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

161–170 of 281 posts

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

#161

Post by godelski »

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…

  > leak this 10 digit code
Leak? It's a 10 digit code where you can throw out more than two thirds of them. The only leaking is getting names attached and being currently active.

I mean numbers are as terrible as social security numbers. For both of them you can take your number, add one, and get another valid number.

I'm also not sure what the correct solution is but I'm sure there's some pretty smart people out there that have some really good ideas and understand the issue with a lot of complexity (aka: I won't believe anyone who starts with "It's so simple, you just...")

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

#162

Post by thinkingtoilet »

_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've always thought that it's because you picked up in the first place. This number is now marked as one that has a human who picks up the phone.

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

#163

Post by godelski »

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.

  >  upcoming iOS 26 has a new screening feature
I had this on my old Pixel. The result was that people generally hung up and didn't leave a message. Apple is a little bit better with marketing and hopefully won't make the same dumb move of making it a "pro only feature" so maybe it'll be different this time around...

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

#164

Post by stackskipton »

Bender wrote: post #12
coldpie wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can someone from outside the US make my phone ring? Why can't I opt out of calls sourced internationally? Seems like an easy way to fix the problem. There is no reason for anyone overseas to call me, and if someone US-based does phone spamming, we can prosecute them.

Why can someone from outside the US make my phone ring? There are applications to block international calls but that only helps if the number is not spoofed. People that have SS7 lines into the telco system can spoof as just about any number. I wanted to kill those circuits but my employer at the time said, "they are paying their bills, arent they?" . This was in the 90's. I guess the laws are every so slowly startin…

This is telco doing as well.

It should be illegal for Telco to allow SS7 spoofing for numbers that customer does not show they own.

Initial SIP setup shows number not to be a number they own, drop the SIP dial and be done with it.

Also, all US based phone numbers should have US based person tied to it. If they misbehave, drop them and blacklist them.

All this is solvable if we don't let phone providers get away with "Welp, the checks cleared, this is not our problem."

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

#165

Post by donmcronald »

Timwi wrote: post #146
SilverElfin wrote: post #45

I get relentless text and phone spam calls - both robotic and with humans - from just a few voice over Internet platforms. Bandwidth.com, Neutral Tandem, and ALL the brands associated with Sinch ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinch_AB ) like Inteliquent. Many of these companies got cease and desist orders in the past from the FTC. It didn’t help anything. We need to see them fined, shut down, and executives jailed.

> We need to see them fined, shut down, and executives jailed. Is that what European countries do? Is that why there are no robocalls there?

I'm not positive, but i think they charge an astronomical amount for calls that don't originate from a local calling prefix. Of course you can get those, but some countries require ID.

Mainly I know that calling from a voip number was really expensive when I tried to set something up for a family member going on vacation to Europe. That probably cuts back on a lot of spam calls.

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

#166

Post by immibis »

coldpie wrote: post #91
singpolyma3 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are all platforms with many different products built but others on top of them. Shutting down all abuse is a cat and mouse game and not something they can "just do" if given tighter rules

This seems solvable. Put the person most closely traceable to the source of the spam in jail, like a form of KYC laws. If you can't identify the actual human who is causing you to put spam into the network, or that person is outside of your country's jurisdiction, then you are the one who goes to jail. If you don't want to go to jail, then don't accept calls from someone you can't point the finger at.

This is how Germany deals with torrent piracy. The net effect is that it was illegal to run a public WiFi hotspot until a special exemption was made for it. In 2017.

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

#167

Post by pogue »

gwbas1c wrote: post #125
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…

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.

You mean the donotcall.gov database? What changes have they made?

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

#168

Post by thephyber »

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…

Yup.

I didn’t realize how bad it got until my father stopped answering calls. It turned out he was getting (no hyperbole) 90 calls a day from spammers and vendors he had no relationship with.

I used the iOS filter, the AT&T filter, and turned on the shortcut so the phone doesn’t ring unless the caller is in his contacts.

The problem is that it already changed his behavior. He doesn’t answer the phone anymore, even if it is a person he recognizes. The Pavlovian response to his ringtone is still very negative.

I’m sure there is a non-trivial percentage of the US who already viscerally hates receiving phone calls.

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

#169

Post by Tuna-Fish »

thephyber wrote: post #168
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…

Yup. I didn’t realize how bad it got until my father stopped answering calls. It turned out he was getting (no hyperbole) 90 calls a day from spammers and vendors he had no relationship with. I used the iOS filter, the AT&T filter, and turned on the shortcut so the phone doesn’t ring unless the caller is in his contacts. The problem is that it already changed his behavior. He doesn’t answer the phone anymore, even if…

This sounds stupid, but it worked for me. Change the ringtone.

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

#170

Post by temporallobe »

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 tried this method, but it didn’t work out for many reasons. I often have to deal with people I don’t personally know for various reasons (mechanic, lawn care, doctors, school staff, etc.), and I have missed too many important calls like this, so I basically just have to deal with it. About 50% of the time it seems to be caught with “spam risk” or something like that, otherwise I just use my judgment.
Post reply on HN