The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790 • Hacker News Board

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#91

Post by _delirium » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:12 PM UTC

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #78

tamalpais wrote: post #27

I enabled the Silence Unknown Callers feature [0] in iOS and haven’t answered a spam call since. The downside is that it sends every call from unknown numbers to voicemail, including legitimate ones. It’s a worthwhile trade-off. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207099

I tried it, and within a week I missed an important call. I was waiting by the phone, and it just never arrived. I realized too late that it had been silenced. It's very frustrating that we can't just get something like a spam filter, rather than a blanket "silence everything unknown."

T-Mobile does spam filtering; not sure about other carriers. The default configuration (or at least I think it is, because I don't remember changing it) is to tag the calls by setting the Caller-ID to the name "Scam Likely". You can then configure your phone to respond differently to calls from that ID (e.g. disable ringer). Alternately, if you trust their filtering enough, you can have those calls blocked so they don't ring through to the phone at all. I think it's been working fairly well for me, but I also rarely get legitimate calls from anyone other than a handful of friends/family who are in my contacts list, so I can't be too sure of the false-positive rate.

Info: https://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-38784

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#92

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:14 PM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #47

jacquesm wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

English is like C, even after 30 years it still has the potential to surprise you :)

'tis as the good book ( https://xkcd.com/1053/ ) says.

Cue 10,000 people submitting a link about the Yellowstone Supervolcano.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#93

Post by nobodyandproud » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #25

nobodyandproud wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the article, you’ll see that often the ones running these scams can’t pay the full amount. You don’t need a lot of money to spam calls. It wasn’t always this way, and getting random BS calls almost never happened back then.

That's fine. We have a solution for people who don't have the full amount of a fine. We take every penny that they do have. Since the guy hasn't paid a cent, and is not living under a bridge, panhandling with a "Homeless veteran, please give me money for food" sign, I'm pretty sure that this is a problem with enforcement . > You don’t need a lot of money to spam calls. No, but you do get a lot of money from the peopl…

That’s not at all a disincentive if the same person then just gets another setup a month later, and starts all over again.

This is not a law enforcement problem, because this problem only became common once phone calls were virtually free to make.

A lot of problems would be solved if phone calls are billable. Then the telcos would be fighting amongst themselves to make sure that they get paid.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#94

Post by giancarlostoro » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #42

I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…

I don't know how Google Voice did it, but I rarely if ever got a robocall when I had Google Voice. After leaving Sprint (and losing Google Voice after years of having it) I get them all the time. T-Mobile catches a few here and there, but I get so many damn spam calls. I just have my phone on mute.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#95

Post by nobodyandproud » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:17 PM UTC

ravenstine wrote: post #42

I see people here saying that spoofed numbers is the problem. Maybe it's a big part of it, but at the end of the day, the phone companies are complicit with the criminals because there's no good reason that these robocalls can't be treated like a DoS attack. These crooks make millions , of calls every year. My first employer was apparently making robocalls, though none of us were aware of it(there was a call center w…

Yup. It’s amusing to see people think there is some hard technical problem here.

Tie the problem of robocalls to the telcos losing money, and this problem will solve itself in months.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#96

Post by OliverJones » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:19 PM UTC

Lots of these robocalls are fraudulent. They say nonsense like they're the FBI acting on behalf of the IRS, with a warrant for my arrest. If somebody ran a scam like that through the USPS, they'd become a guest of the US Bureau of Prisons for a few years. Internet DoSers get prison time too. But not these parasites.

If the scammers are offshore, an arrest or two in the customs hall at an airport will get peoples' attention.

Prison time, big fines, and restitution will be a more effective deterrent than what we have today. The American Graffiti (1974) writers correctly described the current system of uncollected fines. https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/6cac9bde-4762-41c2-8b76-264eba9...

Even if hard time doesn't deter these people, a few big cases will at least let the federal government project the illusion they're doing something about it.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#97

Post by Semaphor » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:19 PM UTC

beerandt wrote: post #82

Semaphor wrote: post #68

I have a question, why are robocalls such a problem in the U.S.A.? As far as I know, they aren’t in Germany (or if they are, not on that level, I never got one).

It wasn't too much of a problem, but it has escalated quickly in the last couple of years, especially with people figuring out how to change or spoof CNAM data, which is what shows up on caller ID. For a while, they'd use numbers only a couple of digits off from yours, or have a set pattern (like add 4 to each of your last 3 digits). Now people don't answer local calls, so they've moved on to neighboring area codes.…

So it’s purely the spoofing?

I looked at Wikipedia, and we have "CLIP" (Calling Line Identification Presentation) and "CLIP no screening" (essentially spoofed numbers). Spoofing a number that you don’t own the rights for is a crime.

So it looks like we have spoofing but only in a sane way, is the other kind of spoofing legal in the US? Or is there some other underlying problem?

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#98

Post by kiernanmcgowan » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:20 PM UTC

tamalpais wrote: post #27

I enabled the Silence Unknown Callers feature [0] in iOS and haven’t answered a spam call since. The downside is that it sends every call from unknown numbers to voicemail, including legitimate ones. It’s a worthwhile trade-off. [0] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207099

The majority of spam calls come from the same area code as my phone number, but its not the area code that I live in. I'd love this feature to be area code specific - it would give the granularity I need to block spam but allow for unknown numbers from where I now live.

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#99

Post by weberc2 » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:21 PM UTC

nobodyandproud wrote: post #55

jjoonathan wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The technological and legislative infrastructure required to turn this into a market far exceeds what would be required for simpler anti-spam measures. It comes across as unhelpful and detached, like suggesting world peace as the solution to gang violence in your neighborhood.

What technical limitation? There is nothing simpler, except that some very well-funded special interest groups never want to see this happen. When I was on a limited plan, the amount of spam messages and calls were virtually zero because the limit would run up and be charged against the caller (internationally). The month I switched to an unlimited, I started getting spammed. Now much of the spam is domestic, but I f…

Why should we artificially charge law abiding people for making a call? Why not disallow call spoofing? Why should we allow telecom fraud, especially when there are obvious technical solutions?

And what well-funded SIGs are our to get your phone call tax plan?

Re: The FCC Has Fined Robocallers $208M, Collected $6,790

#100

Post by howdydoo » Sat, Nov 09, 2019, 7:22 PM UTC

Aloha wrote: post #79

howdydoo wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even that wouldn't be necessary. Here's an idea – when receiving a call, the receiving network could separately connect to the claimed number and verify its authenticity. No match? Reject the caller. The owner of a number (and thus its cryptographic identity) could then delegate other agents to use its keys, its phone number, and most importantly, its reputation. Cryptography has come a long way since the days of rot…

The FCC s already working on signing Caller ID, which sounds like what you're proposing, or similar to. https://www.fcc.gov/call-authentication

Thanks for the link! It looks like it's on track to be implemented this year. I must admit I am _very_ pleasantly surprised to see a project of this scale on track to be completed in under two years (knock on wood). For everyone's sake, I hope it works as advertised!