth flow for wikidata or similar, but that’ll get integrated with our monitoring tool when it happens.
We do have 6-8 people working on data quality monitoring and moderation at the moment. Looking for more!
We wouldn’t “not store map data”, we would block an editor app that brings more too much trouble in relationship to the useful data it adds. That is not without precedent. You would still be able to add map data, including surveillance cameras, with other software. I don’t think we are at such a point yet, that’s why I wrote “there might come a time” - meaning if this escalates further.
Yes, I’ve made Bob aware of this thread. It’s not something that I wanted to discuss privately though.
Over this last week, I’ve also been fighting against the same thing happening in Gillette, Wyoming, where ~700 fictitious cameras have also been mapped (although also including, amusingly enough, one being mapped in the middle of the Strait of Hormuz!).
As Frederik said, we really need things to happen at your end to help prevent this sort of thing.
Can I suggest that everybody takes a deep breath and calms down? I was already going to weigh in on the Canadian thread with it’s over the top rhetoric, but here is likely better.
Given this is simple to undo and limited in scope, starting one of the infamous OSM witch hunts is not required, there is no reason to believe that this can’t be brought under control.
PS: I know it is a US thing to immediately jump to proprietary platforms for discussion, but I would suggest simply using Matrix instead.
PPS: anybody can set up an OSMCha OSMCha filter for new users and ALPR tagging.
Have recategorized all “Flock” camera nodes in Napanee, Ontario to generic surveillance CCTV cameras (these nodes generated significant public concern and panic). All of these nodes were by @Geezer1. Messaged them notifying them of this and my rationale for doing so.
Now that you mention it, the brand name does feel susceptible to becoming a genericized trademark. Over in id-tagging-schema we’ve been mulling adding “nest” and “ring” as search terms for a doorbell camera preset – which would be helpful for mappers who see a Panasonic or whatever and only know of the leading brand.
As the name implies, DeFlock is originally for recording and avoiding Flock cameras, though it’s slightly broader than that these days. By default, when you add a new node, you can select from a list of “profiles” that’s prepopulated with common ALPR makes and models. You can add a custom profile in settings that has an arbitrary set of tags.
That said, as DeFlock expands beyond its original user base in the U.S., it might be an opportunity to expand the scope further. I’ve even heard that the application is technically capable of generating routes that avoid arbitrary objects like drinking fountains and traffic signs. (You never know these days.)
It does - it’s a generic node editor client for OSM. Just comes with certain preset tag sets we call “profiles.” One of my favorite demos when explaining how deflock/osm work is to create a profile for amenity=bench.
One of the things that’s been on my todo list for too long is updating https://deflock.org/identify with a lot more importable tag profiles (including non-surveillance things) and creating a profile builder tool. Once that’s done, I will integrate it with the app so people actually see it.
Does the deflock app support any kind of notifications for changeset comments? I’ve had trouble getting in contact with deflock contributors to ask them to refine the location or check the manufacturer again.
People seem to be marking an Atlanta-area address floating around the internet that is ostensibly that of Flock’s CEO with multiple ALPR/Flock cameras, e.g. Changeset: 188271424 | OpenStreetMap
