FCC to Consider New Rules to Combat International Scam Robocalls
I've noticed a few (small number) of robocalls have started spoofing international phone numbers instead of local phone numbers. I don't know if this is because telephone gateways are doing a better job at blocking neighbor caller ID spoofing -- or something else. https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-consider-new-rules-combat-international-sca... WASHINGTON, April 27, 2022 [...] The new rules, if adopted at the FCC’s May 19 Open Meeting, would require gateway providers to participate in robocall mitigation, including blocking efforts, take responsibility for illegal robocall campaigns on their networks, cooperate with FCC enforcement efforts, and quickly respond to efforts to trace illegal robocalls to their source. Under the proposed Report and Order, non-compliance by a gateway provider would result in that provider being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database and subject to mandatory blocking by other network participants, essentially ending its ability to operate. [...]
On 4/27/22 2:41 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
I've noticed a few (small number) of robocalls have started spoofing international phone numbers instead of local phone numbers. I don't know if this is because telephone gateways are doing a better job at blocking neighbor caller ID spoofing -- or something else.
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-consider-new-rules-combat-international-sca...
WASHINGTON, April 27, 2022
[...] The new rules, if adopted at the FCC’s May 19 Open Meeting, would require gateway providers to participate in robocall mitigation, including blocking efforts, take responsibility for illegal robocall campaigns on their networks, cooperate with FCC enforcement efforts, and quickly respond to efforts to trace illegal robocalls to their source. Under the proposed Report and Order, non-compliance by a gateway provider would result in that provider being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database and subject to mandatory blocking by other network participants, essentially ending its ability to operate. [...]
So I have a question. Suppose that I wanted to report a call as being spam to my provider, say. With email, I can just send them a message with the full headers since it's in my inbox. There isn't the equivalent for an inbox for voip, so that would require the provider to keep records of the signaling, right? I mean it could be kept on the phone if it's terminating SIP, but it seems like the provider keeping records would be more efficient. What I want is a spam button on the ones that it doesn't say are a scam. Mike
On 4/27/22 15:33, Michael Thomas wrote:
So I have a question. Suppose that I wanted to report a call as being spam to my provider, say. With email, I can just send them a message with the full headers since it's in my inbox. There isn't the equivalent for an inbox for voip, so that would require the provider to keep records of the signaling, right? I mean it could be kept on the phone if it's terminating SIP, but it seems like the provider keeping records would be more efficient. What I want is a spam button on the ones that it doesn't say are a scam.
With AT&T and perhaps others, you can forward the message to 7726 (spells SPAM on the keypad) and they'll reply asking for the originating phone number or email address. -- Jay Hennigan - jay@west.net Network Engineering - CCIE #7880 503 897-8550 - WB6RDV
With AT&T and perhaps others, you can forward the message to 7726 (spells SPAM on the keypad) and they'll reply asking for the originating phone number or email address.
This is, of course, the root of the problem. The recipient of the spam does not know either the originating phone number or the originating e-mail address. All they know is the Advertizing ID -- and that is useless for everything except what it was designed for -- advertizing. If one knew the originating phone number then one would know who to hunt down and which throat to slit from ear to ear, and there would be no need to involve AT&T at all... This, and the fact that the Telco's get bloody rich from providing termination for all the crap they have enabled is exactly the reason they did it in the first place! -- (CAUTION) You are advised that if you attack my person or property, you will be put down in accordance with the provisions of section 34 & 35 of the Criminal Code respectively. If you are brandishing (or in possession) of a weapon then lethal force will be applied to your person in accordance with the law. This means that your misadventures may end in your death. Consider yourself cautioned and govern your actions appropriately.
Hi, Keith: The root cause of phone spam is because Caller-ID service was first deteriorated by a marketing gimmick that enabled the spoofing of the Caller-ID. Combined with eMail spam techniques, VoIP operations have now become out of hand. Below is an overview of these annoyances. This is a topic that I am not sure whether NANOG is the proper forum to deal with. Although, certain parameters and considerations are closely related to the Internet issues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caller_ID_spoofing Abe (2022-04-27 22:17) On 2022-04-27 21:39, Keith Medcalf wrote:
With AT&T and perhaps others, you can forward the message to 7726 (spells SPAM on the keypad) and they'll reply asking for the originating phone number or email address. This is, of course, the root of the problem. The recipient of the spam does not know either the originating phone number or the originating e-mail address. All they know is the Advertizing ID -- and that is useless for everything except what it was designed for -- advertizing.
