10 ms·
A Call to Action: Stop the FCC's KYC Regime
- cute_boi 4mo agoWill this KYC reduce spam and scam calls?
- rockskon 4mo agoNo.
- inigyou 4mo agoIt did in every other country that did it. What's different about this one? If you get a spam call in Europe from Europe, you call the police and the spammer gets located and punished.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- triceratops 4mo ago> It did in every other country that did it Citation required.
- cge 4mo agoEurope does not consistently have KYC for phone service, at least for mobile connections. Normal phone companies in Ireland don't ask for information when buying SIMs (physical ones, at least). Some eSIM providers in Europe don't ask for information at all, and accept cryptocurrency payments. (I'm also aware that some other European countries have very different requirements, up to actually needing copies of identification.) More widely, however, there do seem to be differences that I don't know the details of. VOIP seems quite different (I use it for my old phones): DID numbers in the US seem extremely cheap and available instantly, with little information, while European ones seem to have an actual verification process and prices that would make large-scale spamming difficult.
- piltdownman 4mo agoAs an additional anecdote, I've never heard of a number-porting/2FA attack using social engineering or other methods in Ireland - but we have our own unique issues now with Robocalls and phishing on WhatsApp and SMS.
- reddalo 4mo ago> It did in every other country that did it Italy has mandatory KYC for all mobile numbers, and scam/spam calls are a common problem. So no, it doesn't fix the problem at all.
- rockskon 4mo agoHas it? Spam calls frequently don't have a source in the same country as their target victim.
- inigyou 4mo agoInternational calls are very expensive. Remember the proposals to stop spam by charging $0.01 to send an email? I believe India even leaned into this by charging a $1/minute tax on incoming international calls.
- stackskipton 4mo agoIn theory, it could help. In practice, for KYC to reduce spam and scam calls, FCC would have to be willing to drop hammer big time on people and telcos who allow it to happen. With current political climate in the US, I don't see that happening since companies would scream "Poor pitiful us" and fines would be the cost of doing business.
- reddalo 4mo agoItaly had forced KYC for all mobile numbers at least since the early 2000's and no, it doesn't fix the spam/scam calls problem at all.
- singpolyma3 4mo agoNo
- br0ceph 4mo agoIm USA based use prepaid service because I dont want to provide information for a credit check to obtain postpay service. Theres absolutely no reason for a US based telephony provider to retain the most sensitive PII on their customers. Every large provider has a history of breaches and selling customer data. The telephone companies are already tracking, storing, selling; so many data points on their customers. They cant be trusted with any information.
- jameshart 4mo agoCounterpoint: for my part I would like it to be the case that any phone line that can dial or message my phone can be traced back to a known human being who can be held accountable for abuse of that phone line in terms of generating spam, abuse or harassment. Seems that we can’t both get what we want. A potential solution is that you get your anonymous phone line but my phone provider simply refuses to let you call me with it. Of course then we need to extend the same principle to data and to IP traffic originating from your device. If you don’t want to be traceable it seems reasonable that services should have the right to refuse to handle IP traffic you generate. Would such a half-baked level of network access suit your needs?
- inigyou 4mo agoIt should show up as anonymous. And you should have a setting: allow anonymous calls y/n
- jameshart 4mo ago.. precisely what I asked for?
- AnimalMuppet 4mo agoI would like any message that is spam to be able to be traced back to the offending human. I would like anonymous political posts to be untraceable by the government. I can't even get all of what I want.
- qdotme 4mo agoHonestly, stop the KYC regime everywhere else. We're making our law enforcement's job marginally easier, by making the criminals' job infinitely easier by creating millions of juicy PII honeypots. No, you don't need my phone #, real name, captcha.. if you think you do, realign your incentives, and rethink what else can be used for your real need instead.
- drnick1 4mo agoAbsolutely. And this is why I don't give any business my real name, phone number, or other personal information. Starbucks does not need to know my name or email to make my coffee. If a company insists on an app or some kind of registration, they lose my business, plain and simple.
