• Cheesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You build a 10 foot high wall, they will build an 11 foot ladder. Stir/shaken was good for like 6 months before spam callers were able to bypass that security measure.

        • 🖖USS-Ethernet@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve been saying for years now that providers should try converting to cert based auth. You get issued a cert with a private key from the provider. You are the only one who can use that number and authenticate to the network with that number.

      • stealthnerd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        STIR/SHAKEN had yet to be fully implemented, so while most carriers are now signing calls, almost none are taking action against unsigned calls.

        I have hope that it will become a useful tool in the future for blocking spam and even bad carriers who are signing anything and everything.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This one uses semi-litho oscillating iron cores, but essentially amounts to a fancy capacitor with some extra bells and whistles.

        Now this one is the most promising to take on lithium ion. It’s just a giant water wheel. You find a nearby source of swiftly flowing water and it has more battery life than even a nuclear power plant!

        This is just a rock, but our scientists are hopeful it can produce a discharge rate faster than an atomic bomb.

        None are even close to viable, but they will suck up millions in investor money. Invest today! /s

      • Maeve@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah, you also have to wait until there are equitable food distribution instead of payments to destroy “surplus.”

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Need to figure out a way to go after posters soliciting this kind of coders in the USA on rentacoder sites, but then there’s the poor coders from other countries who will do it for a few cents on the dollar.

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, same. I’ll fuckin’ believe it when I see it. Can’t tell you how many times I have people tell me about the national do-not-call list as if I haven’t been on it already for a decade and scammers and spammers don’t respect it anyway and are unpunished for ignoring it.

  • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The existence in the first place of robo-dialing loopholes is criminal, and we ought to be able to prosecute it as such. I have no doubt that FCC leaders have accepted bribes to make everyone’s phones shittier.

    It would be really nice for everyone if we could get a consistent streak of non-criminals leading the FCC.

  • TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    The FCC order will take effect 30 days after it’s published in the Federal Register. A public draft of the order was released ahead of the FCC meeting.

    So bad actors have at least 30 days to pull as much data as they can right now. People who keep their existing phone numbers may very well still be targets of robocalls because a database can be compiled right now, if it hasn’t already happened. And unless you change your number and your new number is a currently unassigned number, you could still be targeted, since the number is in a list of phone numbers; your new number just wouldn’t be listed as assigned to you. So maybe 10-15% of the people who change their phone numbers will be OK?

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      1 year ago

      these new rules have nothing to do with how the bad guys obtain targets’ phone numbers, they’re about how they get assigned phone numbers.

    • Synnr@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This explains the 4 different “Hey! I got your number at the XX meetup.” and “Hey, let’s go play golf tomorrow!” type texts ove gotten this week. Trying to validate info.

      EDIT: RTFA (says to myself)… this just makes it harder for shell companies to setup shop in the US and get blocks of US numbers to make VOIP calls/texts from. Someone will at least be held accountable, so they have to burn people (in jail) or get fined etc in their home country.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I just have any calls that aren’t from my contacts forwarded to Google voice using Yet Another Call Blocker.

        https://gitlab.com/xynngh/YetAnotherCallBlocker

        Besides, I don’t use my phone number for calls - that all happens with messengers these days (Telegram, etc), so I know you’re a telemarketer anyway.

        • HubertManne@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          thats fine for most individuals but hospitals and doctors offices for those with medical issues. Well that makes it hard. They often to not call from the “official number”.

          • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yea, that sucks.

            For those I give my Google voice number.

            Not an elegant solution, for sure. Fortunately my Healthcare system also uses video calls via their app for security purposes.

            Not sure what else can really be done.

              • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yea, I hear ya. Lots of shitty apps these days with excessive perms.

                I root, run a firewall, and lock the little bastards down. No, you don’t get location perms. No, you don’t launch at boot, or when I plug in to charge, or when a media button is pressed. So many shitty receiver registrations, and running in the background. Nope, removing that too.

                • HubertManne@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I just don’t even want a smart phone. I have one for work because I have to but only work stuff goes on it. Im surprised most will run like that. I have a hard time getting them to run on a tablet.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Remember when like every address in America (including the White House) sent in a letter with the exact same text saying the did not support net neutrality and then when questioned about it the FCC said they were attacked and wiped their servers?

  • thelastknowngod@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m an American living abroad and I use a VoIP service to maintain my US number. It had actually gotten more difficult to do this because of the changes they are making.

    A few weeks ago I needed to submit docs proving I was a legitimate business with US tax id and whatnot… If you don’t have that, you have to provide an alternate number from a traditional phone contract of someone who lives in the US. Unless I were to pay for a phone subscription in America, there is no option for an individual to do this independently. I needed to use a family member’s number.

    My American phone number is very much necessary but I only use it on very rare occasions… Paying something like $30-40 per month for an American phone contract (that I’ll never use) plus the $15-20 per month fee for the voip provider is excessive.

    If they just had an id verification system for American citizens and didn’t tie it to a domestic account holder, that would be something.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like my ssn which was stolen in the last decade that I just got back under COVID relief because I couldn’t get it back without stolen copies of prior filings?

  • llama@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Easy access to phone numbers? Did they flash an amnesia light to make them forget how Arabic numerals work? Literally all you have to do is look at a phone book to see what the valid area codes and exchanges are then robodial away.

    • datelmd5sum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Couldn’t we just replace phone numbers with IPv6 addresses? Who the fuck uses a POTS landline these days?

      • Maeve@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Plenty of people for valid reasons, like people on home dialysis, breathing apparatus etc in a rural area that has problems staying on the grid during large storms or drivers hitting a power pole at the end of the nearest road.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In one of its many attempts to curb robocalls, the Federal Communications Commission said it is making it harder for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers to obtain direct access to US telephone numbers.

    Before that, they could only get numbers by making a request through a traditional carrier," FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement for yesterday’s commission meeting.

    Describing One Owl, the FCC said the company’s efforts “to operate under the cloak of ever-changing corporate formations to serve the same dubious clientele demonstrate willful attempts to circumvent the law to originate and carry illegal traffic.”

    “Right now, it is very easy for bad actors who get caught facilitating illegal robocalls to set up shop under a new name and carry on with business as usual, and these rules will make it harder to do that,” Nicholas Garcia, policy counsel for consumer-advocacy group Public Knowledge, told Ars.

    Garcia noted that "false or fraudulent registration and compliance reports would be an obvious way for the most dedicated bad actors to circumvent these new rules.

    But that itself may provide new avenues for enforcement, and more requirements and friction raise the cost and risks" for VoIP operators that don’t follow the rules.


    The original article contains 770 words, the summary contains 202 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!