Mark Klein, a retired AT&T technician, sits quietly at the center of a high-profile legal storm hitting the nation's largest telecommunications companies for allegedly helping the government spy on American citizens' phone and internet communications without court approval.

In 2006, Klein stepped forward and handed sensitive AT&T documents to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group that was preparing a class-action lawsuit against the telecommunications giant. That case and more than 50 similar suits have been consolidated into five master complaints that are now proceeding in a federal court in San Francisco. This summer, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear AT&T's appeal of a key ruling that rejected the government's national security concerns and allowed the suit to continue.

See Also:

Mark Klein's Insider Documents Those documents are under seal, but Wired News independently acquired and published a significant portion of them last year. They show that AT&T built a network-monitoring facility in a nondescript room at an internet switching hub in San Francisco, at 611 Folsom St. Diagrams in the document show that AT&T technicians split fiber-optic cables handling AT&T's WorldNet internet service – as well as traffic to and from other major ISPs – diverting copies of the traffic into the room, which was packed with internet-monitoring equipment.

In this rare interview, Klein supplies details of how he first learned about the secret room even before being transferred to the Folsom Street office. He also lashes out at Congress for failing to hold hearings, and says he won't be satisfied until he can visit the AT&T building and see that the room has been dismantled.

Wired News: How did you first find out about the special room at the Folsom Street building?

Mark Klein: In 2002, we – the union technicians – were notified by support that the (National Security Agency) was coming to interview someone for a special project. That's when I got wind of something. I though it was odd that the NSA was coming to a phone company because I thought they weren't supposed to be spying domestically after the law was changed in the 1970s. They told us (it was) because the place was small and we had to know to let the person in. I happened to answer the door and I directed him to the guy he was interviewing for this special job. (Editor's note: This took place at the Geary Street central office in San Francisco, where Klein worked before he was transferred to the Folsom Street office.)

In January 2003, as we gradually moved under a Folsom Street supervisor.... The Geary Street technicians had a tour of the Folsom building, and one of the technicians on the tour pointed at a door and said, "That's the new secret room and only one guy is allowed in there."

In a small office word gets around. People called it So-and-So's secret room and So-and-So worked at my office. (Klein declined to identify the person who worked in the room.)

WN: What did you think about the room at the time?

Klein: I thought, this is not right. But we were in a tough situation at Geary Street and the company kept making cutbacks, and if I made things worse I might not have had a job. Four jobs were in jeopardy at Geary and I saved my job by getting into Folsom....

Who the hell am I? Who was going to listen to me? So I decided to stay quiet and just take notes.

WN: How did you get the three documents?

Klein: Two had been given to the techs when they did their cuts. (Editor's note: "Cuts" here refers to splitting optical fiber.) One guy whose job I was taking on was cleaning out his desk and was about to throw them out, and he said, "Hey, do you want these?" The third document was one a management technician left lying around on top of a router.

WN: How many people worked in or on that room?

Klein: Two people worked in the secret room, and they were management technicians. The first was downsized out of his job at the end of 2003, and was replaced by a second. A third management tech did not work in the secret room but knew what was going on. I knew all three of them. These guys would occasionally stop by the water cooler to chat with the union technicians in their office area on Folsom Street and they said things they probably shouldn't have.

WN: How did you learn more about the room?

Klein: Another guy – he was bragging one day and he pulled out a batch of keys hanging on a chain from under his shirt. And he started saying "this one is for San Diego" and "this one is for Seattle."

Later on, I was trying to troubleshoot the network. And I found that when I bypassed the splitter (into the secret room) the network would work. They were screwing up their own network. They were degrading their own network.

I called the support line for help and told her what was happening with the cabinet and she said, "That's odd. They are having the same thing at the other offices." I said, "What other offices?" and she said, "San Diego, Seattle, San Jose." I got her information first, so that information matched with the key guy. And I realized this was bigger than I thought.

WN: Wired News published some of the documents you provided to other sources. How much did we miss? (Editor's note: Parties in the AT&T case are forbidden from discussing or sharing the documents, but neither Wired News nor Klein is under a gag order.)

Klein: I think you got the essence.

WN: What information have people missed about the documents?

Klein: J. Scott Marcus (who served as the FCC's senior adviser for internet technology from July 2001 until July 2005) actually knows more about AT&T at the high-level internet engineering level than I do. (Editor's note: Marcus filed an independent analysis on behalf of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.)

In the redacted declaration (.pdf), at pages 10-11, Marcus says that the documents confirm this is not just for network security, and that it is for government spying. He argues that the unit installed has its own backbone. You wouldn't need a separate backbone for network security – but for government surveillance they do.

WN: What made you decide to go public?

Klein: What got me back interested was The New York Times' story in December 2005. (Editor's note: The Times reported that the government had been secretly monitoring Americans' phone calls and e-mails that crossed the nation's border since shortly after 9/11 without getting approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA.)

The president admitted the program existed, but only admitted that part which had been exposed – and he avoided talking about the part that wasn't, which was the internet.

The administration sent officials out to defend the program, including (Vice President) Dick Cheney, and they said they didn't think they had to obey FISA.... This was the defense of the indefensible. So I decided if they are going to perpetuate this fraud then I'm going to blow their cover.

(Editor's note: Klein gave the documents to several civil rights groups, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. Former Los Angeles Times editor Dean Baquet killed reporter Joseph Menn's story on the documents and allegations after meeting with then-director of national intelligence John Negroponte and then-NSA chief Michael Hayden.)

Baquet's argument for killing it was weak – that they didn't understand the documents because they were too technical. That's what outside experts are for. That's what the New York Times did when they got the documents.

They were basically afraid to touch it after the government suggested they shouldn't.

WN: Has AT&T been in contact with you?

Klein: They haven't done anything to me, which is confirmation to me that they are doing this.

Qwest did the right thing. They asked for a legal document and when the government wouldn't give them one, they said no. The other companies volunteered – that's my speculation. Maybe they did get some document, but I am skeptical.

WN: What do you want to happen now?

Klein: I want this program ended. I will be satisfied when I can get a tour of the Folsom Street building and I can see the equipment has been ripped out. I want to see the physical stuff ripped out. I will not be satisfied with assurances from the government that this program is stopped or being overseen by a court.

They have embedded spying into the infrastructure of the internet. I'm not sure people are fully conscious of what is going on, and I want it exposed and stopped.

WN: Have you tried to talk with members of Congress?

Klein: I've called and sent letters to senators and Congress members. They haven't called back. I don't think they want to pursue it. They want to talk about this behind closed doors. These days I am angry at Congress for helping them keep it secret.

They could hold hearings and subpoena people and give them immunity. Right now there are people who could come forward and say what they know, but they need immunity. That's the bottleneck. I don't see a resolution coming from this Congress. It's a conspiracy against the American people.

WN: Were you scared when you decided to come forward?

Klein: I was concerned about taking on the government by myself. When I heard the director of national intelligence was getting involved, that's when I decided to get a lawyer. (Editor's note: Klein is now represented by a team of four lawyers. All four formerly worked as federal prosecutors.)

WN: Have you heard from former co-workers after you came forward?

Klein: Some of the people I used to work with, I would exchange e-mails or see them when someone retired. But I've cut myself off. I haven't wanted to put them in jeopardy, especially the ones that still work there. I still consider them friends. But I'm not lonely. I have other friends.