Slashdot Mirror
AT&T Seeks to Hide Spy Docs
UltimaGuy writes to mention a Wired article about some AT&T documents that have gone off the farm. An ex-employee provided some information to the EFF, to assist in their wiretapping case against the company. Ma Bell is now arguing the files are confidential, and shouldn't be used in a court case. From the article: "The documents, which the EFF filed under a temporary seal last Wednesday, purportedly detail how AT&T diverts internet traffic to the National Security Agency via a secret room in San Francisco and allege that such rooms exist in other AT&T switching centers."
If a civilian has the docs, they can go after him, but there's no fourth amendment protections here. It'd take somebody in the administration classifying them to make them officially restricted.
Just cause AT&T doesn't want them out there doesn't mean squat.
I just wonder how long it will be before Mark Klein is repaid for his heroic and patriotic act with legal action from AT&T, a la Stephen Heller / Diebold.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
In papers filed late Monday, AT&T argued that confidential technical documents provided by an ex-AT&T technician to the Electronic Frontier Foundation shouldn't be used as evidence in the case and should be returned.
Big whoop. Copy the documents and hand them back to AT&T. What's the problem? Now that the genie is out of the secret room, so to speak, how does AT&T think this is going to help? They've just received a pretty severe black eye, though most of the public really doesn't know the details, despite the publicity. If I were AT&T, I'd maintain a low profile -- raising a fuss only makes more people get interested in what's in the documents.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
And all of this in "The land of the Free". Makes you wonder.
200GB/2TB $7.95 Coupon: SAVE90DOLLAR
In addition, if this surveillence operation is true, then he may be harming national security
No, the surveillence operation itself is harming national security. I am America, you are America. The government isn't supposed to be America, "We, the people" are supposed to be America.
Spy on me, you make me insecure. MY security from the government itself is national security.
I'd rather have Bin Laden kill half of Congress than give up my 4th amendment rights. Without our (now nearly worthless) Constitution, this isn't America.
I'm starting to worry that America died on 9/11. America's bravery sure died, and the America I used to know died.
Next November, please don't waste your vote on terrorists like the Republicans and Democrats -- vote third party!
Echelon. I'm surprised no one has mentioned so far.
More info, for those who has never heard of it before:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON
All rites reversed 2010
[alerting terrorists that they are being watched.]
What kind of idiot do you have to be to believe that terrorists don't realise they're being watched? I realise the "Take my rights away, please! They scare me!" crowd overlaps somewhat with the "Those Ay-rabs sure do enjoy having sex with camels!" crowd, but do you honestly believe al-Qaeda is stupid enough to not realise they're being surveilled?
Sorry, but that's bullshit.
Defending your privacy has nothing to do with admitting guilt. Do you think there could possibly be trade secrets in those documents somehow unrelated to the charges against AT&T?
A good example here might be a court trying to admit as evidence your complete credit card purchase history in an attempt to prove acts of terrorism. Even if there was *nothing* in there linking you to terrorism, you might seriously object to the disclosure of it, would you not? And I just love double standard concept of law... Should have two versions of the law, one where corporations are Guilty until proven innocent?
I'd love to see them nailed against the wall as much as the next guy, but let's not become hypocrits in the process, ok? AT&T has the right to contest public disclosure of internal documents as much as you do.
Yes and no.... In a perfect world, yes -- it would help fight terrorism; even if the terrorists are using encryption there is meta-data there to be mined.... when you cross-reference the data begin and end points you can still get the jist of what may be going on; do so with *ALL* traffic on the 'net and you can certainly learn something useful.
On the other hand, it would have been clear to a child that Osama and friends were going to take over commerical jets for nefarious deeds long before 9-11 if they'd had access to all the same information that was circulating in the 'intelligence community'. As you say, the problem was (in-part) the disability to tie all that information into a cohesive report that the top-brass would listen and react to in time to make a difference.
Gathering more information is useless if it's not properly filtered and disseminated.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seuss
I vaguely recall a case in which an inventor was denied the right to pursue a patent infringement case based upon the grounds of government security concerns. Unfortunately, I cannot recall the specific circumstances of the case, perhaps someone else can help me clarify. Nevertheless...
If the government decides that this case threatens national security this case will never make it to the deposition stage...much less a trial hearing. AT&T merely has to seek intervention from the government on their behalf. With the corroboration of the government this case will get squelched in no time flat. And, in theory, all that should required is the statement that this technology was developed under contract for the US government. At this point such a statement should have little damning effect as our executive as effectively admitted outright to extra-judicial wiretapping.
On a slightly different note, am I the only one who is having flashbacks of the Echelon and FBI Carnivore projects?
"09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0"
YES! People have rights - they're people. Corporations have no entitlement to the same rights.
I am trolling
The threat to American citizens is massively overstated- you are far, far more likely to die in an accident, of a disease, or hell, even of a drug overdose than in a terrorist attack. Of all the potential causes of death in this country, terrorist strike is waaaaaay in the back. You're allowing yourself to be manipulated into being afraid, and allowing them to use your fear to destroy the liberties that make America great. Your fear is contemptible- your capitulation is disgusting.
And I just love double standard concept of law... Should have two versions of the law, one where corporations are Guilty until proven innocent?
Not double standard, but a higher standard. We must hold those that we put into a position of power to a higher standard. I believe those who write and enforce the law(or have undue influence) should pay a much higher price if they break it. Then they might be more careful about the laws they write. We must remind them that their jobs exist to serve us.
What?
If an employee knows that his company is committing an illegal act, then it is his or her prerogative to alert the public and the judicial system; this is what is known as the "whistleblower" status. Whether or not the documents involved are confidential has absolutely no bearing.
The only shady part is whether or not the Patriot Act or other rights-inhibiting measures can cover AT&T's ass, or the asses of the agencies involved. If the Patriot Act had not been passed, believe me, AT&T would be in a world of shit.
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
All of your points are valid but do nothing to excuse giving a non-living entity, with indefinate lifespan, and the power of many people, the same rights as a real citizen. While I don't think that most of your points should be allowed, those should be taken care of by a different set of laws. Companies are social and governmental constructs they should not be able to hide behind privacy as a normal citizen.
"YES! People have rights - they're people. Corporations have no entitlement to the same rights."
Unfortunately, this nation's courts disagree with you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation
Corporations are accorded all the rights and freedoms of an actual person. When that doctrine was established was the beginning of the rise of corporate dominance, the end of corporate accountability and the point at which we lost all ability to control what corporations did to our countries, our environment, our governments, and our people.
That was probably the single biggest mistake in all of human history (save the burning of the Library at Alexandria). It spelled the end of what we would ever know as "freedom" - it spelled the beginning of the rule of money over morality.
Not that money wasn't always more important to people. It had simply never been given the legal power to be, before.
We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
Privacy may be a joke in the sense that it is technically difficult to acheive, but I see this case as part of a serious power struggle within our government,
one that could lead to calls for the impeachment of the president.
The president has asserted
1) that he can ignore clearly written laws.
2) that he has no duty to inform congress.
3) that no judicial review is possible.
4) that his authority for all this comes from an emergency - terrorism -
that will probably exist for ever.
Power without accountability, forever. Is that something worth fighting against?
Don't mess with The Phone Company. Piss them off and you'll be using two tin cans and a piece of string.