- filup 4mo agoI walked into a gas station the other day because the pump did not print the recipt. I asked the cashier for the receipt and she said I needed to download the app in order to get a receipt. Pure insanity.
- dredmorbius 4mo agoName and shame, if you please.
- dec0dedab0de 4mo agoWe really just need telcos to stop allowing caller id spoofing. Doesn’t even need your name, but with a real number we could actually report these scams. You can still allow people to hide it, but then by default every non-business phone should block calls with hidden numbers.
- smallmancontrov 4mo agoWhat ever happened to SHAKEN/STIR? I thought this was supposed to happen 5 years ago. Did they just chicken out on the prospect of actually shutting down telcos sending spam volume? I still get loads of spam phone calls, so clearly something went wrong (or slow enough to be indistinguishable from wrong).
- inigyou 4mo agoAccording to a defcon talk, spammers just make sure all their spam gets routed through legacy TDM systems which discard the shaken/stir header because they're too old to support it. The other side then re-adds a "we got this from somewhere that didn't support this header" header.
- coldpie 4mo ago> legacy TDM systems Easy fix. It should be opt-in to accept a call that is routed through one of these. I know they allow it so some grandma in rural France that still uses a dial phone on a copper line that hasn't been touched since 1962 can call her son in New York, but for the rest of us who are not in that situation, we can just blacklist all those calls and lose nothing. This would even fix spam for the people who opt-in, because so few people have grandmas in rural France that it's not worth it for the spammers to bother anymore.
- calvinmorrison 4mo agoI am, more in tune with "just get it over with" than ever. Ipv6? 25 years of this crap? should have just said, Jan 1 2001, all routers must support 64 bit ipv4 addresses. Like the chrome HTTPS switch over, JUST DO IT
- rib3ye 4mo ago> Note: By checking this box, I acknowledge that I am filing a document into an official FCC proceeding. All information submitted, including names and addresses, will be publicly available via the web. Is there really not a way to submit an express FCC comment that avoids all my personal info being publicly published to the web? Yeesh.
- riffic 4mo agocall your congress critter instead
- jubilanti 4mo agoThink of it like a petition or testifying before Congress. The whole point is that you are putting your real name behind it. And if you think your name and address are private, then I have some bad news for you.
- rib3ye 4mo agoI spend a lot of time filing requests to take down my home address. Most low-hanging fruit options have been scrubbed. I am hesitant to increase the count.
- jubilanti 4mo agoYou mean the link between your name and home address? Impossible to scrub. If you're registered to vote, own a home, or many other things, that is legally a matter of public record.
- terminalbraid 4mo agoI will not be called to action by a page with a big slop image at the top.
- cf100clunk 4mo agoKYC == ''Know Your Customer''
- marstall 4mo ago"force phone providers to collect identity information from ordinary people before they can acquire or renew service with a phone carrier." don't see the harm in this? isn't this already the case for 99.9% of phoneline havers already?
- dghlsakjg 4mo agoYou don’t see the harm in requiring telcos - famous for handing over data without warrants or court orders - being forced to have identifying data for every subscriber? I can think of a half dozen ways that can get abused. Remember that in the states policing is decentralized. There is always some department somewhere willing to abuse their power. Look at how flock has been used to stalk partners, or how geofencing was used to sweep up everyone in the area of a protest, or how stingray is used to listen to all calls in an area. This is opening up avenues of abuse for almost no benefit.
- mindslight 4mo ago> famous for handing over data without warrants or court orders More concretely, famous for supplying bulk data to the surveillance industry for a nominal fee. That is ostensibly the goals behind this development - all of these companies demanding phone numbers for "verification" and snake oil "2FA" want to reliably dox 100% of their users rather than just 80%.
- lazide 4mo agoAlmost no one has physical phone lines anymore. It also used to be a given because they had to send a physical paper bill to someone, and hence needed an address. Neither of these are true anymore. Also, the tone is set from the top. Do you think the current admin cares about actually tackling fraud and abuse?
