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

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

docs.fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 352 posts

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

#231

Post by unishark »

jborichevskiy wrote: post #161
dsmithn wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope so. I stopped answering calls from unknown numbers until a year ago when I got a call from the same number twice and it was a paramedic calling to let me know my wife was in a car accident. She was awake enough to remember my number but her phone was lost. So now I can't help but answer calls from unknown numbers even though I know 999 out of 1000 of them will be spam. It's abusive and an incredible was…

Missing an emergency call like that from a family member or close friend is one of my fears. I do hope these regulations come with teeth.

It's a popular scam for that reason.

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0204-family-emergency-...

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

#232

Post by readme »

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.

We shouldn't interfere in the free market. Those robocalls are just good old American ingenuity.

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

#233

Post by chrisfinazzo »

dantheman wrote: post #216
nimish wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

This has been going on for a long long time - while the FCC was trying to expand it's mandate to net neutrality instead of actually doing it's job.

Well, actually...

That kinda/sorta was the mandate, until we put a telecom shill in charge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010

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

#234

Post by ninkendo »

nine_k wrote: post #171
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?

Fraud becomes harder because unauthorized impersonation of someone else's number becomes illegal and is (hopefully) technically prevented. Because of this, you can just blacklist spammers again, and burner numbers for them become harder to come by.

This is the correct answer. Forcing all numbers to be authenticated doesn’t stop scammers from calling you, it just makes it easier for you to make an effective blacklist. (A blacklist around which Apple and Google, etc would be wise to make a good UX.)

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

#235

Post by macintux »

koolba wrote: post #212
macintux wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can get that for free with a google voice number. If you can’t port directly, the indirect method is to sign up for a PAYGO mobile phone and port your number there as an interim hop.

I don’t trust Google with my email. Not going to trust them with my voicemail.

(Yes, I know, a significant portion of my email ends up in their hands anyway.)

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

#236

Post by varrock »

unishark wrote: post #231
jborichevskiy wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Missing an emergency call like that from a family member or close friend is one of my fears. I do hope these regulations come with teeth.

It's a popular scam for that reason. https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0204-family-emergency-...

I have a feeling the fake emergency calls are much more obvious than a real one, though. I will say, however, that emergency family calls are probably successful in the older generations.

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

#237

Post by anonymousiam »

I've got a FreePBX/Asterisk VoIP PBX and I've thought about running TeleCrapper2000 (https://hackaday.com/2005/09/08/telecrapper-2000/), but a better solution is to just put Google Voice in front of it and turn on "Screen Calls". It does a very effective (although not 100%) job of eliminating most robo/sales calls.

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

#238

Post by [deleted] »

chrisfinazzo wrote: post #233
dantheman wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been going on for a long long time - while the FCC was trying to expand it's mandate to net neutrality instead of actually doing it's job.

Well, actually... That kinda/sorta was the mandate, until we put a telecom shill in charge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010

[deleted]

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

#239

Post by gibspaulding »

nkurz wrote: post #220
dvtrn wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This is a nice example of port-knocking: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Port_knocking . I wonder if it would be possible to set up something like this more rigorously. Give everyone unrelated two phone numbers. The first never rings the phone. The second only rings if the first was called within the last minute.

Or perhaps just a pin they have to enter in order to get the first phone to actually ring. Basically 2fa for the right to bother me.

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

#240

Post by dantheman »

chrisfinazzo wrote: post #233
dantheman wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been going on for a long long time - while the FCC was trying to expand it's mandate to net neutrality instead of actually doing it's job.

Well, actually... That kinda/sorta was the mandate, until we put a telecom shill in charge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010

Where did congress grant the FCC the authorities for that order?
Post reply on HN