This should get better once carriers have implemented STIR/SHAKEN. Many are currently doing testing right now.
supposedly the big three have implemented it but you have to have certain phone models.
The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
201–210 of 432 posts
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup. It’s amusing to see people think there is some hard technical problem here. Tie the problem of robocalls to the telcos losing money, and this problem will solve itself in months.
> It’s amusing to see people think there is some hard technical problem here. One of the primary users of robocalls are politicians. I'm sure they'll get right on legislating against it. /sarc
(US) Politicians already gave themselves a loophole into unlimited unsolicited spam. So cleaning up other spammers would strengthen the quality of their spam channel, as consumers would be less jaded/more likely to pick up.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can and do block calls under certain circumstances, i.e from Invalid or Unallocated ANIs.
This doesn't appear to be universal then, because I've been told by Telcos in the UK and France that they will not block calls even when the presented number is impossible. It was made clear that any call that was made to one of my numbers would be delivered irrespective of any faulty components visible to me in the SIP header.
Well this is certainly jurisdiction-dependent.
e.g. the CRTC has policy 2018-484, Implementation of universal network-level blocking of calls with blatantly illegitimate caller identification: https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2018/2018-484.htm
CRTC gave telcos twelve months to implement, and it seems to have largely been implemented within that time frame.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah it's bonkers they allow this still. No good actor ISP is going to knowingly let improperly sourced traffic transit networks...
Oh how I wish that was actually true.
I mean, yes there are bad actor ISP's that allow it, but his statement is accurate due to the caveat.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s amusing to see people think there is some hard technical problem here. One of the primary users of robocalls are politicians. I'm sure they'll get right on legislating against it. /sarc
(US) Politicians already gave themselves a loophole into unlimited unsolicited spam. So cleaning up other spammers would strengthen the quality of their spam channel, as consumers would be less jaded/more likely to pick up.
Does that loophole also apply to political action committees?
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#206I once needed to get my own health insurance plan for three months. I googled "short term health insurance" and went to one of the first websites I found. I put in my contact info ONCE. For the next six weeks I had maybe 75+ health insurance brokers calling me and texting me. Just blowing up my phone at all hours of the day. Some would try and make contact multiple times so I'd block their numbers from call and text. They would then switch phone numbers. I ended up having 50+ numbers on my block list.
I was so frustrated I just decided to pay out of pocket for all my medical expenses those three months.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#207The 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…
So if I buy a $20 prepaid cell phone for cash and use it to robocall ten of my friends, they'd share $1000?
Things don't happen in a vacuum, don't be so dismissive. There would probably have been put something in place to stop a $20 sim from doing these things in the first place.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#208I have a question, why are robocalls such a problem in the U.S.A.? As far as I know, they aren’t in Germany (or if they are, not on that level, I never got one).
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…
Oddly, in Canada, many of the spam calls I receive aren't in English. (Mostly Mandarin, though Google indicates it's a problem in the US too: https://www.npr.org/2018/05/10/609117134/chinese-robocalls-b...)
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#209I 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…
This is exactly correct. The phone companies could charge $9/minute to any call originator who wasn't showing the actual number on the call, and this activity would stop. Conversely, the FCC could make any telco that carries a robo call 50% liable for any fines associated with that robo call. That too would stop this crap in its tracks.
They could charge 0.01 per call and it would stop.
Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
[deleted]