3 ms·
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
by 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 agoYeah, 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 agoI'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.