Use of this data, or perhaps to be fairer on the author of the blog, the use of the data in the manner implied by Barclays is not to be encouraged. People shou

Use of this data, or perhaps to be fairer on the author of the blog, the use of the data in the manner implied by Barclays is not to be encouraged. People should NOT be trusting calls simply on the basis of the number presented and should ALWAYS validate the caller by another means. Spoofing of numbers is a reality on communications networks worldwide. This applies even in places in the US where they have STIR/SHAKEN tokens. STIR/SHAKEN tokens are mostly about the reactive tracing the origin of the call, not necessarily about proactive blocking spoofing. The UK, like 99.999% of other telecoms networks in the world doesn't even have the equivalent to STIR/SHAKEN and is reliant on carriers implementing (or, more often not) various limited and mostly informal possibilities. You would have thought a company such as Barclays would be more knowledgeable than to go around saying that you can trust a CLI if it matches one on a list we publish.