Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'One Ring' Phone Scam

fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 367 posts

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#331

Post by fjsolwmv »

cheerlessbog wrote: post #232
astura wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, because when your spouse is getting rolled into emergency surgery after suddenly collapsing you'll definitely know what number is going to call you to inform you, so you'll want to whitelist that one. And when a drunk driver hits her car on a rural road in the middle of the night and her phone is trapped in the wreck, you'll want to make sure you whitelist the phone number of the passerby that stops to help. An…

There is usually a setting to allow unknown numbers through if they call again within a short amount of time. That may help with the emergency case. Unfortunately the 2FA calls for my corporate login seem to come from different numbers each time..

That's a useless arms race because spammers can easily call twice.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#332

Post by fjsolwmv »

amyjess wrote: post #293
anonu wrote: post #157

From the website: How to avoid this scam: Don't answer or return any calls from numbers you don't recognize. If the FCC is recommending we don't pick up our phones, isn't something really wrong with the system?

> How to avoid this scam: Don't answer or return any calls from numbers you don't recognize. Unfortunately, this isn't great for a number of reasons: 1) The last two times I got a series of missed calls every two hours from somebody who didn't leave a voicemail, it was my credit card company (a different company each time) calling to ask me about a number of suspicious charges on the other side of the country that I…

Why do you use a credit card from a company that (a) does not how to email you or notify you via app, and (b) dumps their fraud protection back onto you by forcing you to handle number misuse; and if the problem was actual fraudulent use, your card woud be canceled so how would reaching you on the phone help, as the response to fraud is to cancel your card # and issue another one?

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#333

Post by bradleyjg »

jgowdy wrote: post #319
bradleyjg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s at least one piece of data on every call that the network operator has—-the identity of the prior network hop. In the early days of fighting email spam, that was enough. Every network operator was responsible for receiving spam complaints and responding appropriately. Network providers that couldn’t or wouldn’t prevent spammers from using their networks were blacklisted and other networks would refuse to rout…

From my best interpretation of your comment you seem to think VoIP is far more "carrier peer to carrier peer" than it is in practice. As a value added telecom provider I have a few upstream carriers but it's not as if I receive calls from every carrier. Just like the Internet, my upstream carriers are my access points to the PSTN, so all of my SIP invites come from either my customers or my know upstream carriers. Th…

That’s the peril of being a leaf node. The same thing was true in the early days of email. An end user, or in your case something close to it, couldn’t blacklist his upstream—-as you say that would be ridiculous. But your upstream (or possibly their upstream) does have true peers that they could blacklist for bad behavior. It might mean there customers couldn’t receive calls from entire countries, but that’s a trade-off I, and I assume plenty of other, would be happy to make and even pay extra for.

This assumes that is that there isn’t some kind of international treaty that forbids doing so. The existence of such has been claimed from time to time in similar discussions but I have yet to see an actual citation.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#334

Post by fjsolwmv »

whatshisface wrote: post #180
welly wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why young (I'm making an assumption here) people don't like making or receiving voice calls. I'd far rather talk to someone than text them. Texting requires far more effort and takes far more time.

> Texting requires far more effort and takes far more time. A reasonable theory would be that if your typing skills are good enough, the opposite is true.

Those are rare skills. The optimum is texting via voice recog

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#335

Post by cr0sh »

saalweachter wrote: post #12
spectramax wrote: post #8

I feel like if FCC/Telephone providers don't fix this soon, traditional cell phones will become unreliable and we will need to adopt a new system or just use existing framework (facetime, whatsapp, etc.). If every cell phone has LTE and internet connection, why the fuck do we need traditional cell phone number? I never use it except for calling my pharmacy, customer support or restaurants/shops. All conversations wit…

I occasionally contemplate trying to find a data-only plan for my cell phone, with no associated cell number.

TMobile used to offer (maybe they still do?) a data-only plan that was/is meant for remote sensing applications (alarms, etc). It wasn't something that was listed on their site (ok - it was there, but you had to really, really dig for it to find out about it).

IIRC, it was also free, but limited to 200 MB a month.

You basically got a SIM card you could stuff into your embedded sensor app and away you go.

