Residents press Ridgecrest council on citywide vehicle‑monitoring cameras and security flaws

During public comment, several residents urged Ridgecrest officials to review and reconsider the city’s vehicle‑monitoring camera system and related data practices. A resident, Mike LeCitra, presented a white paper from an information‑security researcher alleging that the cameras capture multiple images per vehicle, extract identifying details (plate, make/model, color and other characteristics), and upload data to a cloud repository with retention periods the commenter said ranged from 30 days to as long as a year.

LeCitra and other callers raised technical security concerns: the white paper, as summarized, said the devices run an outdated Android build, lack encrypted internal storage, have an unlocked bootloader and an enabled Android Debug Bridge (ADB) mechanism that could be activated via a device hotspot, and do not enforce two‑factor authentication for cloud access. The commenter said investigators found passwords from other police departments on black‑market sites and argued that the combination of device and cloud vulnerabilities leaves the community exposed.

Other callers echoed privacy and governance concerns and noted possible future use of drones by police. Council members acknowledged the comments and asked staff with decision authority on the camera system to review the white paper and meet with the commenter and the vendor to verify the claims and document any security gaps. One council member explicitly asked staff to examine whether a USB‑style attack or similar vector could enable unauthorized access.

The meeting record shows no formal action to pause or suspend the surveillance system; council members asked staff to look into the issues and report back. Several residents requested public disclosure of search logs and access records from the system; staff and council did not provide those logs during the meeting and directed staff to follow up.