Did BellSouth cooperate or not?

May 16, 2006

I’ll readily admit I’m confused by this.

BellSouth Corp. yesterday denied it gave customer calling records to the National Security Agency en masse, contradicting a newspaper report that said it did so along with AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. to help the government track suspected terrorists.

“As a result of media reports that BellSouth provided massive amounts of customer calling information under a contract with the NSA, the company conducted an internal review to determine the facts,” the country’s third-largest telephone company said in a statement.

“Based on our review to date, we have confirmed no such contract exists and we have not provided bulk customer calling records to the NSA,” the Atlanta company added.

The denial seems to suggest that the USA Today article that broke this story is mistaken. So, what does USAT have to say about this?

Last Thursday, USA TODAY reported that the NSA has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, BellSouth and Verizon, people with direct knowledge of the program said. […]

USA TODAY first contacted BellSouth five weeks ago in reporting the story on the NSA’s program. The night before the story was published, USA TODAY described the story in detail to BellSouth, and the company did not challenge the newspaper’s account. (emphasis added)

So, BellSouth essentially acknowledged the story last week, after having five weeks to review the company’s policies. Yesterday, however, BellSouth explained that it doesn’t have a “contract” with the NSA on this and hasn’t “provided bulk customer calling records.” Is this a situation in which BellSouth wants to play semantics games over the meaning of the word “contract”?

Maybe BellSouth wants to steer clear of the FCC.

The Federal Communications Commission, which regulates the telephone industry, should open an investigation into whether the nation’s phone companies broke the law by turning over millions of calling records to the government, an FCC commissioner says. […]

“There is no doubt that protecting the security of the American people is our government’s No. 1 responsibility,” Commissioner Michael J. Copps, a Democrat, said in a statement Monday. “But in a digital age where collecting, distributing and manipulating consumers’ personal information is as easy as a click of a button, the privacy of our citizens must still matter.”

First, the public disgust, then the sweeping lawsuit, then the inevitable congressional hearings, then the FCC. Somewhere, some Qwest executives are smiling.

At the risk of being predictibly cynical, what’s the downside of BellSouth denying it assisted the NSA?

Congress can’t even get security clearance to investigate what the NSA is up to so exactly who is going to drop the dime on BellSouth?

  • Well, it’s supposed to be a secret, so of course they are going to deny it. Has any company yet confirmed that yes, they have been cooperating with the NSA in giving them customer records or letting the NSA tap customer lines without warrants?

  • I think it’s more than the FCC.

    Stocks for all three companies named in the story are down since last Thursday. Comcast is using this as a sales tool for its Digital Voice product.

    If the story is true, it’s going to be Bad For Business.

    So BellSouth issues a non-denial-denial (the story didn’t say that BellSouth had a “contract,” or was providing “bulk” records, or that Ackerman had personally approved anything).

    As a former BellSouth customer, I’m tempted to file suit myself.

  • I would actually have to question whether Qwest is playing a similar semantics game. Saying, “We did not turn over customer records” could be different than “The gov’t seized our customer records” but the outcome would be the same.

    Is Qwest simply playing the denial game correctly, where BellSouth is not?

    And doesn’t this story sound like a repeat of the China/Yahoo story that played out just a few short weeks ago?

  • FWIW:

    I sent the following email to Bellsouth:

    Please advise whether Bellsouth has divulged my telephone calling records to the National Security Administration (NSA) AND, IF SO, BY WHAT AUTHORITY?

    I received the following by way of reply:

    Thank you for contacting us about the National Security Administration
    (NSA) news story.

    BellSouth does not provide any confidential customer information to the
    NSA or any governmental agency without proper legal authority.

    For additional information:

    * You may contact us toll free at 1-866-232-9735. The hours of
    operations are: Monday-Friday 8AM to 7PM, Eastern Standard Time and
    Saturday 8AM to 5PM, Eastern Standard Time

    or

    * You may also write us at:

    BellSouth
    Suite 505
    500 Chastain Center Blvd NW
    Kennesaw, GA 30144

    We do appreciate your business and thank you for choosing BellSouth!

    Thank you for choosing BellSouth.

  • #5

    Aha, the escape clause for BellSouth is “the proper legal authority.”

    The Bush administration would have you all believe that it has the legal authority to requisition phone records. All it takes is just one telco attorney to agree that the NSA’s request is proper.

    Ergo, still a non-answer.

  • Gridlock,

    Did Qwest actually say anything about the program publically? The only public comments from the Qwest camp that I saw were from Joe Nacchio’s lawyers.

    Joe Nacchio is the former CEO of Qwest and is under indictment for insider trading. He may have some ulterior motives.

  • The Verizon suit has been expanded to include BellSouth and AT&T.

    BellSouth Corp. and AT&T Inc. were named in a $200 billion lawsuit on Tuesday alleging that telecommunications companies violated privacy rights by turning over customer phone records for use in a U.S. government call-tracking program to detect terrorist plots.

    BellSouth and AT&T were added to the lawsuit seeking class-action status that was initially filed against Verizon Communications Inc. in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Friday.

    This is all of the motivation BellSouth needs for lying. I think they are gambling that the truth will never be known because BushCo. will invoke the “military and state secrets privilege” to derail this suit. The odds are in favor of BellSouth on this bet, since BushCo has already signaled they would invoke the privilege in the EFF suit against AT&T for cooperating with the NSA in the domestic spying scam disclosed by the NYTimes in December of last year.

  • From tomorrow’s NYTimes article on Verizon’s denial of cooperating with the NSA:

    A senior government official, granted anonymity to speak for publication about the classified program, confirmed on Friday that the security agency had access to records of most telephone calls in the United States. The official said the call records were used for the limited purpose of identifying regular contacts of “known bad guys.” The official would not discuss the details of the program, including the identity of companies involved.

  • Re: #5 and #6

    I read the escape clause as “confidential customer information”.

    Is your telephone number “confidential customer information”? They may believe that a data record of two telephone numbers, datetime and time of duration might not be “confidential customer information”. After all, who “owns” telephone numbers, you or them?

    Nope, these are not satisfactory denials to me. Ask your telephone and long distance companies, did they give the NSA two telephone numbers, datetime of the call, and duration of the call for any calls you made or received.

  • Readers of this ‘blog’ who might have interest in security clearance obtaining matters should be interested in the following information. A recently constructed psychological-type ‘test’, the Personnel Security Standards Psychological Questionnaire (PSSPQ), has been shown, through repeated research, to be able to accurately predict success/failure to be eventually granted high-level security clearance status for those being processed (or planning to be processed) for same. The PSSPQ was developed by a seasoned psychologist who, several years ago, retired from federal service when being the Chief Research Psychologist in the USA’s largest intelligence agency. Information about the PSSPQ (including the arrangements to be made in order to be administered the instrument) can be found at: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~lastone2/psspq.html

    • Comments are closed.