If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On 22 Jul 2018, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
in alt.windows7.general: Oh, you get faked CLIs in the US too, do you? Isn't faking CLI illegal? If it is, aren't the telco.s participating in the crime? I don't think they can claim "common carrier" immunity; sure, any that _relay_ it maybe can, but the ones where the call _originates_ must know it isn't coming from the line it pretends to be. (And if they're from abroad, then it's the one that handles the call where it enters the country.) I've been led to understand that most of the fake calls are coming from offshore (often India, China, Africa, or elsewhere), or the internet calls are routed through offshore facilities so they're untrackable. I think it's very difficult to control that sort of thing. They are already operating as criminals, and I suppose the legality of faking Caller IDs is low on their list of concerns. But, yeah, I'd say close to 100% of the junk robocalls are using fake CLIs. I mentioned before that I keep a log of all junk calls, going back to 2012 (you could legitimately say that I have too much time on my hands, but whatever...) I sometime call back the (ostensive) caller number - here if you precede the call with *69 your own Caller ID will be hidden - and I almost always find that the number is invalid, that is, faked. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
I selected "Other (traditional landline)", and it immediately said something like "sorry, 'Other (traditional landline)' does not support nomorobo." [It said that immediately, no further questions to pin down my provider.] So I don't think you can assume this is a list of supported carriers - there might be others that prompt a "sorry ...". I went through the same procedure. I did not get the "sorry" message. However, I could only select Phone type = "landline/voip" and Carrier = "Other (Traditional Landline)" to test. I don't have a POTS line to add its phone number to complete adding it to my NoMoRobo phones list. If you didn't get that far then I suspect you got IP filtered; i.e., you're not in a region that they support. As you surmised, NoMoRobo is a service available only to USA-based users. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Nil writes: [] they invariably hang up. If I call back the caller ID number, it's usually not in service. [] Oh, you get faked CLIs in the US too, do you? Isn't faking CLI illegal? If it is, aren't the telco.s participating in the crime? I don't think they can claim "common carrier" immunity; sure, any that _relay_ it maybe can, but the ones where the call _originates_ must know it isn't coming from the line it pretends to be. (And if they're from abroad, then it's the one that handles the call where it enters the country.) Caller ID wasn't invented for any purpose, except to place a $2 a month charge on a phone bill. That seemed to be the only objective when it was invented. Setting up calls is handled by SS7 and this is the thing phone companies worry about. As this is how they track network usage for long distance. See this section for just how bad it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_System_No._7 "Protocol security vulnerabilities" "Sir Cares-A-Lot" doesn't work at the phone company :-) The same goes for infrastructure operators, and hackable features of the power distribution system. "Sir Cares-A-Lot" never worked there either. Paul |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
Zaidy036 wrote:
On 7/20/2018 6:26 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: I had one of these calls yesterday - "your computer has stopped communicating with the Windows server", or something like that. I used my usual: "hang on while I get the police on the other line"; that usually makes them hang up pretty smartish. However, thinking about it afterwards, I wondered: would it be possible to devise something that could do something to their systems, while pretending to do whatever they ask? I've never gone beyond the initial call - I have always seen through them so far, it's not been difficult! - so I don't know what they ask you to _do_. I suspect it isn't likely to be possible, but it would be _so_ satisfying ... (-: Yes, have the Federal law changed to require that the telcos not allow the calling number to be changed and that it must record the actual source. Spoofing has been a long-time problem that the telcos are unwilling to address. There are many online services to assist with spoofing. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides...-and-caller-id "Under the Truth in Caller ID Act, FCC rules prohibit anyone from transmitting misleading or inaccurate caller ID information with the intent to defraud, cause harm or wrongly obtain anything of value. Anyone who is illegally spoofing can face penalties of up to $10,000 for each violation." Oooh, it's illegal if the intent is to commit harm. Yeah, big deal, like the law is going to stop illegal spoofing. Plus there are legitimate uses of spoofing, like a someone calling as a rep for their company and wanting to show the company's phone number and name in the Caller ID. Even Google Voice can use spoofing: you can configure their Hangouts Dialer app to show your Google Voice number instead of your cell phone number. I don't want anyone calling me on my cell phone number, especially since I don't dole it out to anyone. I want them always calling me at my Google Voice number. The app directs my outbound calls through a Google Voice hub that then re-originates my outbound call from their hub with the phone number and name from my Google Voice account. When a callee sees me calling, those that know my age-old phone number, especially if they have me in their contacts list, will know it is me calling. They won't know who the hell is calling