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

FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

docs.fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 281 posts

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#171

Post by runako »

godelski wrote: post #102

On a side note, today and yesterday I've been bombarded with spam calls. Even got one while writing this comment. All of which have my same area code, which is for a location I haven't live at for over 15 years. No voice mail, nothing. It's not even this bad around election time. Btw, if you haven't already, you can sign up for the FCC's Do Not Call list[0]. While obviously this isn't going to solve everything, it do…

> All of which have my same area code, which is for a location I haven't live at for over 15 years

I am in a similar situation. One of my not-yet-implemented projects is to route my phone through a VOIP app that automatically blocks any number from my phone's area code (or even the whole state) where the caller is not in my contact list.

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#172

Post by throwitawayfam »

Evidlo wrote: post #96
charliebwrites wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would one discover which VOIP providers are the source of calls?

I wrote a little tool which can do lookups: https://github.com/evidlo/nanpa_lookup There's no free source of this information anywhere. The only affordable option is telcodata.us

What do you do when these lookups return the company that owns the number but the company says that they are not in control of the number? E.g, I have one number that keeps harassing me that reports as Verizon but Verizon says they have not been with Verizon since 2024.

Also great tool, thank you

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#173

Post by bitbang »

For anybody on an android phone,I highly recommend https://github.com/aj3423/SpamBlocker

It is highly configurable with every feature I've ever wanted but could never find for call filtering in the the app store. I've essentially set mine so that if the calling number is not in my contacts, or is not a number I've called in the last 90 days, the phone never runs and the call is sent to voice mail. But it supports lots of other mechanisms to filter with like regex, or how many times the number has called within a given timeframe.

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#174

Post by godelski »

runako wrote: post #171
godelski wrote: post #102

On a side note, today and yesterday I've been bombarded with spam calls. Even got one while writing this comment. All of which have my same area code, which is for a location I haven't live at for over 15 years. No voice mail, nothing. It's not even this bad around election time. Btw, if you haven't already, you can sign up for the FCC's Do Not Call list[0]. While obviously this isn't going to solve everything, it do…

> All of which have my same area code, which is for a location I haven't live at for over 15 years I am in a similar situation. One of my not-yet-implemented projects is to route my phone through a VOIP app that automatically blocks any number from my phone's area code (or even the whole state) where the caller is not in my contact list.

A few times it has been bad enough I've thought about picking up learning how to make phone apps so that I can one click report the numbers to the FCC. I'm not sure it'll do something but making an explicit "fuck you, do something about this" statement tends to help. Squeaky wheel and all that... (Why is this not a feature in the base phone app?)

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#175

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

zeta0134 wrote: post #110

At this point I'm firmly of the opinion that "leak this 10 digit code and anyone on the planet can call me relentlessly" is just a broken model. Maybe that worked better when the calls carried a significant cost, but clearly the scammers are able to do this sort of thing at scale. In practice of course, my phone is 100% permanently in "do not disturb" mode and does not ring at all unless I've added you to my contact…

>I'm not sure what the correct end solution is, but the current solution seems to be very broken.

If we just made it impossible for phone calls to reach US destinations if they originate from a short list of foreign countries, would that actually do anything to address this issue?

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#176

Post by brendoelfrendo »

nutjob2 wrote: post #145
teeray wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others have alluded, there are unknown third parties who must call you (and you would want their call). For example, the hospital: something has happened with a loved one. We can probably solve this problem with certification. Show me your medical license (or hospital scale equivalent) and you get to make unsolicited calls. Then we allow people to select certified unsolicited calls by category: medical, financial,…

Even in this case, I'd rather get a text message. A mere call doesn't provide any context and is not informative. Maybe your loved one showed up in their ER or maybe it's a billing issue. The text message should explain the nature of the call and which number to call in reply.

I agree that a text can help provide context, and I definitely prefer it for non-emergency communications, but sometimes people want to go straight to synchronous communication so they can discuss urgent details without delay.

> The text message should explain the nature of the call and which number to call in reply.

You lost me here. If I get an unsolicited text message claiming to be a doctor who needs to speak to me urgently about a loved one's medical emergency, I'm not calling back via any number other than the hospital's front desk or switchboard. Invoking an emergency and asking you to call an unverified phone number is scamming 101.

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#177

Post by [deleted] »

unsignedint wrote: post #76

The PSTN is simply not sustainable. It’s a relic of a time when there was no practical way to authenticate or validate calls. Today, with malicious actors able to dial in from anywhere in the world at negligible cost, the system is fundamentally unequipped to handle the abuse it faces. Efforts like STIR/SHAKEN exist, but they’re little more than a band-aid—and not a particularly effective one—because the underlying n…

[deleted]

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#178

Post by crooked-v »

darkhelmet wrote: post #158
conductr wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could just block the numbers, or auto send to voicemail, that my phone already flags as Spam/Telemarketing this wouldn’t be so frustrating for me. I do need my phone to ring for unknowns/outside my contacts numbers, so the blocking ability I need isn’t available (on iOS anyway.) I am left manually doing this when something rings if it is flagged, I will ignore it and if it’s unknown and not flagged I will answer…

For what it's worth, upcoming iOS 26 has a new screening feature. The idea is that calls from numbers you don't have a connection with will be asked to briefly identify themselves and why they're calling. It'll show you this text and give you the choice to block/send-to-voicemail/ignore/accept.

There's also a "send unsaved numbers to voicemail" option if you don't like the call screening, and a separate toggle that puts calls/voicemails from unknown numbers on a separate list from the main one.

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#179

Post by mulmen »

unsignedint wrote: post #76

The PSTN is simply not sustainable. It’s a relic of a time when there was no practical way to authenticate or validate calls. Today, with malicious actors able to dial in from anywhere in the world at negligible cost, the system is fundamentally unequipped to handle the abuse it faces. Efforts like STIR/SHAKEN exist, but they’re little more than a band-aid—and not a particularly effective one—because the underlying n…

This is a corollary to Chesterton’s fence. unsignedint’s public good.

If you can’t explain the benefit then you can’t tear it down. The PSTN guarantees that all telco operators interoperate. Without it you get what happened with instant messaging. AKA walled gardens. You take for granted the ability to call an iPhone with an Android.

The FCC is responsible for maintaining trust, which they have done here. They can incentivize telco providers to curb the spam activity. You don’t need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Re: FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

#180

Post by cptskippy »

darkhelmet wrote: post #158
conductr wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I could just block the numbers, or auto send to voicemail, that my phone already flags as Spam/Telemarketing this wouldn’t be so frustrating for me. I do need my phone to ring for unknowns/outside my contacts numbers, so the blocking ability I need isn’t available (on iOS anyway.) I am left manually doing this when something rings if it is flagged, I will ignore it and if it’s unknown and not flagged I will answer…

For what it's worth, upcoming iOS 26 has a new screening feature. The idea is that calls from numbers you don't have a connection with will be asked to briefly identify themselves and why they're calling. It'll show you this text and give you the choice to block/send-to-voicemail/ignore/accept.

So iOS will automatically confirm your number for spammers? That's nice...
Post reply on HN