NYPD Halts Sole-Source Surveillance Deal with Israeli Firm Cognyte Amid Privacy Concerns

The New York Police Department (NYPD) has faced growing privacy concerns over its proposed $750,500 surveillance deal with Israeli technology firm Cognyte. The agreement, valued at up to £564,732, involves the purchase of FalcoNet, a portable cellphone-tracking system. The proposal, initially announced in December 2025, was based on a sole-source procurement process, which the NYPD claimed was necessary because Cognyte exclusively supplied the required equipment and services.

The controversy escalated on 26 October 2026 when the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.) condemned the planned purchase. The group raised alarms about the potential for widespread surveillance and the risk of innocent individuals being monitored without suspicion. The NYPD responded by announcing on 27 October that it would restart the procurement process through open competition, though Cognyte remains eligible to submit a bid.

According to official procurement records, the NYPD sought a three-year contract with Cognyte Technology Inc., covering FalcoNet hardware, software, training, and support services. The equipment was intended for the NYPD’s Technical Assistance and Response Unit, which provides specialist technical support during investigations. However, the portability of the system, which can operate from vehicles and other mobile platforms, has drawn particular attention.

FalcoNet is part of a category of technology known as cell-site simulators, commonly referred to as stingrays. These devices mimic mobile phone towers, prompting nearby phones to communicate with them and potentially revealing identifying information about devices within range. Their ability to detect multiple phones simultaneously has raised concerns about the collection of data involving individuals who are not suspected of wrongdoing.

Privacy advocates have questioned whether expanding the department’s surveillance capabilities could expose innocent New Yorkers to unnecessary monitoring. The proposed equipment’s portability has intensified these concerns, as such systems can be deployed from mobile platforms, increasing the scope of potential surveillance.

S.T.O.P. also raised concerns about the artificial intelligence capabilities of the technology, though the precise functions proposed for the NYPD have not been publicly established. The procurement notices identify the equipment and contract value without providing a comprehensive technical explanation of its data-processing capabilities. This lack of transparency has fueled further scrutiny and calls for legislative action to regulate the use of such surveillance tools.

The case highlights the broader issue of Israeli technology exports and their potential implications for privacy and civil liberties. As the NYPD moves forward with its procurement process, the debate over the balance between security and individual rights continues to unfold.

Source: Read the original report