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

The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 432 posts

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#111

Post by Semaphor »

philipkglass wrote: post #109
Semaphor wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it’s possible to show a local number when the call is arriving from another part of the world? That seems strange or rather insane, but would explain how the problem happens ;)

Sometimes they show up spoofed to a local area code. Sometimes they show up as from the 800 area code, which is not specific to any geographical region in the United States and is also used by legitimate call centers. My bank's customer service number is an 800 number, for example. I don't know if easily spoofable phone numbers are unique to the US. But even if they are not, international scam-calling operations are…

Yeah, but when the call is originating from outside the US? Why would that be allowed?

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#112

Post by axus »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #94
ravenstine wrote: post #42

I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…

I don't know how Google Voice did it, but I rarely if ever got a robocall when I had Google Voice. After leaving Sprint (and losing Google Voice after years of having it) I get them all the time. T-Mobile catches a few here and there, but I get so many damn spam calls. I just have my phone on mute.

I'd say I get an equal number of robo-calls to my cell phone number, and my Google Voice number which forwards to it. Might have something to do with the area code.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#113

Post by JaRail »

tamalpais wrote: post #27

I enabled the Silence Unknown Callers feature [0] in iOS and haven’t answered a spam call since. The downside is that it sends every call from unknown numbers to voicemail, including legitimate ones. It’s a worthwhile trade-off. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207099

I'm excited to see improvements and results to the Google Assistant's on-device call screening. It's a step up from voicemail but I'm not sure how willing people will be to participate. For example, someone calling from a doctor's office might only be able to speak to a specific person. For privacy reasons, they call from blocked number and won't specify who they are until they've at least asked that they're speaking with the right person.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#114

Post by ikeboy »

The solution is simple, and I've proposed it before.

If someone used spoofing to break the law, there's strict liability for some kind of statutory damages, say $100, applicable to everyone across the chain. I.e. I can sue Verizon for sending the call to my phone, Verizon can sue whoever connected to their network, they can sue whoever spoofed on their network, etc.

This will quickly lead to networks requiring proof of authorization or at least posting some kind of bond to be allowed to spoof numbers.

And there's no real downside. Nobody has a pressing need to spoof but not enough to post a bond convincing the phone networks that they won't break the law.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#115

Post by beerandt »

Semaphor wrote: post #97
beerandt wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't too much of a problem, but it has escalated quickly in the last couple of years, especially with people figuring out how to change or spoof CNAM data, which is what shows up on caller ID. For a while, they'd use numbers only a couple of digits off from yours, or have a set pattern (like add 4 to each of your last 3 digits). Now people don't answer local calls, so they've moved on to neighboring area codes.…

So it’s purely the spoofing? I looked at Wikipedia, and we have "CLIP" (Calling Line Identification Presentation) and "CLIP no screening" (essentially spoofed numbers). Spoofing a number that you don’t own the rights for is a crime. So it looks like we have spoofing but only in a sane way, is the other kind of spoofing legal in the US? Or is there some other underlying problem?

No, there's an increase in not-spoofed (afaik) calls too. Plus some of the callers have figured out different tricks, like multiple brief calls to bypass do-not-disturb settings, or as an attempt to get the person to call back the caller ID number.

For me, at least, the calls also seem to be highly clustered, whether spoofed or not, for whatever reason.

As far as I know, spoofing is left to phone company policy, which says it needs to be an associated number, like the same company or same address. I think part of the problem is they don't have a way to actually verify this for out of system calls. And technology has made setting up spam lines on small remote systems feasable.

This is speculation, but I suspect it would be considered criminal fraud if it's done as part of a bigger crime. I don't think it's a crime in-and-of itself, but other than that, idk.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#116

Post by cheez »

kyrra wrote: post #49
ravenstine wrote: post #42

I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…

Telecoms can't block calls. They are not legally allowed to do it.

It's better this way. Slippery slope and all. Before you think I'm being alarmist, google drag queen storytime.

Edit: if you're downvoting, look it up, there are convicted child sex offenders doing this.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#117

Post by MarkSweep »

_delirium wrote: post #91
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried it, and within a week I missed an important call. I was waiting by the phone, and it just never arrived. I realized too late that it had been silenced. It's very frustrating that we can't just get something like a spam filter, rather than a blanket "silence everything unknown."

T-Mobile does spam filtering; not sure about other carriers. The default configuration (or at least I think it is, because I don't remember changing it) is to tag the calls by setting the Caller-ID to the name "Scam Likely". You can then configure your phone to respond differently to calls from that ID (e.g. disable ringer). Alternately, if you trust their filtering enough, you can have those calls blocked so they do…

Unfortunately when I use our conference system’s “call my phone” feature it almost always shows the number as “scam likely”. So I guess the scammers are using the same block of numbers as the conference system.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#118

Post by JaRail »

Semaphor wrote: post #101
philipkglass wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of people living outside the USA who can speak English. Both legitimate and fraudulent English-language call centers are easier to set up internationally than German-language call centers. The robo part of the call can obviously be automated from anywhere but there are actual humans pretending to be from "Apple Support" when a target responds. That raises another question: are other Anglosphere countr…

So it’s possible to show a local number when the call is arriving from another part of the world? That seems strange or rather insane, but would explain how the problem happens ;)

They'll buy tons of phone numbers from all over so they always have local numbers to call from. They just use VOIP software to route it to wherever the call center is located. As far as their provider is concerned, they're probably just a local business. Or, at most, a local number for a foreign company.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#119

Post by dan-robertson »

jacquesm wrote: post #8

Never knew you could contract it has into it's as well.

’S can mean:

- is (as in “it’s a nice day”)

- it is (a weird archaic poetic usage)

- God’s (also weird, eg ’Sblood)

- that’s e.g. ’sright

- has e.g. it’s got many meanings

- us e.g. let’s go on a walk

- his (also weird. Obsolete/dialect)

- as (eg so’s = so as)

- does when’s the band come on?

Naturally one can see several of these in one sentence, e.g. “let’s meet as soon’s Brian’s recovered from the fever he’s got.”

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#120

Post by Semaphor »

JaRail wrote: post #118
Semaphor wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it’s possible to show a local number when the call is arriving from another part of the world? That seems strange or rather insane, but would explain how the problem happens ;)

They'll buy tons of phone numbers from all over so they always have local numbers to call from. They just use VOIP software to route it to wherever the call center is located. As far as their provider is concerned, they're probably just a local business. Or, at most, a local number for a foreign company.

As I said in another comment, why allow international numbers to spoof national numbers?
Post reply on HN