them if they see my cell phone number (which can change when I get a new phone or change carriers). Only when technology gets involved with spoofing get blocked. That's why NoMoRobo, albeit not perfect, does impact the number of spoofed calls you get since most spoofing is used by robodialers (whether it then redirects to a voicemail system, a human-sounding fake voice, or to a real human telemarketer - robodialers are at the front end). The problem the telephony providers had before was the FCC also has their call completion rules. Providers would end up violating those rules when blocking spoofed calls. The FCC granted them an exemption. https://arstechnica.com/information-...rge-you-extra/ Although "authorized" to block spoofed callers, the providers are likely to offer it as an extra-cost add-on feature; i.e., if you want it, you pay. While they've been given a go-ahead, tis likely to take 5, or more, years before it shows up if they do it on their own versus adopting NoMoRobo (or simply adding the simultaneous ring where you could add NoMoRobo). Just getting the telphony carriers to add simultaneous ring has had dismal results. It inflicts internal costs that they would be hard pressed to get their customers to pay for. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
In message , Nil
writes: On 22 Jul 2018, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in alt.windows7.general: Oh, you get faked CLIs in the US too, do you? Isn't faking CLI illegal? If it is, aren't the telco.s participating in the crime? I don't think they can claim "common carrier" immunity; sure, any that _relay_ it maybe can, but the ones where the call _originates_ must know it isn't coming from the line it pretends to be. (And if they're from abroad, then it's the one that handles the call where it enters the country.) I've been led to understand that most of the fake calls are coming from offshore (often India, China, Africa, or elsewhere), or the internet calls are routed through offshore facilities so they're untrackable. I think it's very difficult to control that sort of thing. They are already operating as criminals, and I suppose the legality of faking Caller IDs is low on their list of concerns. Yes, going after the original criminals isn't going to get anywhere. That's why I want to go after the telcons. Routing calls through offshore facilities shouldn't be any excuse: the point at which those calls enter (or re-enter) the country should detect an incoming international call that comes with an internal CLI. OK, there _are_ a few cases where spoofing of CLI are valid - though I think fewer than claimed. But it still ought to be possible to monitor and control them: and certainly it ought to be possible to detect when they're using an invalid one. But, yeah, I'd say close to 100% of the junk robocalls are using fake CLIs. I mentioned before that I keep a log of all junk calls, going back to 2012 (you could legitimately say that I have too much time on my hands, but whatever...) I sometime call back the (ostensive) caller number - here if you precede the call with *69 your own Caller ID will be hidden - and I almost always find that the number is invalid, that is, faked. (I think it's 141 here. Or you can have it on by default, and then you use IIRR 1470 if you _do_ want it revealed.) Yes, "number withheld" is different from a faked one. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf offensive speech is something to be protected, not celebrated. - "yoni", 2015-8-5 |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On 07/22/2018 08:12 PM, Nil wrote:
[snip] I mentioned before that I keep a log of all junk calls, going back to 2012 (you could legitimately say that I have too much time on my hands, but whatever...) I sometime call back the (ostensive) caller number - here if you precede the call with *69 your own Caller ID will be hidden - and I almost always find that the number is invalid, that is, faked. Or the number could belong to someone who has nothing to do with the junk caller, so YOU are annoying someone (same thing that can happen when you respond to spam email). Also, I get a lot of calls that claim to be from a city, state (like "NEW YORK, NY". I was surprised last week when I got one with such an ID that was legitimate (robocall but still legitimate, announcement of a burn ban). -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "If God dropped acid, would he see people?" [Steven Wright] |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On 23 Jul 2018, Mark Lloyd wrote in
alt.windows7.general: Or the number could belong to someone who has nothing to do with the junk caller, so YOU are annoying someone (same thing that can happen when you respond to spam email). No. All the numbers I've ever called back have turned out to be Not In Service - that is, the numbers were spoofed in the first place. In the email world that's called a "Joe Job" - using a legitimate From when sending out spam. Sometimes the intent is to harass the owner of the From. It could happen with junk phone calls, too, and in fact I have noticed many spoofed caller IDs that appear to have belonged to real people at some time but aren't in use any longer. Also, I get a lot of calls that claim to be from a city, state (like "NEW YORK, NY". I was surprised last week when I got one with such an ID that was legitimate (robocall but still legitimate, announcement of a burn ban). There are a few like that, but they'll leave a message. I've never had Nomorobo block one of those. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 18:24:14 -0400, Nil
