It's true we're spying on you, but can we keep it secret?

AT&T wants to block EFF's use of some of their internal documents in EFF's suit against AT&T:
Mark Klein, a former technician who worked for AT&T for 22 years, provided three technical documents, totaling 140 pages, to the EFF and to The New York Times, which first reported last December that the Bush administration was eavesdropping on citizens' phone calls without obtaining warrants.


AT&T's lawyers also told the court that intense press coverage surrounding the case, including Wired News' publication of Klein's statement, was revealing the company's trade secrets, "causing grave injury to AT&T." The lawyers argued that unsealing the documents "would cause AT&T great harm and potentially jeopardize AT&T's network, making it vulnerable to hackers, and worse."

The EFF filed the documents last week under a temporary seal when it asked the judge to force AT&T to stop the alleged internet spying until the case goes to trial.

Well, I can certainly imagine that having it revealed that AT&T would consider the information that they were helping NSA spy on people something they'd want to keep secret, and that having people find out about it would harm their business. I'm pretty skeptical of the claim, however, that this information makes their network "vulnerable to hackers". It's not exactly secret information that telcos use Narus-type boxes to analyze their networks--actually, Narus lists AT&T as a customer--and while I don't know exactly what sort of topology AT&T is using here, it's not like you need something exotic to make this work. Indeed, much of the point of a system like a Narus is that it's easy to deploy.if their network is even remotely properly designed, it's hard to see how this information leaves them vulnerable--except to the extent to which it pisses off hackers who might otherwise attack somebody else.