- m463 4mo agoThe big ones already force you to give SSN for service. Then they lose it in a data breach.
- 4mo ago
- josefritzishere 4mo agoLeave it to the Trump administration to implement mass surveillance as the solution to spam.
- theturtletalks 4mo agoKYC and AML are the most blatant attempts at subverting due process I’ve ever seen. Instead of the government actually trying to catch money laundering, they just make 3rd parties like banks and payment processors judge, jury, executioner. Effectively giving them the power to decide who can do business. And if they decide you can’t, you have no recourse. If the government didn’t give this power to private companies, they would have to prove in court that you are doing something unsavory. And to people saying KYC/AML works, sure. HSBC was laundering billions and these guys know how to get around KYC. You’re just screwing over common people at this point and giving banks and financial institutions power to skirt due process.
- elevation 4mo ago> the most blatant attempts at subverting due process This seems so clear to me; KYC is an end run around the constitution. But how do we stop it? If we legislate "no KYC" then what is my recourse when an imposter empties my accounts? You'd want it to be at least allowed. But if we allow industry to require KYC "we will only deposit your pay to a verified bank account" then you may end up with de facto KYC if not de jure. But if you tell businesses they may not require it, it enables other kinds of fraud. Legislation does not constrain people who will to do evil.
- logicchains 4mo ago>But how do we stop it? Use Monero as much as possible. If enough people adopted it, there's absolutely nothing they could do to stop it short of turning off the internet entirely. Even China, with the strictest internet controls in the world, hasn't managed to stop people paying for banned goods and services in crypto there.
- frollogaston 4mo agoI'm all for cryptocurrency as a way to fight both KYC and money-dilution, but it's still not user-friendly. Regular people need a way to clog the gears too.
- 4mo ago
- phyzome 4mo agoIt's even worse: Since cell phones broadcast your location at all times, this means telling hundreds of companies (and a number of governments) your location at basically all times. That's already an issue with most cell phones. Making this apply to prepaid phones is even worse.
- agloe_dreams 4mo agoOne thing I wonder is if this is just one step removed from 'Now we know the identity of every user so we can now have both probable cause and verified identity to arrest over statements containing speech we do not like.' " Like that is Carr's FCC in a nutshell - he wants to control speech by controlling the airwaves. That is a raw fact in his behavior. But when the news stations say the thing they want them to say, what happens next other than slightly extending the definitions of public good to the internet and then restricting speech?
- gwerbin 4mo agoIf you have to wonder, you don't need to wonder. So now not only can "antifa"-related speech qualify you as a terrorist (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/countering-domestic-terrorism-and-organized-political-violence/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/coun...), now your phone is legally required to track you and report your location at all times. The legal infrastructure is in place to track and bring a wide range of consequences down on just about any and all political enemy, whether that be ruining their life by dragging them through years of criminal charges or simply black-bagging them and whisking them off to a prison for "enemy combatants" without any oversight from a court. All of this is being done in full view of Congress and the Supreme Court, therefore one can only conclude that they are comfortable with and complicit in what is going on.
- gunsle 4mo agoAre you trying to imply that there isn’t coordinated attacks by fringe groups just because they’re leftist?
- LastTrain 4mo agoHow about instead we do "know your company" and consumers get intel about the ones doing the calls?
- rastrojero2000 4mo agoAny particular reason yall can't just argue in court that by creating opportunities for your PII to be stolen your governments (state or federal or both) are actively harming you economically? Sure, not much money to be had by fighting that fight but basically any PAC should have the means to do this and by claiming money is at stake and not people's actual safety you do have a better chance at this not being dismissed because of how your justice system /is/.
- 3RTB297 4mo agoUnless you've had fraud committed against you, that's a hard sell. What dollar figure do you use as the basis? Are you suing for years of credit monitoring? Because that's typically the solution for people who are the victims of PII leaks. One could argue that it's a failure of law enforcement or telcos or regulators to do enough to prevent fraud and maaaaybe bring a class action or something, but that's a massive stretch.