That might be a large enough data cap for plain-text messaging, but not much else.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#336

Post by goguy »

SomeHacker44 wrote: post #198
Waterluvian wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. The phone system is totally broken. A few years ago I disabled the incoming call part of my phone to everyone except a few family members and my wife. So far it's been great. Everyone who needs me emails me. I've yet to run into a situation where someone I needed to hear from would only call me.

Just not willing to do this. I never want to miss a call from someone talking about an emergency with a family member, the FAA calling about an unclosed flight plan, a recruiter (if job hunting), a delivery person, etc. I answer virtually all unknown numbers except the ones T-Mobile puts in as “Scam Likely.” What I do not understand is, given that the phone is a computer, why there is not an on-phone IVR which can so…

How many calls are you actually getting? Even if it's one a day, who h seems extremely high, is it really that much effort to lose the 5 seconds it takes to answer and hang up straight away?

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#337

Post by apollo_ »

goguy wrote: post #336
SomeHacker44 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just not willing to do this. I never want to miss a call from someone talking about an emergency with a family member, the FAA calling about an unclosed flight plan, a recruiter (if job hunting), a delivery person, etc. I answer virtually all unknown numbers except the ones T-Mobile puts in as “Scam Likely.” What I do not understand is, given that the phone is a computer, why there is not an on-phone IVR which can so…

How many calls are you actually getting? Even if it's one a day, who h seems extremely high, is it really that much effort to lose the 5 seconds it takes to answer and hang up straight away?

anecdotal: I've been getting 2-5 spam/scam calls per day. I cancel any incoming call that I don't recognize or am not expecting. The alternative is disruptive (leaving my desk, finding an empty conference room, answering, etc). The interruption costs far more than the time it takes to resolve.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#338

Post by Consultant32452 »

humblebee wrote: post #294
Consultant32452 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any guesses as to why you've been chosen? I can't remember the last robocall I got. I'm in my late 30s, have a cell phone only, which is on the do not call registry. The only times I get harassed are when I update my resume on whatever job site. Then for a few weeks/months I get what I consider too many calls from recruiters. I wonder if we have different purchase histories or something that has resulted…

I also have a similar experience to the OP. However, I do not get 10 calls a day. It's generally 1-3 during most weekdays but not all. I use to not travel much, and any traveling I did was pretty basic flight + hotel. No fancy vacations or anything. A bit over a year ago I booked a trip to a resort in Cancun through a travel agency in Florida. None stop spam since. I noticed a massive increase the amount of email spa…

That really blows, I'm sorry that happened to you and op. This kind of frequency is tantamount to harassment.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#339

Post by jgowdy »

Marsymars wrote: post #324
jgowdy wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried to be clear that I believe the principle should apply to all callers. No on planet earth should second guess whether they're calling a different nation or not. That principle includes other +1 nations.

Sure, but as a Canadian, I'm not bothered by it. My phone and VoIP plans all include US calling/texting. I'd prefer to keep the +1 prefix. The US is free to change theirs.

I'm just going to nit on your phrasing here. NANP and the associated +1 country code originated from the United States. Technically I am talking about "changing theirs." The fact that it's very reasonably shared with other North American countries in a manner that allows for plenary power on the part of each other member nation is the source of this issue. I'm suggesting the US revise NANP and put more conditions on sharing the +1 country code, although most preferably with a consensus of the other members.

Bad actors in different nations than consumers shouldn't be able to leverage sovereignty or agreements like NANP to be bad actors with impunity.

Re: 'One Ring' Phone Scam

#340

Post by icedchai »

Aloha wrote: post #10
foobarian wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I could see the big mobile networks going off on their own and highlighting trusted callers from their own networks. And it would take only a few peering points between the big providers to cover the vast majority of cell users. I would actually switch networks for this (presumably one would do it first).

It's not even trusted callers, its blocking CID spoofing for numbers in their own owned pools, that are originating calls from elsewhere - this should be blocked, as I can think of very few cases where a cellular provider would find this valid.

This may be one of those things that is easier said than done. Number portability may make that more complicated than it seems. Any telco experts around?
Post reply on HN