5 ms·

Another possible solution: Government enacts a law that telecom companies MUST ensure that SenderID is valid for the company that sends the SMS.

feet 4y ago
Yea but that would require that the government actually regulate something g which they haven't done since what, the 70s?
- winrid 4y ago
  Well they just regulated women's bodies today...
  - feet 4y ago
    Oh no you see, that was deregulation! Now the states get the choice to regulate women's bodies Ugh But yea, trigger laws enacted have now regulated women's bodies in something like 15-20 States or something? It's disgusting
onelesd 4y ago
Telecoms lobby against this because they generate big revenues servicing SMS spammers whom end-users aren't able to effectively block since the ID is trivially spoofed.
- remix2000 4y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised if telecoms themselves were the ones coordinating some SMS scam operations. This may sound tinfoilish, but we're talking about the same telecoms that were once caught red-handed tricking people into calling back foreign numbers...
- newsclues 4y ago
  Ding ding ding! It’s profitable on multiple levels to allow this, so corporations ensure the political class doesn’t enact legislation for consumers.
- dotancohen 4y ago
  Furthermore, SMS competes with Whatsapp. I don't use WhatsApp, so with people who do not have Telegram I use SMS. The more annoying and conotated with spam SMS is, the more pushy people become with insisting on WhatsApp. Luckily I'm often in a position to absolutely resist, but I can see how others, such as job hunters or Tinder hookups, would be pressured into installing the spyware. This is not being done by Facebook/WhatsApp themselves, but keeping SMS annoying is certainly in Facebook's interest.
  - dools 4y ago
    WhatsApp has the hella spam problems
- ruff 4y ago
  Hmm... for all 10 digit US numbers the telcos introduce 10 DLC registrations last year that require you to register and verify your business in order to send any meaningful amount of SMS traffic. You have to provide details like a DUNs number, an EIN, and addresses that match those registrations. https://support.bandwidth.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500002422242-10DLC-Overview https://support.bandwidth.com/hc/en-us/articles/150000242224... They haven't gotten to blocking messages that don't register but have raised the fees and fines for folks who don't register and they're able to track down.
kuon 4y ago
I have a VOIP business account, and I can set any caller ID I want (including on SMS). And this is validated at the carrier level. The main use case for this is redirection, when I get a call from A to my office O, it will also call my mobile phone M, but it is my PBX at O that start the call, so normally I would have O as caller on my phone, but I want A, so my PBX must be able to set the caller ID to A. I cannot use redirection at the carrier level, because a number might redirect to multiple mobile phone at the same time or recording the call or any feature that are provided by a PBX. I guess this is a very common use case and it make it trivial to spoof caller ID.
- rsync 4y ago
  "I have a VOIP business account, and I can set any caller ID I want (including on SMS). And this is validated at the carrier level." There is an easy fix to this and I believe Twilio does this ... You allow senders to announce CID for any number they have validated with your service (in this case, Twilio) ... so you prove to Twilio that you control that number and they they let you set that number as CID. Seems like a very simple and elegant solution ... and allows for the use-cases that you are alluding to.

feet 4y ago

Yea but that would require that the government actually regulate something g which they haven't done since what, the 70s?

winrid 4y ago
Well they just regulated women's bodies today...
- feet 4y ago
  Oh no you see, that was deregulation! Now the states get the choice to regulate women's bodies Ugh But yea, trigger laws enacted have now regulated women's bodies in something like 15-20 States or something? It's disgusting

onelesd 4y ago

Telecoms lobby against this because they generate big revenues servicing SMS spammers whom end-users aren't able to effectively block since the ID is trivially spoofed.

remix2000 4y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if telecoms themselves were the ones coordinating some SMS scam operations. This may sound tinfoilish, but we're talking about the same telecoms that were once caught red-handed tricking people into calling back foreign numbers...
newsclues 4y ago
Ding ding ding! It’s profitable on multiple levels to allow this, so corporations ensure the political class doesn’t enact legislation for consumers.
dotancohen 4y ago
Furthermore, SMS competes with Whatsapp. I don't use WhatsApp, so with people who do not have Telegram I use SMS. The more annoying and conotated with spam SMS is, the more pushy people become with insisting on WhatsApp. Luckily I'm often in a position to absolutely resist, but I can see how others, such as job hunters or Tinder hookups, would be pressured into installing the spyware. This is not being done by Facebook/WhatsApp themselves, but keeping SMS annoying is certainly in Facebook's interest.
- dools 4y ago
  WhatsApp has the hella spam problems
ruff 4y ago
Hmm... for all 10 digit US numbers the telcos introduce 10 DLC registrations last year that require you to register and verify your business in order to send any meaningful amount of SMS traffic. You have to provide details like a DUNs number, an EIN, and addresses that match those registrations. https://support.bandwidth.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500002422242-10DLC-Overview https://support.bandwidth.com/hc/en-us/articles/150000242224... They haven't gotten to blocking messages that don't register but have raised the fees and fines for folks who don't register and they're able to track down.

kuon 4y ago

I have a VOIP business account, and I can set any caller ID I want (including on SMS). And this is validated at the carrier level. The main use case for this is redirection, when I get a call from A to my office O, it will also call my mobile phone M, but it is my PBX at O that start the call, so normally I would have O as caller on my phone, but I want A, so my PBX must be able to set the caller ID to A. I cannot use redirection at the carrier level, because a number might redirect to multiple mobile phone at the same time or recording the call or any feature that are provided by a PBX. I guess this is a very common use case and it make it trivial to spoof caller ID.

rsync 4y ago
"I have a VOIP business account, and I can set any caller ID I want (including on SMS). And this is validated at the carrier level." There is an easy fix to this and I believe Twilio does this ... You allow senders to announce CID for any number they have validated with your service (in this case, Twilio) ... so you prove to Twilio that you control that number and they they let you set that number as CID. Seems like a very simple and elegant solution ... and allows for the use-cases that you are alluding to.