- rastrojero2000 4mo agoGiven it's a physical impossibility to create an impregnable fortress for your data and said data both already has a dollar amount attached to it in the black market and an obligation to be cared for, the argument could be that the government is setting up companies to lose money unless they too get to sell that data themselves, which regulations -and basic decency- say they can't.
- maerF0x0 4mo agohttps://www.newsnationnow.com/business/your-money/annoyance-economy-costs-americans/ https://www.newsnationnow.com/business/your-money/annoyance-... Suggest phone scams are a $26 B per year industry.
- Hizonner 4mo agoThe government is allowed to create regulations that harm people economically. Not much money to be had by instantly losing that fight.
- joaohaas 4mo ago>open link >AI slop art right at the start Instant close
- collabs 4mo agoIn my opinion, the real fix to scam, spam, and robocalls is to pass along the REAL(TM) Caller ID information not just the caller ID but the actual billed Caller ID information and allow the recipient easy ways to drop the calls when those two don't match. I don't know exactly the technical details of Stir/Shaken but someone somewhere is paying / getting paid for each call and this information should be transparently available to the call or message recipient. For "legitimate" reasons like doctors or call centers, they should already provide a separate work phone and not make them use their personal line. For leaky carriers, those should be blocked entirely. Nothing good comes from them. Basically what I am suggesting is if the full attestation level ("A-level") is not available, drop those calls and text messages by default unless the customer opts in (I have no idea why anyone would)
- mullingitover 4mo agoI was nodding in agreement, but I realized there must be some catch here. If this was that simple it probably could've been implemented a while ago. My guess is that there's some requirement that if it's a working number, it must be able to dial emergency services and that's the loophole that's being exploited. So the FCC's answer is if all numbers must work, push the check directly on the subscriber.
- collabs 4mo agoIn theory, yes. I would hope all the things that are "common sense" and "simple" would have already been implemented. However, as my professor of History from college loved to say "follow the money". If something could be simple and straightforward but is implemented in a convoluted way that is clearly suboptimal, someone somewhere makes more money as a result. It could be as transparent as Google Chrome implementing auto play with a "Media Engagement Index (MEI)", Apple being forced to implement USB-C on the iPhone kicking and screaming, or carriers and large call centers dragging their feet on doing STIR/SHAKEN correctly and passing along the billing information that I will remind you they already have because they like to get paid. So, while we hope common sense previals, at the end of the day, it only does so automatically when it makes business sense. To your point about emergency services—while it's true that any unactivated phone must be allowed to dial 911, that rule only opens a one-way path to emergency dispatch. It doesn't give a device the ability to place outbound calls to everyday citizens. The real loophole isn't a public safety mandate; it's the wholesale VoIP market.
- phendrenad2 4mo agoLet me give you an analogy: Someone keeps blaring an airhorn outside your window at 4am. It's making it difficult for you to sleep. The government, in their bountiful wisdom, decides to hold an emergency meeting, and agrees to pass a law that people need to show an ID to buy an airhorn. You're appalled. This is an invasion of privacy! You protest outside of city hall. You try to get some of your neighbors onboard, but find that they're already protesting! Their protest is demanding that the government do something about the annoying airhorns.
- pona-a 4mo agoThe funny thing is most of the world had already pioneered the airhorn ID long ago. Very few of them saw any decrease in 4 AM airhorn activity, yet some are already well-known to arrest and harass airhorn users to international human rights observers' condemnation.
- phendrenad2 4mo agoYes and this post is the remedy. We need to point out the privacy issue, and also point out that it won't do what people want.
- adolph 4mo agoFor background on KYC in the banking context @patio11's podcasts and essays are worth consuming: Patrick: Yes, so "Know Your Customer" (KYC) and "Anti-Money Laundering" (AML) are mandatory elements of the international compliance regime that have been in place in the United States since the early 1980s. Over time, this regime spread globally, largely fueled by the U.S. leveraging the dollar as a tool of foreign policy—a point where I find myself agreeing with critiques from the crypto community. Their complaints about this are largely accurate. You can see this clearly in the documents as these laws were passed and as supranational bodies increasingly tightened regulations on banking secrecy havens. https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/true-crime-banking-edition/ https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/true-crime-ba... https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/kyc-and-aml-beyond-the-acronyms/ https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/kyc-and-aml-beyond-th...
