181–190 of 352 posts
I didn't see anything in there about penalties for carriers not enforcing this. Also willing to bet they beg for extensions claiming they're not ready - or too costly to implement.
Good point. I suspect carriers tolerate scammers because they're good for the bottom line.
I didn't see anything in there about penalties for carriers not enforcing this. Also willing to bet they beg for extensions claiming they're not ready - or too costly to implement.
Good point. I suspect carriers tolerate scammers because they're good for the bottom line.
The spoofed caller ID to match your local area code has landed on people in my contact list, and it was extremely jarring to think "why is my best friend's mom calling me out of the blue" and get offered a discount cruise by a robot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some carriers may have the ability to limit calls to customers based on attestation level. Customer could configure they only want to receive i.e "A" attested calls. This means the carrier from where the call originated knows that the customer who made the call owns the number they dialed from.
Right, but I guess I'm asking, are plans for this in the works? Because currently I'm not aware of anything like this, nor of any plans to implement anything like this. None of the announcements suggest it might be happening either, so that's why I'm lost as to what the end-user experience would be.
It should be relatively easy to identify the bad actors here and I don't mean the spammers, I mean the telcos that make this possible, deliberately so, by essentially "laundering" spam calls.
My response to picking up a number is to answer the call and say nothing. Auto-dial systems will route the call to a person when they get a "live" response. I don't know the criteria but I'm pretty sure it's them detecting noise on the call (which could be voicemail).
A human calling will wonder what is happening and fill the silence by saying something. A machine will not.
I hang up within 6 seconds of this in the hopes that it affects some metric somewhere of this being a low-quality or spam call. I don't know if it does. I think I read somewhere once that it did. I could be wrong.
If a real human is on the other end and does say nothing in this window, they'll generally just call right back. You get the exact same number again then this time I'll answer it.
It is nice to filter contacts vs non-contacts but there are too many things on non-contacts. Businesses you deal with, primarily.
In the email world where obviously spam is a huge problem zombie relays that allow this (which I believe is the primary source?) can get blacklisted. Why don't telcos who do this also get blacklisted? Or at least identified? This isn't AT&T or Verizon. It's the little telcos that connect to them.
But is this all too little too late? I think we've discovered over the last 20 years that we're all pretty much over open networks. It's all opt-in now with the likes of Whatsapp, FB Messenger and so forth.
Oh and while we're at it, can we get rid of this stupid exemption to robocalling restrictions for political campaigning? It's defended as "political free speech". To me, this is nonsensical. Free speech doesn't mean that I should be forced to listen to it.
EDIT: Found an example [1] of the bad actors I'm talking about.
[1]: https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/31/21117477/justice-departme...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but I guess I'm asking, are plans for this in the works? Because currently I'm not aware of anything like this, nor of any plans to implement anything like this. None of the announcements suggest it might be happening either, so that's why I'm lost as to what the end-user experience would be.
I can only speak for one carrier, and the answer as of this moment is no. Pretty much everyone is struggling to meet the FCCs aggressive timelines and do interoperability testing with each other. After that is done, maybe. I'm sure the FCC has upcoming requirements based on this, but to my knowledge those aren't out yet. If the FCC doesn't make additional requirements, then it will depend on the carrier's decision. I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just wish various Doctors and Dentists could jump on the text/email bandwagon. Those two groups are responsible for nearly all of my phone usage - with a slim minority (that is itself mostly spam) being calls from my bank.
They are subject to HIPAA comstraints.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are subject to HIPAA comstraints.
There's something in HIPAA saying how the provider is to contact you? Over which channels? I'm sceptical. I get texts from my dentist and in-app notification from doctor.
This is why fax is still so common in medicine and law (in law there’s also a belief that a fax confirmation says it’s been delivered, if not read, while email is considered less reliable / more easily deniable.
Can someone explain what this will translate into in terms of the end-user experience? For one thing, authentication will be next to useless (at least to me) if my phone is still going to ring. So does that mean it's not going to ring for a spoofed number? Also, if it results in tons of voicemail then that's still going to be quite annoying. (How) is the actual end-user experience going to be addressed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my understanding, spoofed calls won’t get onto your carrier’a network under this model, let alone ring your phone. All this assumes that sorting out spoofing resolves the problem, which isn’t guaranteed.
I thought they still go through to the carrier? Just under a different attestation level: https://www.bandwidth.com/glossary/stir-shaken/
I imagine we will see a tickbox in the operators apps and web settings portals to block or send such calls straight to voicemail (or similar), as they'd be able to be distinguished via the reduced attestation level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is not true. but if you need to carry around proof of passport there is a passport card you can get for North American travel only.
The passport card is no longer valid for international flights, only entry by land or sea.