5 ms·

It would be great if there were a * 69 type system that all the carriers supported (i.e. was imposed by the FCC) where dialing * 7786 (* SPAM) or something woul

It would be great if there were a * 69 type system that all the carriers supported (i.e. was imposed by the FCC) where dialing * 7786 (* SPAM) or something would flag the previous incoming call as unsolicited spam/scam and allow you to leave a voicemail with the FCC describing what happened. Hopefully the metadata would be fresh enough in the moment that they could meaningfully record the actual route of the call as opposed to the spoofed or blocked caller ID and begin to identify the bad actors (if not the ultimate source then at least the last identifiable middleman).

MichaelGG 11y ago
CDRs are kept for quite a while, so it's possible/easy to track these calls down. There are a bunch of intermediaries (I ran one), and each time you need to get them to release customer information. The FCC doesn't care enough; no one investigates.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Okay we do the legwork and track him down. He's an Indian national using a stolen or prepaid credit card in Mumbai and using voip.ms or flowroute or whoever just needs a CC to get started. He has long left this service and gone to another by the time you "catch" him. He's made millions of calls since.
  - MichaelGG 11y ago
    Well most places don't just allow a credit card to start sending high volume, due to the fraud risk. But agreed, there may not be too much ID, and prosecuting internationally is hard. So there's a few options: 1. Don't allow such users to use other caller IDs until they verify themselves (business, USF ID, etc.) or until they verify ownership of the number, or some other limitation. This is fairly reasonable and can be totally automated (some providers do so). Some Indian shop doesn't need to spoof all US numbers, so why allow them? 2. Require deposits against such behavior, and in case of uncontested complaint, keep the money. 3. Share information on offenders (FCC run, mandatory). This is like having a list of known bad agents. Yes, they can get new IDs, but that costs a bit (see point 1, no need to allow someone in India on a free email account, without a company, impersonate all US numbers). 4. Of the FCC really wanted to nuke the problem, they could make providers liable. End of story. Within a month, providers would get together and figure it out. And this wouldn't need to hurt legitimate usage that much. Established operators are easy enough to figure out (or you can grandfather until there are complaints). End users trying to get going should have no problem, either.
- evunveot 11y ago
  My hope was that flagging bad calls would allow the FCC to aggregate call records and focus on the worst offenders (sources or intermediaries), but I guess if they can't (edit: won't) hold intermediaries or service providers liable in some way then it's not scalable.

MichaelGG 11y ago

CDRs are kept for quite a while, so it's possible/easy to track these calls down. There are a bunch of intermediaries (I ran one), and each time you need to get them to release customer information. The FCC doesn't care enough; no one investigates.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Okay we do the legwork and track him down. He's an Indian national using a stolen or prepaid credit card in Mumbai and using voip.ms or flowroute or whoever just needs a CC to get started. He has long left this service and gone to another by the time you "catch" him. He's made millions of calls since.
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  Well most places don't just allow a credit card to start sending high volume, due to the fraud risk. But agreed, there may not be too much ID, and prosecuting internationally is hard. So there's a few options: 1. Don't allow such users to use other caller IDs until they verify themselves (business, USF ID, etc.) or until they verify ownership of the number, or some other limitation. This is fairly reasonable and can be totally automated (some providers do so). Some Indian shop doesn't need to spoof all US numbers, so why allow them? 2. Require deposits against such behavior, and in case of uncontested complaint, keep the money. 3. Share information on offenders (FCC run, mandatory). This is like having a list of known bad agents. Yes, they can get new IDs, but that costs a bit (see point 1, no need to allow someone in India on a free email account, without a company, impersonate all US numbers). 4. Of the FCC really wanted to nuke the problem, they could make providers liable. End of story. Within a month, providers would get together and figure it out. And this wouldn't need to hurt legitimate usage that much. Established operators are easy enough to figure out (or you can grandfather until there are complaints). End users trying to get going should have no problem, either.
evunveot 11y ago
My hope was that flagging bad calls would allow the FCC to aggregate call records and focus on the worst offenders (sources or intermediaries), but I guess if they can't (edit: won't) hold intermediaries or service providers liable in some way then it's not scalable.