- adolph 4mo agoReading this line in Lopp's article: "FCC even asks whether providers should consult lists of terrorists, terrorist organizations, and “criminal persons” maintained by law enforcement entities," brings to mind McKenzie's work describing the outsourced role of NGO's in vetting banking customers. https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/nonprofit-indicted-bank-fraud/ https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/nonprofit-indicted-ba... https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/splc-financial-infrastructure/ https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/splc-financia... https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/defendant-censor-politico-spy/ https://www.complexsystemspodcast.com/episodes/defendant-cen...
- AtlasBarfed 4mo agoYeah if US mail is as spam compromised as it is, you can forget about phone calls ever being cleaned up. In the era of Target specialized AI that can mimic voices, writing styles, communication is now fundamentally compromised without some sort of actual reform
- maerF0x0 4mo agoHonestly I'm at the point where I'm like lets just kill the POTS. It makes little sense to me that it's become a sort of user ID for many things, that we have better alternatives (WebRTC, FaceTime et al) that we should push. Like where it currently says "Telephone number" i should be able to put in a URL like "webrtc://<a pseudonym for my IMEI>" (which itself could be a dropdown box for "This device" on the phone itself...) For example, why isn't it the default that when a telemarketer calls me it's not a video call? And why can't I preview their video stream prior to answering? I get its "impossible" to make everyone change, but i do think we should push forwards...
- frollogaston 4mo agoIMEI is tied to the physical phone, Facetime is Apple-specific, idk what the webrtc option would be. I'm actually glad phone won as digital ID, not cause it's the best choice but because it could've been a lot worse.
- apt-apt-apt-apt 4mo agoCareful, you are one capital letter 'U' away from having the FBI, NSA, SWAT team at your door!
- themafia 4mo ago> that we have better alternatives (WebRTC, FaceTime et al) They may or may not be better. What they _aren't_ is "widely available." Also I feel like a lot of people forget that phones still work even if the power grid is disabled. Your replacement should have the same attribute. > why isn't it the default that when a telemarketer calls me it's not a video call? How about when I block you I block the underlying service number and not the fake caller ID number. If a company gets blocked by too many customers it is automatically disconnected from the network. This is _our_ network. Not the spammers. All companies use it by our leave. They wanted common carrier status and that should have a price.
- dredmorbius 4mo agophones still work even if the power grid is disabled With the sunset of POTS and twisted-pair copper wire, this is absolutely not the case. At the very least, service continuation now requires 1) cellular masts with reserve power and 2) a charged cellphone (most of which have at best ~24h battery life), or 3) a directly-wired or fibre-based Internet access and 4) battery-backed VOIP or SIP system. A POTS service had its own power supply, independent of mains, with battery back-up, and frequently ran for days even during widespread grid outages.
- sunshine-o 4mo agoPhone numbers are just a liability: - It is kind of expensive, - You are forced to provide it to many official institutions, - It is the default or mandatory insecure 2FA for many institutions, - It always get leaked somewhere and is one of the most common/reliable identifier. We still have them around governments and telcos love it and old people and scammers are its last users.
- frollogaston 4mo agoThe cost is a feature. Kinda also the case with IPv4 addresses.
- sunshine-o 4mo agoSame problem with IPv4. We've been paying for v4 and v6 for decades but somehow we cannot get rid of v4. My guess is there are a lot of interests at play.
- naturalmovement 4mo ago"Call to Action" is a needlessly impotent threat. Like high school students walking out of their own lunch period to protest the loss of salisbury steak on the menu. Most major telcos worldwide outside the US have strict KYC rules, this is not a battle you are going to win, because there are very few legitimate reasons in support.
