It’s beginning to look as if one of the first returns SBC is getting from
its $16 billion acquisition of AT&T is a legal and public relations
nightmare.
The old Ma Bell, it seems, has no problem with turning over your
e-mail to the National Security Agency (NSA).
No warrant? No problem.
According to a lawsuit filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF),
AT&T apparently didn’t blink when the NSA approached the telecom
giant in the aftermath of 9/11 for help in mounting what the EFF called a
“massive and illegal program to wiretap and data-mine Americans’
communications.”
Most of the EFF’s proof is currently under a court seal, but the key witness
in the EFF lawsuit has gone public.
“Based on my understanding of the connections and equipment at issue, it
appears the NSA is capable of conducting what amounts to vacuum-cleaner
surveillance of all the data crossing the Internet — whether that be
people’s e-mail, Web surfing or any other data,” former AT&T technician Mark
Klein said in a statement released by his lawyers.
AT&T, according to Klein, is supplying all the data for the NSA’s data-mining activities.
Klein claims AT&T has secret rooms in company facilities in San Francisco,
San Jose, Los Angeles, San Diego and Seattle containing data-mining
equipment, made by Mountain View, Calif.-based Narus, that serves as a
“semantic traffic analyzer.”
“The Narus technology is known to be used particularly by government
intelligence agencies because of its ability to sift through large amounts
of data looking for pre-programmed targets,” Klein stated.
In his statement, Klein said his duties at AT&T included overseeing the
company’s Worldnet Internet room, where he discovered fiber optic cables
channeling e-mail to the Narus equipment.
“While doing my job, I learned that fiber optic cables from the secret room
were tapping into the Worldnet circuits by splitting off a portion of the
light signal,” Klein stated.
Klein added he has design documents that instructed technicians on how to
connect circuits to the Narus equipment.
“The circuits listed were peering links, which connect Worldnet with other
networks and hence the whole country, as well as the rest of the world,”
Klein said.
AT&T’s reaction to all this is not exactly a ringing denial. Admitting
nothing, AT&T went to court earlier this week to argue that Klein’s
documents shouldn’t be used in the EFF lawsuit. And they want the docs
back.
In other words, blame the whistleblower. Beyond that, AT&T has nothing to
say.
The EFF, on the other hand, has plenty to say.
“The evidence that we are filing supports our claim that AT&T is diverting
Internet traffic into the hands of the NSA wholesale in violation of
federal wiretapping laws and the Fourth Amendment,” EFF staff attorney Kevin
Bankston said earlier this month.
“More than just threatening individuals’ privacy, AT&T’s apparent choice to
give the government secret, direct access to millions of ordinary Americans’
Internet communications is a threat to the Constitution itself. We are
asking the court to put a stop to it now.”
In addition to Klein’s statements and documents, the EFF evidence of AT&T’s
“dragnet surveillance of its networks” includes expert testimony by J. Scott
Marcus, who served as an Internet technology senior advisor for the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) from 2001 to 2005.
“The public deserves to know about AT&T’s illegal program,” said EFF Legal
Director Cindy Cohn. “In an abundance of caution, we are providing AT&T with
an opportunity to explain itself before this material goes on the public
docket, but we believe that justice will ultimately require full
disclosure.”
If that happens, SBC may well be second-guessing its decision to adopt the
AT&T name.
“AT&T is a name with a proud
heritage known and respected around the globe,” SBC said when it changed names.
If the courts prove that AT&T facilitated massive domestic spying, that respect
is going to take a hit. And it should.
