People complain about email being 'broken', but it's working great compared to phones.
I'm at the stage where I automatically reject all phonecalls where I don't recognise the number, and then Google that number. 99% of the time I then end up adding the number to my Contacts with the name 'Spam'. Why isn't anyone fixing this?
Bonus anecdote: I used to never use my work phone, but our work phones were recently replaced with Microsoft Lync phones - now I get spam phonecalls at work.
I too follow the whitelist approach for phone calls. Most ligitmate callers (my bank, doctor, friend, family, or coworkers) will leave a message. This effectively confirms their identity and I'll add the number to my contacts list so that I know to answer next time. It works really well.
In fact, late last week, the CTIA wrote the FCC to tell it that the kind of blacklist approach taken by Foss’s company wouldn’t work. According to the lobbying group, it raises privacy concerns—and causes other problems too.
“Even assuming an accurate database of blacklisted and whitelisted numbers can be compiled and maintained, the ease with which modern equipment and software can allow a caller to spoof a caller ID would present significant challenge,” the group says.
I thought the phone companies had access to more information than caller ID for the calls they handle. Surely you can't fake caller ID details to dodge your phone bill? I'd love it if they'd give out a star code we could all dial after a call we didn't want to receive that would, if enough people did it, disallow future calls from that entity from reaching any phone line for which a customer has requested the blocking of calls reported as bothersome. No exemptions for charities or politicians either.
Firstly CLI blocking is easy to get around. Faking CLI is very easy. There is a field within SIP that is refereed to as P-assert. The idea is that this field always contains the billable number.
However I know of at least 3 sip carriers you could sign up today with, have numbers within 10 minutes and they allow you to put ANY CLI and P-assert. Then you can bridge in to the TDM and almost untraceable.
CLI faking is very common. There is a requirement in the UK that no calls gets in to the network without a p-assert but the network is to complex these days, there is always a way to get a call in with what ever information you want
We have been working on a blacklisting service as well. we have 2 types, the personalized white and black list (so a parent can have a white list for their kids phone): i think i agree with the FCC that global block lists are a bad idea (too easy to get someones number blocked for lulz). The second looks up the CLI and checks a number of those "who is calling me sites" if the number is know for spam it does not get to the phone and starts reading the comments back to them about their number (cli will get round this). Both ways have issues. The reason I bring this up is because we become an MVNO and in turn run our own sim cards. This meant that we could have had the blacklist/whitelist without messing with the call flow to much. This also allowed you to dial 9 to block the last number that called you was sexy but meh too much work to run an MVNO and just no money in it.
We will see. Lots of changes will be happening in telecoms in the next 5-10 years. webRTC could flip the existing telecoms models on their heads, if only someone could get some traction.
Having managed the "global black list" for a major VoIP company (millions of subscribers) I can tell you it does make customers happy. However ... if you implement one you will inadvertently block valid calls. The FCC and big phone companies are correct about that. It's just not possible for someone like AT&T to take the risk.
Real life problems you will see and have to deal with:
- blocking of valid calls from legitimate voice broadcasts (i.e. schools / municipalites)
- managing trouble tickets from other phone companies opening tickets constantly for "blocking the call"
- managing trouble tickets from customers about not getting calls they should have
- how to deal with call attempts that do not provide proper signaling information (i.e. "anonymous" as the actual caller ID and not using RPID, PAI, or SS7 appropriately)
When I had a land line, I changed my recorded message to the three tones and "We're sorry, the number cannot be completed as dialed" message and eliminated pretty much all spam calls.
Hah, I did that, though it was just the tones and then a normal voicemail message. The robodial stuff at the time just listened for them, so it was quite effective.
[+] [-] nmeofthestate|11 years ago|reply
I'm at the stage where I automatically reject all phonecalls where I don't recognise the number, and then Google that number. 99% of the time I then end up adding the number to my Contacts with the name 'Spam'. Why isn't anyone fixing this?
Bonus anecdote: I used to never use my work phone, but our work phones were recently replaced with Microsoft Lync phones - now I get spam phonecalls at work.
[+] [-] maxerickson|11 years ago|reply
That leaves the you've won a free cruise/insurance/alarm scam companies, but they mostly don't call over and over again.
The point is not to argue with them about whether they should be calling you etc., it is to advertise yourself as a dead lead.
[+] [-] slig|11 years ago|reply
If it's somewhat important, they can email me later and schedule a call.
[+] [-] daigoba66|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] charlesdm|11 years ago|reply
If it's important, they'll usually leave a message or send an e-mail.
[+] [-] mtmail|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 72deluxe|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] biff|11 years ago|reply
In fact, late last week, the CTIA wrote the FCC to tell it that the kind of blacklist approach taken by Foss’s company wouldn’t work. According to the lobbying group, it raises privacy concerns—and causes other problems too.
“Even assuming an accurate database of blacklisted and whitelisted numbers can be compiled and maintained, the ease with which modern equipment and software can allow a caller to spoof a caller ID would present significant challenge,” the group says.
I thought the phone companies had access to more information than caller ID for the calls they handle. Surely you can't fake caller ID details to dodge your phone bill? I'd love it if they'd give out a star code we could all dial after a call we didn't want to receive that would, if enough people did it, disallow future calls from that entity from reaching any phone line for which a customer has requested the blocking of calls reported as bothersome. No exemptions for charities or politicians either.
[+] [-] tinfoilman|11 years ago|reply
Firstly CLI blocking is easy to get around. Faking CLI is very easy. There is a field within SIP that is refereed to as P-assert. The idea is that this field always contains the billable number.
However I know of at least 3 sip carriers you could sign up today with, have numbers within 10 minutes and they allow you to put ANY CLI and P-assert. Then you can bridge in to the TDM and almost untraceable.
CLI faking is very common. There is a requirement in the UK that no calls gets in to the network without a p-assert but the network is to complex these days, there is always a way to get a call in with what ever information you want
We have been working on a blacklisting service as well. we have 2 types, the personalized white and black list (so a parent can have a white list for their kids phone): i think i agree with the FCC that global block lists are a bad idea (too easy to get someones number blocked for lulz). The second looks up the CLI and checks a number of those "who is calling me sites" if the number is know for spam it does not get to the phone and starts reading the comments back to them about their number (cli will get round this). Both ways have issues. The reason I bring this up is because we become an MVNO and in turn run our own sim cards. This meant that we could have had the blacklist/whitelist without messing with the call flow to much. This also allowed you to dial 9 to block the last number that called you was sexy but meh too much work to run an MVNO and just no money in it.
We will see. Lots of changes will be happening in telecoms in the next 5-10 years. webRTC could flip the existing telecoms models on their heads, if only someone could get some traction.
Ramble Ramble, i rare have anything to say :/
[+] [-] jamesbrownuhh|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sdramsey00|11 years ago|reply
Real life problems you will see and have to deal with: - blocking of valid calls from legitimate voice broadcasts (i.e. schools / municipalites) - managing trouble tickets from other phone companies opening tickets constantly for "blocking the call" - managing trouble tickets from customers about not getting calls they should have - how to deal with call attempts that do not provide proper signaling information (i.e. "anonymous" as the actual caller ID and not using RPID, PAI, or SS7 appropriately)
[+] [-] snarfy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Vendan|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Gargoyle888|11 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashcash
was created to stop email spam but is equally valid for phone calls. It /could/ be fully implemented by your phone carrier.
[+] [-] teddyh|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ianetaylor|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wnevets|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tmaly|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] deanclatworthy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] morganvachon|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chatman|11 years ago|reply