backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 43 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on May 28 at 10:09 PM

PDF documents from AT&T attorneys reveal details confirming previous allegations of NSA wiretapping

AT&T attorneys released a legal briefing with three pages of redacted information in a PDF format.  Unfortunately for AT&T and the US National Security Agency, the censored information was still readable in many PDF viewing applications.  The document was part of the same EFF lawsuit filed back in February of this year.

The document alluded that a room in one of AT&T's switching centers is dedicated to NSA digital eavesdropping -- complete with backup fiber optic splices and monitoring equipment.  CNET claims the following is part of the censored text with regard to the NSA room: "Although the plaintiffs ominously refer to the equipment as the 'Surveillance Configuration,' the same physical equipment could be utilized exclusively for other surveillance in full compliance with [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]."

This accidental leak of information comes on the heels of a separate document leak incident orchestrated by AT&T insider and whistleblower Mark Klein.  Klein claims he spliced fiber optic cable to a room in an AT&T switching center for the NSA.  That room, it turns out, is the same room mentioned in the PDF document that was improperly censored.

Cable companies have been quick to jump on the negative press surrounding AT&T and its alleged breach of privacy.  Several cable companies including Comcast, Cox and Time Warner, issued statements claiming they will not provide the NSA with unwarranted information.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

If they had a warrant...
By creathir on 5/26/06, Rating: 0
RE: If they had a warrant...
By JonB on 5/26/2006 4:18:47 PM , Rating: 2
that's the deal, though. The NSA never quite bothered getting warrants. It would have been too much trouble, bothering a judge and all.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By rrsurfer1 on 5/26/2006 4:20:12 PM , Rating: 2
I think the point is here, they didn't have a warrant at all. Especially not for unrestricted wiretapping, that kind of warrant would never be issued.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By Duwelon on 5/26/06, Rating: -1
RE: If they had a warrant...
By soydeedo on 5/26/2006 4:51:29 PM , Rating: 1
"calling trends" sounds like a phone company trying to decide if i need a long distance plan. having unwarranted eavesdropping on your telephone conversations is akin to having the possibility that someone could be listening to any/all face to face conversations. i'm not sure about you, but that just makes me uncomfortable and i don't think there are many that like behemoths to look over their shoulders.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By Duwelon on 5/26/06, Rating: -1
RE: If they had a warrant...
By AndreasM on 5/26/2006 5:31:07 PM , Rating: 2
Who cares if it's legal or not? It's WRONG.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By deeznuts on 5/26/2006 4:51:55 PM , Rating: 2
Slippery slope. Yeah this is fine, what's next? If it was legal, then fine. But apparently this is illegal.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By Duwelon on 5/26/2006 4:56:05 PM , Rating: 2
How apparrent is it that it's illegal? I'm not saying it's not, although it shouldn't be imo, though i'm not saying i'm FOR actual evesdropping. Just cause it's on the news and some group is up in arms about it, doesn't mean it's illegal.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By smitty3268 on 5/26/2006 7:27:13 PM , Rating: 2
It directly breaks the FISA law that Congress passed back in the 70's. Of course, the administration claims that the Constitution gives them the right to break that law for national security purposes.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By creathir on 5/26/06, Rating: -1
RE: If they had a warrant...
By Martin Blank on 5/26/2006 7:12:07 PM , Rating: 2
Grand juries do not decide matters of guilt or innocence. They listen to evidence brought by prosecutors (defense attorneys are rarely, if ever, allowed to present counter-evidence), and decide if there's a reasonable chance of success at trial. If so, they hand down an indictment, which allows the prosecutors to actually take the case to court, where a normal jury (or a judge, if a jury trial is waived or under certain other conditions, such as FISA) decide the guilt or innocence of the accused party.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By rrsurfer1 on 5/26/2006 4:54:55 PM , Rating: 4
Well, you and the people you've "actualy talked to about this" may be OK with the NSA violating our rights to "secure our country" but many are certainly not. Many others including myself see this as invasion of privacy.

If we did everything possible to "secure our country" we would be living in a police state. The NSA had no right to create these indexes (if thats all they are, which is questionable, that's all that been PROVEN).


RE: If they had a warrant...
By Duwelon on 5/26/06, Rating: 0
RE: If they had a warrant...
By smokenjoe on 5/26/2006 5:11:18 PM , Rating: 2
This is scary that some people have no idea what think kind of thing meas- basicly they can listen to your converstations with no real limit if they decide you are one of the enimy then they can start attacking your frends or start taking your converstations out of context and prossicuting you for it. Go read your history there are plenty of examples why we have a constitution.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By CrystalBay on 5/26/2006 5:45:12 PM , Rating: 2
they're gonna do it anyways no matter who's in charge. So you can't do any thing about it , except stop doing what's is bothering you concious...


RE: If they had a warrant...
By mindless1 on 5/28/2006 10:05:31 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, NO. They weren't, but now are. Clearly there was a change in policy.

Don't pretend it has anything to do with conscience, I'm sure there are things you do innocently every day that could be twisted into sounding nefarious, and of course you wouldn't be aware at the time because it wasn't.


RE: If they had a warrant...
By rrsurfer1 on 5/26/2006 5:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
I can think of so many examples... I'm sure if you think about it you can too.

1) A senator is calling another senator frequently to discuss a new bill. This information would be valuable to many different groups.

2) A CEO makes calls to a competitor discussing a merger.



RE: If they had a warrant...
By Motley on 5/26/06, Rating: -1
RE: If they had a warrant...
By gramboh on 5/26/2006 5:58:32 PM , Rating: 4
It's funny, the people that support measures like this accuse the opposition of being paranoid and over-reacting, yet the people supporting the measures are paranoid themselves of an imminent but unknown 'threat' to U.S. security.