Security Cameras & Recording: California Privacy Law Basics for Patrol Programs

The basic legal landscape

Penal Code Section 632 makes it generally unlawful to record a confidential communication without the consent of all parties, which is why two-way audio recording by security systems and body cameras raises different legal questions than silent video. Video-only surveillance in common areas — parking lots, lobbies, hallways — where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy is generally treated differently, but placement in restrooms, locker rooms, or private residential interiors raises separate legal and, in some cases, criminal exposure under other Penal Code sections addressing invasion of privacy.

Posted notice that a property is under video surveillance is a common best practice and, in some contexts, expected by tenants or required by lease/CC&R disclosures, even where not universally mandated by a single statute. Body-worn cameras on security officers add another layer: if audio recording is included, consent and notice practices should be built around Penal Code 632 and any applicable local ordinance.

What this does NOT authorize

• It does not authorize hidden audio recording of conversations without consent under Penal Code 632's two-party consent rule.
• It does not authorize camera placement in restrooms, changing areas, or other spaces with a recognized expectation of privacy.
• It does not eliminate the value of a written camera and recording policy reviewed by counsel, particularly for HOAs and multifamily properties with resident privacy questions.
• It is not a substitute for consulting an attorney on a specific camera, body-cam, or recording program design.