5 ms·

This is great. Everyone hates robocall and these companies that still allow robocall do not deserve to be connected to our data/voice networks.

mjevans 4y ago
I agree, this should have happened years ago. """ What’s New: Today’s Enforcement Bureau orders demanded that Akabis, Cloud4, Global UC, Horizon Technology Group, Morse Communications, Sharon Telephone Company, and SW Arkansas Telecommunications and Technology show cause within 14 days as to why the FCC should not remove them from the database. Removal from the database would require all intermediate providers and terminating voice service providers to cease carrying the companies’ traffic. If that were to occur, all calls from these providers’ customers would be blocked and no traffic originated by the provider would reach the called party. “These and other recent actions reflect the seriousness with which we take providers’ obligations to take concrete and impactful steps to combat robocalls,” said Loyaan A. Egal, acting Chief of the Enforcement Bureau. “STIR/SHAKEN is not optional. And if your network isn’t IP-based so you cannot yet use these standards, we need to see the steps taken to mitigate illegal robocalls. These providers have fallen woefully short and have now put at risk their continued participation in the U.S. communications system. While we’ll review their responses, we will not accept superficial gestures given the gravity of what is at stake.” """ Also, FFS, FCC please have press releases on normal HTML pages, not PDFs, so the pagination is client side and no one has to fix your hard wrapped lines or make things display properly on differently sized devices.
- nobody9999 4y ago
  >Also, FFS, FCC please have press releases on normal HTML pages, not PDFs, so the pagination is client side and no one has to fix your hard wrapped lines or make things display properly on differently sized devices. That would be nice. In the absence of such niceties, I chose PDF for the submission because it was the least obnoxious format available. The press release (as well as the specific orders for each provider affected) can also be had in docx and txt formats[0]. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-remove-companies-robocall-database-non-compliance https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-remove-companies-robocall-d...
- xani_ 4y ago
  At this point I take the PDF over many "modern" webshits
  - jandrese 4y ago
    At least a PDF isn't going to try to do some infinite scroll thing that screws up all linking and makes it nearly impossible to find something again.
- b3morales 4y ago
  So (still trying to understand exactly what's what)... those companies are the ones providing connectivity to the actual scammy robocallers? Or what is it that they do?
  - jffry 4y ago
    I think these companies are failing to implement STIR/SHAKEN and are running into expiring grace periods. That's not necessarily evidence of guilt - they might claim that as a small business they cannot afford these changes - but it seems like the only option to clean up the mess caused by spammers. The protocols are meant to allow tracing which network originated a call - at their root is an attestation by the network that a call they are originating for one of their customers is allowed to use the number in caller ID. If you're a network who wants your originating calls to be carried across other networks, you can't just set up a promiscuous attestation system that allows your customers to just slap on any random caller ID that they want, or else you'll get blacklisted real quick.
    - viraptor 4y ago
      > The protocols are meant to allow tracing which network originated a call ... to make tracing easier We could always trace the calls - you just had to ask each telco in the path to provide those details. There realistically wasn't any enforcement to do that though.
      - jffry 4y ago
        Yeah, I suppose you're right. Ultimately in such a tracing effort I imagine they probably would encounter a bunch of telcos passing the buck until it gets to a dissolved overseas entity who cannot be held responsible for anything.
        viraptor 4y ago
        I'll keep repeating this one forever, but - that's not an issue. This would end spam calls immediately: "if you can't tell who's the source or if the source is international, you're responsible and will be fined per spam call". Telcos are not clueless or powerless. They can put pressure on international peers to not send spam, but have no incentive currently. No real telco wants to lose partners.

mjevans 4y ago

I agree, this should have happened years ago. """ What’s New: Today’s Enforcement Bureau orders demanded that Akabis, Cloud4, Global UC, Horizon Technology Group, Morse Communications, Sharon Telephone Company, and SW Arkansas Telecommunications and Technology show cause within 14 days as to why the FCC should not remove them from the database. Removal from the database would require all intermediate providers and terminating voice service providers to cease carrying the companies’ traffic. If that were to occur, all calls from these providers’ customers would be blocked and no traffic originated by the provider would reach the called party. “These and other recent actions reflect the seriousness with which we take providers’ obligations to take concrete and impactful steps to combat robocalls,” said Loyaan A. Egal, acting Chief of the Enforcement Bureau. “STIR/SHAKEN is not optional. And if your network isn’t IP-based so you cannot yet use these standards, we need to see the steps taken to mitigate illegal robocalls. These providers have fallen woefully short and have now put at risk their continued participation in the U.S. communications system. While we’ll review their responses, we will not accept superficial gestures given the gravity of what is at stake.” """ Also, FFS, FCC please have press releases on normal HTML pages, not PDFs, so the pagination is client side and no one has to fix your hard wrapped lines or make things display properly on differently sized devices.

nobody9999 4y ago
>Also, FFS, FCC please have press releases on normal HTML pages, not PDFs, so the pagination is client side and no one has to fix your hard wrapped lines or make things display properly on differently sized devices. That would be nice. In the absence of such niceties, I chose PDF for the submission because it was the least obnoxious format available. The press release (as well as the specific orders for each provider affected) can also be had in docx and txt formats[0]. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-remove-companies-robocall-database-non-compliance https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-remove-companies-robocall-d...
xani_ 4y ago
At this point I take the PDF over many "modern" webshits
- jandrese 4y ago
  At least a PDF isn't going to try to do some infinite scroll thing that screws up all linking and makes it nearly impossible to find something again.
b3morales 4y ago
So (still trying to understand exactly what's what)... those companies are the ones providing connectivity to the actual scammy robocallers? Or what is it that they do?
- jffry 4y ago
  I think these companies are failing to implement STIR/SHAKEN and are running into expiring grace periods. That's not necessarily evidence of guilt - they might claim that as a small business they cannot afford these changes - but it seems like the only option to clean up the mess caused by spammers. The protocols are meant to allow tracing which network originated a call - at their root is an attestation by the network that a call they are originating for one of their customers is allowed to use the number in caller ID. If you're a network who wants your originating calls to be carried across other networks, you can't just set up a promiscuous attestation system that allows your customers to just slap on any random caller ID that they want, or else you'll get blacklisted real quick.
  - viraptor 4y ago
    > The protocols are meant to allow tracing which network originated a call ... to make tracing easier We could always trace the calls - you just had to ask each telco in the path to provide those details. There realistically wasn't any enforcement to do that though.
    - jffry 4y ago
      Yeah, I suppose you're right. Ultimately in such a tracing effort I imagine they probably would encounter a bunch of telcos passing the buck until it gets to a dissolved overseas entity who cannot be held responsible for anything.
      - viraptor 4y ago
        I'll keep repeating this one forever, but - that's not an issue. This would end spam calls immediately: "if you can't tell who's the source or if the source is international, you're responsible and will be fined per spam call". Telcos are not clueless or powerless. They can put pressure on international peers to not send spam, but have no incentive currently. No real telco wants to lose partners.