Does anyone else have the suspicion that Prism was named prism because instead of getting companies to co-operate with the program they were siphoning off data like they did to google by tapping their fiber lines?

That would fit more in line with what we have heard about the tapping stations/rooms at AT&T/Verizon over the years.

I mean if they were really involved with back dooring the individual servers of google/apple/facebook that would involve hundreds of employees at each company to make that happen. Someone would have spoken out by now with some evidence to prove it.

To my knowledge that hasn't happened. Just this shitty looking powerpoint outlining when the data was starting to come in...

I recall that being a common interpretation of the name when the news of PRISM first broke, so you're certainly not alone in that.

One does not simply tap fiber. Especially at the composite level of transport links. The systems don't work that way.

Wouldn't HTTPs prevent that?

Yes, but according to google they were tapping the "dark fiber" (private lines only carrying google traffic) that were not encrypted between their data centers.

Those lines were for things like data replication so it was a goldmine for the NSA to tap. Those transmissions have since been encrypted.

Not entirely, though Google and subsequently Microsoft, Apple et all have upgraded inter-datacentre connectivity to be encrypted - reducing this attack vector.

As snowwresteler says ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10297136 ) downthread:

> Prism in general was mischaracterized by the early reports. It was first reported as a persistent backdoor into servers, but it was actually just a way for NSA to automate requests for information through the FBI. This was detailed in later reports.

> Edit: for those skeptical about my comment above, here is more detail from a discussion about a year ago:

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8333844

What describes the obvious discrepancy between what Tim Cook wrote and signed his name to, and the content on those slides?

> I want to be absolutely clear that we have never worked with any government agency from any country to create a backdoor in any of our products or services. We have also never allowed access to our servers. And we never will.

The slides imply Apple gives access to data on customers. Tim Cook says Apple does not give access to their servers. Is that really the point you're trying to make?

That's just semantics and weasel words, nothing more.

You can vote with your wallet, and also at the ballot :)