Live data from Hacker News

FCC bars providers for non-compliance with robocall protections

docs.fcc.gov

151–160 of 281 posts

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

#151
post #21
post #2

Good start. Next, put the people running these scam phone providers in jail.

I'm going to go ahead and say none of them are in the jurisdiction of the DoJ.

If a country dares have IP laws less restrictive than the US would like, the US finds plenty of levers to pull. But in this case, the matter is something that is illegal in the scammer's country also (clear fraud tends to be illegal everywhere), so there's probably more that US police could do than literally nothing.

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

#152

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…

  > Also, legit callers should keep in mind 
Also, legit callers should keep in mind that using a screening service (like Google's) should mean "I'm looking at my phone but you're calling from an unknown number so why do you expect me to pick it up in a world where literally everyone knows how common spam calls are?"

As well as "If you leave a message there's a decent chance I'm going to call you back in 30 seconds, I don't want to start a game of phone tag."

If I don't know your number AND I'm not expecting a call, I 100% will not answer it. If you're legit, sorry, you are the exception, not the typical case. Don't blame me, blame the spammers.

The modern world is absolutely infuriating, filled with self-inflicted problems.

  > Right after SHAKEN/STIR was passed
It has definitely gone through ebbs and flows. Predictably around legislation about this topic. I 100% believe this is a problem that can be solved (greatly impacted) through legislation given this strong correlation. But I don't think it is because the DNC list is a list to call but rather that I've had this number for a few decades and it definitely made it onto some list years ago.

  > moonlight as spammers
This is 100% happening. As well as a lot of other illegal stuff. I worked at a call center for two months between my undergrad and getting hired and my coked up bosses 100% asked us to do illegal things. I disobeyed. Anytime someone asked me to take them off the list I complied. Got written up, didn't give a fuck. They were definitely selling those lists to spammers who were happy to have confirmation that the numbers were legitimate.

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

#153
“ The FCC is doing everything in its power to fight back against these malicious and illegal calls.”

Umm, no it isn’t. This is 2025. The technology to fix this is not complicated, but the people who can implement it simply don’t want to.

If Verizon/ATT/T Mo got fined $25 every time a robo call went through they’d find a way to stop it really fast. Create KYC verification systems and use metadata to route non-verified calls to a spam voicemail folder, problem solved.

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

#154

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…

There are so many simple solutions, just like phone privacy is fixable (firewall your phone)

I just don't think anyone wants to fix it. Why can't apple let us send "spam risk" to voicemail?

Like adding extensions, possibly with passwords to your phone line.

It would be good to give an extension or password to friends, or one for each business, which can be automated to input with a pause after answering, and it gets through (or further) if possible.

we should have phone rules just like mail rules.

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

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Funny enough, when that Roy Moore scandal was unfolding I was living in The South and I kept getting calls and voicemails from someone named "Bernie Bernstein" who was definitely trying their best impression of Bernie Sanders while telling me about how Democrats are pedophiles.

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

#156
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. My city started posting about online safety and warnings about various scams. Unfortunately, almost every one of them also mentions how a local resident was victimized. We have a fairly large senior population. It's easy to say it's idiots who fall for this stuff when we're young enough to have grown up in this world or started using new technology at an early age. We will be the ones targeted someday and it…

> It's easy to say it's idiots who fall for this stuff It’s not just “easy”, it’s an ideological imperative to ensure that the vulnerable have “personal responsibility” to avoid predation, while predators bear no responsibility for their own actions. Many tech business models depend on exploitation — it’s not just phone scammers.

It's always convenient to decide that the weak deserve to be exploited because they were too lazy or stupid to be strong. Then we can do the thing that makes the least sense, which is to design society to protect the strong.

Or rather, to justify what the strong were already doing and didn't have to ask anybody's permission to do, and that nobody else ever had a say about that mattered.

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

#157

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…

I have an app on Android called SpamBlocker. I added a regex rule to deny any call from my area code - like you, I haven't lived there for a long time. I'd 100% recommend this approach.

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

#158

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…

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.

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

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wish I could tell my phone to return a busy signal for unknown numbers lacking whatever it is that SHAKEN/STIR provides.

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

#160
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How I imagine you ~~calling~~ emailing the fire department: https://youtu.be/uesx85EHRTo (The IT crowd - Moss Contacts Fire Department)

Sure, put the emergency hotline on the internet. It already is very special and doesn't use the phone network the way other voice calls do.

Maybe shutting down the entire phone system would be too disruptive, but perhaps we could start by rethinking incoming calls for individuals—or at least shift the social norm around them. In a sense, that trend has already begun, since most people won’t pick up if the number is unfamiliar. And in circles where multi-modal communication is the default, how often do you actually get a legitimate call over PSTN anymore?

Legitimacy aside, the only people who still call me without prior arrangement tend to be those who assume they’re entitled to my time and attention on demand. The phone has always been a disruptive form of communication—even if every single call were legitimate (which is far from reality)—because it disregards the boundaries of the recipient’s time.

That’s why I stopped giving anyone real-time PSTN access. For me, it’s voicemail-only now, and honestly, it’s the best decision I’ve made for cutting down on annoyances.

Post reply on HN