wrote: On 22 Jul 2018, Ken Blake wrote in alt.windows7.general: I don't care what's legal and what's not. I don't want *any* calls soliciting me for *anything*. That includes services I've done business with before and charities and political calls. If I want to do business with them again, make a donation or vote for their candidate, I'll contact them. They don't know this thing about you. Especially the charities and politicians. They see *you* as just one of a huge number of sources of funds, support and votes. In the main, calling "you" (calling people in general) does them no good, they don't get any funds, support or votes from us but they do from a small number and every vote, currency unit or volunteer counts. It's just like the criminals. They don't catch many with their idiotic vanishing creams, dubious timeshares or Nigerian prince needing a safe way to get his money out but they do get sufficient numbers to cover the cost of all of those calls. Bugging the **** out of you, personally, and me, personally, is a small price to pay. We, as individuals were never going to help them anyway so our levels of irkedness are moot. It's the idiot sisters they are relying on and there are tens or hundreds of millions of those. It's like mass production. Economies of scale. Having sufficient numbers of dumb, gullible but relatively cash-rich people to cheat to make the effort of cheating them worthwhile. You don't count. I don't count. Only the victims matter. And there are millions of those untapped. It may be an overreaction, but there's so much of this kind of stuff going on these days that I almost don't want to have a telephone anymore. I need mine for the broadband. Any of the legal callers are obligated to respect your request to put you on their own Do Not Call list. That's about all you can do about that. But in practice, I almost never get a "legal" commercial call. A few political calls around election time. My town sometimes makes emergency robo-calls. I used to get a very occasional call from a charity I give to, but I asked them to stop and they did. Otherwise nothing but junk calls. My solution for those is: 1) Rely on Nomorobo to block most of them; 2) Use my phone service's limited blocking feature to block the few numbers that call repeatedly (I have a "3 strikes yer out" policy.) But really, robocallers rarely re-use numbers. They know better. 3) don't bother to answer the phone unless it's a Caller ID I recognize. If it's someone I know, they will leave a message. I answer all calls if I'm awake, present and close enough to a handset. It was trained into me and I can't shake it. Not that it's an onerous task as I now get about one call every few years. It's all a nuisance, but I manage to tolerate it. I got a call from "Dave", today. He said he was representing an insurance company who would give me lots of money if there had been an accident in the last three years. I mentioned that, with seven milliards of people on the planet there must be accidents happening all of the time so this policy would cost him a lot and would make me very wealthy. "Dave" didn't seem to mind. He just kept spooling off his spiel. "Dave" was a robot. "Dave" was the only person-like thing to call me in months. I have never been called by politicians or charities. Posibly because I never leave my number where they can find it and I'm TPS registered. Or possibly because they know I'm unlikely to help them and very likely to try to sell them on some scheme to gentrify Jupiter with Apollo era technologies. J. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
In message , Wolf K
writes: On 2018-07-22 20:45, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Nil writes: [] they invariably hang up. If I call back the caller ID number, it's usually not in service. [] Oh, you get faked CLIs in the US too, do you? Isn't faking CLI illegal? If it is, aren't the telco.s participating in the crime? I don't think they can claim "common carrier" immunity; sure, any that _relay_ it maybe can, but the ones where the call _originates_ must know it isn't coming from the line it pretends to be. (And if they're from abroad, then it's the one that handles the call where it enters the country.) Sure it's illegal, but how do you find and convict the perpetrators? Especially since police forces are underfunded, which means understaffed and under-trained. You miss my point. I'm not talking about the primary perpetrators, who we're going to have great difficulty finding and convicting, especially since a fair percentage of them are abroad anyway. I'm talking about those who abet them: the telcom companies who route these calls. A telcom company isn't hard to find. Of course, my contention that they're participating in the crime, though I'm sure perfectly valid, won't get anywhere, as they have far more clout (e. g. with the legislature) than I do. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Quantum particles: the dreams that stuff is made of - David Moser |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 15:15:28 -0400, Nil
wrote: On 23 Jul 2018, Mark Lloyd wrote in alt.windows7.general: Or the number could belong to someone who has nothing to do with the junk caller, so YOU are annoying someone (same thing that can happen when you respond to spam email). No. All the numbers I've ever called back have turned out to be Not In Service - that is, the numbers were spoofed in the first place. In the email world that's called a "Joe Job" - using a legitimate From when sending out spam. Sometimes the intent is to harass the owner of the From. It could happen with junk phone calls, too, and in fact I have noticed many spoofed caller IDs that appear to have belonged to real people at some time but aren't in use any longer. Also, I get a lot of calls that claim to be from a city, state (like "NEW YORK, NY". I was surprised last week when I got one with such an ID that was legitimate (robocall but still legitimate, announcement of a burn ban). There are a few like that, but they'll leave a message. I've never had Nomorobo block one of those. How do you know what NoMoRoBo blocks? |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On 23 Jul 2018, Ken Blake wrote in