If one knew the originating phone number then one would know who to hunt down and which throat to slit from ear to ear, and there would be no need to involve AT&T at all... This, and the fact that the Telco's get bloody rich from providing termination for all the crap they have enabled is exactly the reason they did it in the first place!
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
I believe the intent is for the service provider to then look up that call by source:destination, investigate how it came into the network, investigate if STIR/SHAKEN signed, and deal with appropriately. If signed, then there's a responsible party to engage. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Thomas" <mike@mtcc.com> To: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 5:33:15 PM Subject: Re: FCC to Consider New Rules to Combat International Scam Robocalls On 4/27/22 2:41 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
I've noticed a few (small number) of robocalls have started spoofing international phone numbers instead of local phone numbers. I don't know if this is because telephone gateways are doing a better job at blocking neighbor caller ID spoofing -- or something else.
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-consider-new-rules-combat-international-sca...
WASHINGTON, April 27, 2022
[...] The new rules, if adopted at the FCC’s May 19 Open Meeting, would require gateway providers to participate in robocall mitigation, including blocking efforts, take responsibility for illegal robocall campaigns on their networks, cooperate with FCC enforcement efforts, and quickly respond to efforts to trace illegal robocalls to their source. Under the proposed Report and Order, non-compliance by a gateway provider would result in that provider being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database and subject to mandatory blocking by other network participants, essentially ending its ability to operate. [...]
So I have a question. Suppose that I wanted to report a call as being spam to my provider, say. With email, I can just send them a message with the full headers since it's in my inbox. There isn't the equivalent for an inbox for voip, so that would require the provider to keep records of the signaling, right? I mean it could be kept on the phone if it's terminating SIP, but it seems like the provider keeping records would be more efficient. What I want is a spam button on the ones that it doesn't say are a scam. Mike
On Wed, 27 Apr 2022, Sean Donelan wrote:
I've noticed a few (small number) of robocalls have started spoofing international phone numbers instead of local phone numbers. I don't know if
Are you sure this isn't just either a failure to spoof or incompetent spoofing?
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-consider-new-rules-combat-international-sca... WASHINGTON, April 27, 2022
[...] The new rules, if adopted at the FCC’s May 19 Open Meeting, would require gateway providers to participate in robocall mitigation, including blocking efforts, take responsibility for illegal robocall campaigns on their networks, cooperate with FCC enforcement efforts, and quickly respond to efforts to trace illegal robocalls to their source. Under the proposed Report and Order, non-compliance by a gateway provider would result in that provider being removed from the Robocall Mitigation Database and subject to mandatory blocking by other network participants, essentially ending its ability to operate. [...]
They're debating whether or not to close the screen door on the submarine before submerging. When I receive robo-calls, I have no means of tracing them to the originating network or identifying the responsible party. Best case, the above would just move [more of the] robo-call origination off-shore to be outside the FCC's enforcement authority. Most likely, it will do nothing because the telcos / VOIP providers profit from this activity and have no incentive to cooperate with enforcement against each other. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route StackPath, Sr. Neteng | therefore you are _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
Jon Lewis writes:
I've noticed a few (small number) of robocalls have started spoofing international phone numbers instead of local phone numbers. I don't know if
Are you sure this isn't just either a failure to spoof or incompetent spoofing?
Nope. I've been seeing an increasing number of bogus international numbers as well. And I'm all in favour of it because for those ones I *know* they are bogus and should be ignored. --lyndon
participants (8)
-
Abraham Y. Chen -
Jay Hennigan -
Jon Lewis -
Keith Medcalf -
Lyndon Nerenberg (VE7TFX/VE6BBM) -
Michael Thomas -
Mike Hammett -
Sean Donelan