A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

telephone hackers - can we upload something?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old July 23rd 18, 02:12 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Nil[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,731
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 03:54 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 04:52 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 05:19 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,881
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 08:45 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 03:29 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,756
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 08:15 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Nil[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,731
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 08:37 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
John[_92_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 515
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 08:51 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 09:36 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 10:19 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Nil[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,731
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 10:38 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 11:05 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default 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  
Old July 23rd 18, 11:31 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Nil[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,731
Default 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  
Old July 24th 18, 12:03 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default 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
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.