- logicchains 4mo agoThere's a very strong legitimate reason, the right for privacy online.
- frollogaston 4mo agoStopped reading at the slop image
- kelseyfrog 4mo agoParents need to parent. Full stop. This means the parents of adult scammers too. Every scammer has a mother and father who are failing them. If they were doing their jobs, this wouldn't be happening.
- downrightmike 4mo agoA LOT of this is from the chinese triad in the Golden Triangle in Cambodia who use kidnapped people and abuse them
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- frollogaston 4mo agoThey're always calling from random countries anyway. Maybe we can tell (not ask) other countries to do their job and clamp down on these scam houses.
- kelseyfrog 4mo agoDo they not have parents in random countries?
- frollogaston 4mo agoProbably, maybe not. Yeah it'd be great if the entire world were prosperous and happy, until then we need a way to make spam calls harder.
- kelseyfrog 4mo agoThen propose something that doesn't infringe on privacy.
- frollogaston 4mo ago
- netfortius 4mo agoAnd how exactly are they going/hoping to do that with GV?
- troyvit 4mo agoThey would do well to make a better CTA for their call to action. Here's the link from the article: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/05/26/2026-10407/enhancing-know-your-customer-requirements https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/05/26/2026-10... I think that gets you most of the way to a link that somebody on HN dropped a few days ago: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express It requires the docket-id to complete: Docket No: 17-59 You can double check that Docket Number here: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-seeks-comment-enhanced-know-your-customer-requirements https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-seeks-comment-enhanced-know...
- Scaled 4mo agoPeople should file comments at that Federal Register link as well as FCC. (The FR is the official way for citizens to comment on proposed agency rulemaking. Since it's independent, it might go farther, but it's worth doing both.)
- bityard 4mo agoWell, I tried to file an FCC comment using the link in the article but reCAPCHA doesn't think I'm a real person. I gave up after about completing about 20 puzzles successfully. Our democracy in action.
- filup 4mo agoWe just need a new phone system where 'phone numbers' are designed to be disposable. Phone numbers were designed with the idea that they need to be easily memorizable in your head but I don't think that's really needed today. At any moment I should be able to discard my contact and redistribute it on my own. The idea that old numbers get recycled is completely ridiculous as well.
- matheusmoreira 4mo agoWe need to get rid of phones straight up. No one should be able to interrupt someone else by randomly ringing them and demanding attention.
- wang_li 4mo agoYou can trivially accomplish this under the current system. There is no need for a change that imposes your preferences on everyone.
- filup 4mo agoDo tell for a laymen like me.
- wang_li 4mo agoCancel your phone service and then no one can call you or interrupt you. Set it to Do Not Disturb. You got multiple choices.
- matheusmoreira 4mo agoThere is a need. The whole point is to do that. "I'll just opt out" half measures won't get rid of the culture. We're all expected to have phones. People want to call. We suffer actual economic consequences if we refuse to participate. Your "solution" boils down to "just don't have a phone so we can ostracize you". Like the loonies who don't have Facebook accounts for the companies to spy on. The whole idea is to wipe Facebook off the face of this Earth so we need not face such choices to begin with.
- scirob 4mo agoYea pls protect it feels mega oppressive how most EU countries require you to have the SIM card guy in his corner store scan your passport.
- lacoolj 4mo agoI didn't even know you could get access to phone service without basic ID info. Maybe I haven't tried playing with enough "burner" phones :\ Also blanking on a time when you legitimately need to have a phone and not provide your name... anyone have examples?
- throwaway1492 4mo agoIt’s trivial to use a cellular connection to control a fpv drone, near real time. I’m really surprised there hasn’t been occurrences of extortion (ie protection rackets) and targeted assassinations via air droppable explosives like we see in Ukraine war. Burner phones enable this.
- NoImmatureAdHom 4mo agoAside from the EFF, where can I send my money? Is there somewhere / someone that's working on this specifically?
- inquirerGeneral 4mo ago[dead]