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

121–130 of 281 posts

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

#121

Post by conductr »

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…

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 it. It’s not perfect but could easily cut more than half of my current interruptions.

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

#122

Post by gwbas1c »

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.

I think one of two high-level approaches:

We could be ultra-strict about who is allowed to call whom, and have penalties and enforcement similar to how we police credit card fraud.

Or, we could do away with phone numbers and instead come up with a scheme where you show a QR-like code to allow someone to call you; and then you can revoke that permission if/when it is abused.

---

Finally, I think the crux of the problem is that in the US we tolerate far too much of this kind of behavior. (Unsolicited contact for the purpose of sales.) Without a corresponding publicity campaign, there's far too much cultural tolerance of allowing anyone to contact anyone at any time for any reason to accept the kind of change needed to truly contain SPAM.

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

#123

Post by CivBase »

Why doesn't the FCC put together a new communications solution to replace phone calls? We already have capable devices and robust infrastructure. What's stopping them from dropping a new protocol on top of that?

The costs of maintaining this legacy solution only seem to be getting higher by the day.

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

#124

Post by jjmarr »

RankingMember wrote: post #71
_fat_santa wrote: post #49

Before I got my phone number, a woman by the name of "Sade" has the number. Recently I've been getting at least one call per day from the same company regarding an extended auto warranty. I've told them politely that this is the wrong number, they keep calling. I've asked them to take my number off their list and they happily agree to, but they keep calling. I've threatened to contact the FCC is they keep calling yet…

I never answer any calls from non-contacts because I assume answering automatically flags the number as "a live one" meaning "potential target who picks up their phone" in any number of nefarious databases. If an outside/unknown number needs me they can leave a message and I'll call them back if the message reveals them to be legit.

I think there's a database of "known trolls" because I've stopped getting calls after I started consistently wasting their time.

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

#125

Post by gwbas1c »

conductr wrote: post #121
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…

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…

I use call screening with Google Fi. I recently added my number to the FCC block list, and they made some recent changes, so it's gotten a lot better.

I did ask if I could just send all calls not in my contact list to get screened, and that idea seemed to "blow their mind," though.

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

#126

Post by gosub100 »

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…

"do not call" means "call me from India on a burner number". Seriously, I've been fighting scammers for years now and their MO is some sort of SEO service where a local business pays to get more "marketing" and (probably unbeknownst to them) their money is used to fund an outbound call center in India that robodials all day long, careful to not call during the night. The calls solicit Medicare upgrades, burial insurance, or home improvement. I don't think these are the malignant "clean your bank account" scammers, they end up promoting legitimate business with the catch that "by accepting this offer you agree to be called (by the local rep) even if you are on the DNC list". So their original robodial is illegal but it's from India so good luck with that, but they record your consent if you pretend to be interested in the product, so you cannot sue the people who contracted them. It's just a classic skirt the law ploy.

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

#127

Post by thfuran »

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've received I think two total spam calls in the years since I ported my cell number to a voip service and set up an IVR in front that just says to press any number. It also blocks the very, very few robocalls I might actually want, and occasionally some company will refuse to accept a voip number as a cell number, but most everything just works fine.

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

#128

Post by ghaff »

conductr wrote: post #121
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…

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…

Yeah. I'm not sure why Spam Risk rings because it almost certainly is spam. But I do get doctor offices, service people related to something I'm dealing with at the moment, emergencies related to family members, etc. that are legit. I suspect the permanently do not disturb faction are mostly in a different life stage than many of us.

I'd probably add that the area code + exchange calls from an area code that you don't actually live in are spam as well though don't see those as much as I once did.

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

#129

Post by mikestew »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #108
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…

The do not call list seems to be a "Spam me, you brute" list. In the beginning, they seemed to take their job seriously, but I doubt that has been the case for many years. Right after SHAKEN/STIR was passed, I got zero spoofed calls. I did get a few robocalls, but they weren't spoofed. For a month or so. So that shows the problem can be solved, legislatively. Then, they started coming back, and now, almost every call…

Cynically, I feel as if politicians are unwilling to get tough on these, because they (or their proxies) use them.

Of course they do, and they voted themselves an exception. Same reason some small business in Redmond, WA isn't allowed to put out a sandwich board sign, but 10 months before every election every g*ddamned piece of dirt in Redmond has a political sign stuck into it.

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

#130

Post by delfinom »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #108
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…

The do not call list seems to be a "Spam me, you brute" list. In the beginning, they seemed to take their job seriously, but I doubt that has been the case for many years. Right after SHAKEN/STIR was passed, I got zero spoofed calls. I did get a few robocalls, but they weren't spoofed. For a month or so. So that shows the problem can be solved, legislatively. Then, they started coming back, and now, almost every call…

They figured out the flaw to SHAKEN/STIR. It was mandated for VOIP calls.

So instead these scam call centers switched to the legacy SS7, that's how you are getting all these fraudulent calls. SS7 is not IP based and incompatible with SHAKEN/STIR

And it'll be 400 years from now before any US telecom thinks about discontinuing SS7.

Post reply on HN