Will this KYC reduce spam and scam calls?
No.
It did in every other country that did it. What's different about this one? If you get a spam call in Europe from Europe, you call the police and the spammer gets located and punished.
A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
11–20 of 248 posts
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#12We really just need telcos to stop allowing caller id spoofing. Doesn’t even need your name, but with a real number we could actually report these scams. You can still allow people to hide it, but then by default every non-business phone should block calls with hidden numbers.
What ever happened to SHAKEN/STIR? I thought this was supposed to happen 5 years ago. Did they just chicken out on the prospect of actually shutting down telcos sending spam volume? I still get loads of spam phone calls, so clearly something went wrong (or slow enough to be indistinguishable from wrong).
I'm not certain, but I think on my phone incoming calls that fail SHAKEN/STIR show the caller id in red rather than black text. I'm on T-Mobile. It also shows "Number Verified" or something like that.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#13Will this KYC reduce spam and scam calls?
In theory, it could help. In practice, for KYC to reduce spam and scam calls, FCC would have to be willing to drop hammer big time on people and telcos who allow it to happen. With current political climate in the US, I don't see that happening since companies would scream "Poor pitiful us" and fines would be the cost of doing business.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#14> Note: By checking this box, I acknowledge that I am filing a document into an official FCC proceeding. All information submitted, including names and addresses, will be publicly available via the web.
Is there really not a way to submit an express FCC comment that avoids all my personal info being publicly published to the web? Yeesh.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#15I will not be called to action by a page with a big slop image at the top.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
What ever happened to SHAKEN/STIR? I thought this was supposed to happen 5 years ago. Did they just chicken out on the prospect of actually shutting down telcos sending spam volume? I still get loads of spam phone calls, so clearly something went wrong (or slow enough to be indistinguishable from wrong).
According to a defcon talk, spammers just make sure all their spam gets routed through legacy TDM systems which discard the shaken/stir header because they're too old to support it. The other side then re-adds a "we got this from somewhere that didn't support this header" header.
> legacy TDM systems
Easy fix. It should be opt-in to accept a call that is routed through one of these. I know they allow it so some grandma in rural France that still uses a dial phone on a copper line that hasn't been touched since 1962 can call her son in New York, but for the rest of us who are not in that situation, we can just blacklist all those calls and lose nothing. This would even fix spam for the people who opt-in, because so few people have grandmas in rural France that it's not worth it for the spammers to bother anymore.
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#17KYC == ''Know Your Customer''
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#18> Note: By checking this box, I acknowledge that I am filing a document into an official FCC proceeding. All information submitted, including names and addresses, will be publicly available via the web. Is there really not a way to submit an express FCC comment that avoids all my personal info being publicly published to the web? Yeesh.
call your congress critter instead
Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#19Re: A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
#20Im USA based use prepaid service because I dont want to provide information for a credit check to obtain postpay service. Theres absolutely no reason for a US based telephony provider to retain the most sensitive PII on their customers. Every large provider has a history of breaches and selling customer data. The telephone companies are already tracking, storing, selling; so many data points on their customers. They…
Counterpoint: for my part I would like it to be the case that any phone line that can dial or message my phone can be traced back to a known human being who can be held accountable for abuse of that phone line in terms of generating spam, abuse or harassment. Seems that we can’t both get what we want. A potential solution is that you get your anonymous phone line but my phone provider simply refuses to let you call m…
I would like any message that is spam to be able to be traced back to the offending human.
I would like anonymous political posts to be untraceable by the government.
I can't even get all of what I want.