Live data from Hacker News

US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

thecentersquare.com

221–223 of 223 posts

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now that STIR/SHAKEN is supposedly a thing, is there a way in Android that I can block calls that go through those carriers?

Unfortunately it's carrier to carrier and not data we're privy to. Carriers get paid arbitrage fees for carrying or connecting calls, so they really have no incentive to stop these calls other than legal liability.

Then they really dropped the ball on SHAKEN/STIR. At a minimum they should pass the customer all the hops so we can block shit we don't want (international calls, VOIP calls, known spammers, known bad companies etc.) on our end.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it's carrier to carrier and not data we're privy to. Carriers get paid arbitrage fees for carrying or connecting calls, so they really have no incentive to stop these calls other than legal liability.

Then they really dropped the ball on SHAKEN/STIR. At a minimum they should pass the customer all the hops so we can block shit we don't want (international calls, VOIP calls, known spammers, known bad companies etc.) on our end.

Telecommunications is interesting in that everything strives to be backwards compatible and will accommodate the lowest common denominator to connect a call. It's very much like Microsoft Windows, in that backward compatibility is both a strength and a common source of problems. Government mandates don't usually go beyond borders, so carriers have to accommodate international operators.

And any new features or technologies often introduce or expose problems.

When Caller ID was introduced, there was a huge backlash around privacy. Callers were upset about having the number they were calling from being exposed. If a doctor called a patient it could expose his direct or home number instead of the office number. In the age of phone books, a phone number could be associated with an address. The ACLU sued to block Caller ID until it was possible to disabled it.

Because large call centers operated hundreds of numbers and wanted a way for them to all appear as the same business entity. Carriers later implemented ways for these customers to spoof Caller ID so that the carrier wasn't responsible for maintaining it. Carriers connecting calls had to trust the originating carrier's caller ID info as well.

All these requirements allowed for a bad actor to spoof Caller ID and for it to just be trusted.

Carriers use to have star codes you would use for certain features like disabling Caller ID, disabling Call Waiting, and, famously, calling back a number that called you. These are similar to the AT codes you can issue to the modem in your cellphone via the dialer. Kids today will never appreciate REM's Star 69.

When digital cellphones arrived, they presented some odd challenges too like the fact that call information was transmitted digitally to the carrier and not via analog tones. Because number presses on your cellphone didn't equate to analog tones over the line, cellphone users couldn't interact with IVR menu systems (e.g., "Press 1 for English...").

Character limits in SMS messages come from the fact that they occupied the null space in beacon messages transmitted between cell towers and phones. Before MMS was a thing you couldn't send longer messages or if your phone broke them up into chunks, they might be delivered out of order or not at all.

Re: US Anti-Robocall Litigation Task Force

#223

This is so easily fixable with the lessons we've learned with egress filtering on the Internet. Legally require large providers to never allow their customers to falsify caller ID. Then have the large providers disconnect small providers who pass along fraudulent caller ID until all small providers are either out of business or aren't facilitating spammers. It's literally that easy, but Congress has ducked this up ti…

"Falsifying caller ID" sounds bad but: 1) we get calls if one of our kids misses class. The number is of their school but they use an outside service. 2) we get calls from business on one of their lines but they want the number to show as the main number. Businesses have a few to a few thousand outgoing lines but they may have many too many thousand extensions. 3) there are people who work from home and call out to c…

You're confused about the meaning of "falsify": alter so as to mislead.

Using a caller ID name / number that you have the right to use is, of course, fine. Using a caller ID name / number that is clearly and obviously not you is attempting to mislead.

You can't walk in to a bank and say you're someone else. So, just like that, but with phones.

But I really wonder why you think it necessary to make excuses for scammers...

Post reply on HN