alt.windows7.general: How do you know what NoMoRoBo blocks? For one, the phone rings only once and then NoMo. That's the point when Nomorobo does its blocking magic. For two, my phone carrier has an on-line log of all calls, blocked or not. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
In message , Wolf K
writes: On 2018-07-23 15:51, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Wolf K writes: On 2018-07-22 20:45, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Nil writes: [] they invariably hang up. If I call back the caller ID number, it's usually not in service. [] Oh, you get faked CLIs in the US too, do you? *Isn't faking CLI illegal? *If it is, aren't the telco.s participating in the crime? I don't think* they can claim "common carrier" immunity; sure, any that _relay_ it* maybe can, but the ones where the call _originates_ must know it isn't* coming from the line it pretends to be. (And if they're from abroad,* then it's the one that handles the call where it enters the country.) Sure it's illegal, but how do you find and convict the perpetrators? Especially since police forces are underfunded, which means understaffed and under-trained. You miss my point. I'm not talking about the primary perpetrators, who we're going to have great difficulty finding and convicting, especially since a fair percentage of them are abroad anyway. I'm talking about those who abet them: the telcom companies who route these calls. A telcom company isn't hard to find. Telecom's are regulated. Basically, they can't refuse/censor traffic, unless it's been defined as illegal. Problem is, suspicious traffic must be shown to be illegal in order to block it. O'wise, telecoms are liable to litigation by annoyed customers. Of course, my contention that they're participating in the crime, though I'm sure perfectly valid, won't get anywhere, as they have far more clout (e. g. with the legislature) than I do. AIUI, telecoms are viewed as "common carriers". It's up to the shipper to ensure the cargo is legal. The common carrier is not liable to criminal prosecution if it accepted the cargo in good faith as conforming to all applicable regulations. Of course it's expected to take common-sense precautions to ensure cargo is safe, and transported safely, etc, but ultimately, it has to rely on the shipper's word. I did say earlier in the thread, but here goes again: I suppose the telcos who just route the call could claim common carrier. But the ones in whose network it _originates_ must know the CLI is being illegally spoofed - since AFAIK in most cases the CLI is not generated by the originator, but by the telco who provides the originator's service. (And in the case of foreign-originated calls that have a domestic CLI, the one that owns the interface must know it's wrong.) Bottom line: You have to catch the number spoofers (etc) in the act. Or, surely, prove that the numbers are spoofed, even if you don't know who the originators are. (_Knowingly_ propagating a crime, I'm pretty certain, makes you a criminal, even if you don't _originate_ it.) It's not easy. In Canada, one can report a suspected spam calls (etc) to the Mounties. The usual reslt is another warning about a new twist on an old scam. FWIW, back in the early days of Internet service, Bell Canada wanted to charge customers for spam filtering. I wasn't the only one who pointed out to them that it was in their own interest to kill spam as soon as it entered their network, since spam eats up bandwidth. Their spam filtering is quite good. I periodically go to the email web portal, and check and empty the spam folders. In the last two years or so, I haven't found a single false positive. Very little spam manages to get past the filyers to the Inbox. If they're keeping the spam long enough for you to be able to check it occasionally, then presumably they're _not_ filtering it where it _enters_ their network - and not saving bandwidth except on the final drop to you? -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "Flobalob" actually means "Flowerpot" in Oddle-Poddle. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:19:20 -0400, Nil
wrote: On 23 Jul 2018, Ken Blake wrote in alt.windows7.general: How do you know what NoMoRoBo blocks? For one, the phone rings only once and then NoMo. That's the point when Nomorobo does its blocking magic. Yes, I know. That's why I asked. For two, my phone carrier has an on-line log of all calls, blocked or not. Ah, that's the way you know. I don't know whether mine does or not. I've never looked. I don't particularly care who they're blocked, but out of curiosity, I'll check when I get a chance. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
On 23 Jul 2018, Ken Blake wrote in
alt.windows7.general: On Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:19:20 -0400, Nil wrote: For two, my phone carrier has an on-line log of all calls, blocked or not. Ah, that's the way you know. I don't know whether mine does or not. I've never looked. I don't particularly care who they're blocked, but out of curiosity, I'll check when I get a chance. I started off wanting to make sure Nomorobo wasn't blocking calls that it shouldn't. As far as I can tell, it never has. I kept keeping track because I was interested to see things like, what numbers recurred, any patterns of frequency or time of day, what spam campaigns were going around, etc. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
telephone hackers - can we upload something?
In message , Ken Blake
writes: [] I don't know . I've never looked. [] Sorry, can't resist - but the above is the standard reply to the question ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. "Do you smoke after sex?" -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|