FCC will require phone carriers to authenticate calls by June 2021 [pdf]

Post by koolba » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 12:57 AM UTC

macintux wrote: post #172

p2t2p wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't want to be unfriendly Given my experience with robocall and stuff, I _do_ want to be unfriendly. I hate to guts that a lot of people assume that they can interrupt you at any given moment. One guy called me when I was driving and wasn't having any of that, kept on complaining that I didn't pick up. My current plan right now is to have a landline number from my internet provider (that's SIP essentially). Whene…

I’ve been paying for Vonage for 10-15 years now so I can keep my old landline phone number active to give out to businesses. Haven’t had a phone hooked up to it for nearly all that time. Voicemail + transcription works great.

Post by noahtallen » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 1:04 AM UTC

larrywright wrote: post #188

mehrdadn wrote: post #145

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?

The thing this will address is certain classes of scams that rely on spoofing a specific area code. The infamous “Windows support” calls, which generally spoof a Redmond, WA area code. The IRS/FBI/Immigration scam calls that spoof Washington DC area codes. These are scams which defraud people of huge sums of money every year, mostly the elderly and immigrants.

Post by dantheman » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 1:08 AM UTC

nimish wrote: post #210

cletus wrote: post #184

Good. But really, why did this take this long? 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 criteri…

It took this long because the fcc is run by people who simply do not believe in using government to enforce oversight.

Post by pandaman » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 1:27 AM UTC

markovbot wrote: post #60

0xff00ffee wrote: post #12

Google Voice impact?

are you asking if this will impact Google Voice? If so, I would imagine the answer is almost certainly that it will not at all impact Google Voice. Google Voice works by acting as a proxy for outbound calls. You dial your friend's number, your phone dials Google, who in turn dials your friend with your Google Voice number displayed. Since Google is the legitimate carrier for your Google Voice number, I can think of n…

Post by nkurz » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 1:31 AM UTC

dvtrn wrote: post #149

penagwin wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is a possible scenario- in my experience most people know to call multiple times - especially if they know that the recipient won’t recognize the number. I don’t usually answer my phone from unknown numbers, but when I get three calls from the same number within 3 minutes I’ll pick it up.

I’m not getting into ALL the details but the “repeatedly calling” back and forth between two numbers quite honestly kept me out of jail overseas due to an embarrassing miscommunication and unintended breaking of a local law (backpacking in college, drinks were had, a friend made an ass out of himself if you must know) I called a local friend, he didn’t answer. I called his wife she didn’t either. Both follow the “don…