34 State AGs Demand The FCC Do More To End Annoying Robocalls
from the sorry-I-was-eating-dinner dept
Despite endless government initiatives and countless promises from the telecom sector, our national robocall hell continues. Robocalls from telemarketers continue to be the subject the FCC receives the most complaints about, and recent data from the Robocall Index indicates that the problem is only getting worse. Consumers continue to be hammered by mortgage interest rate scams, credit card scams, student loan scams, business loan scams, and IRS scams. In September, the group found that 4.4 billion robocalls were placed to consumers at a rate of 147 million per day. The trend is not particularly subtle:
The trend continues skyward despite the fact that the FCC passed new rules in 2015 expanding the ability of telecommunication companies to block robocalls and spam messages at the request of customers. And in 2016, the agency created a "robocalling strike force" tasked with crafting solutions for the problem. Additional rules dropped in 2017 taking aim at robocall spoofing.
So why is this still a problem? For one thing, cheap, internet-routed calling and spoofing options have outpaced both legal and technical solutions, leaving regulators and lawmakers in a perpetual race to catch up from behind. Flimsy security standards embedded in most caller ID systems also make spoofing phone numbers relatively trivial. Enforcement is also inconsistent (in part because smaller robocallers are often much easier to defeat in court than major companies), and years of apathy, blame shifting, and tap dancing by major carriers like AT&T certainly didn't help.
To that end, 34 State attorneys general signed a formal request this week urging the FCC to do more to thwart the problem. Comments made to the FCC make it clear that the FCC's 2017 spoofing rules didn't go far enough, so the AGs are requesting that the FCC create additional, more tailored rules to tackle things like "neighbor spoofing":
"One specific method which has evolved recently is a form of illegal spoofing called ‘neighbor spoofing.’ A neighbor-spoofed call will commonly appear on a consumer’s caller ID with the same area code and local exchange as the consumer to increase the likelihood he/she will answer the call. In addition, consumers have recently reported receiving calls where their own phone numbers appeared on their caller ID. A consumer who answered one such call reported the caller attempted to trick her by saying he was with the phone company and required personal information to verify the account, claiming it had been hacked. Scams like this cannot be tolerated."
The AGs also encouraged the FCC to bring some additional pressure on carriers to speed up the deployment of STIR (Secure Telephone Identity Revisited) and SHAKEN (Secure Handling of Asserted information using toKENs), protocol frameworks that should make it notably easier to authenticate legitimate calls and identify illegally spoofed calls. Hopefully the FCC can take a brief break from ignoring the public and kissing up to widely despised telecom monopolies to consider the request.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fcc, robocalls, scams, state attorneys general
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
They think people really love them, so if they are beloved make them opt in.
Then maybe do something about the 'charity' & 'survey' calls which are thinly veiled come-ons to separate you from your money with a sales pitch for something unrelated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Henhouse
A case of the wolves guarding the henhouse, eh?
No one on the Hill is going to make a change that keeps them from calling their voter base.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Henhouse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The RNC claimed that it had a "first amendment right" to choke up people's voicemail boxes with rignless political spam.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/05/republicans-claim-1st-amendment-right-to-send-you- robo-voicemails/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
According to that article, they claimed everyone had the right to send voicemail spam. Which is at least fair—if the RNC can tell you how to vote, why not, say, Russians with American investments?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Given this logical extension of Citizen's united, and the fact that borders really don't seem to exist on the internet, just what is "election interference" from a foreign country, and how does it differ from "advertising" by a company or campaign or "organic speech" from individuals.....
We really haven't worked out the consequences of "everyone to everyone" communications yet....
I think, on principle, that we need to begin by recognizing that the constitution applies to all actions of the US government, worldwide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But I suppose requiring US Agents to act within the boundaries of US law and the constitution when abroad implies that we actually leave the country and therefore are imperialist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That would be much too peer-to-peer, too egalitarian. But its probably part of the solution.
Zero-marginal cost (to send) messages are a form of displaced cost, just like pollution. It costs you much more to *filter* out to the ones you want to pay attention to.
Same for this post, actually...several people will have to read it (at a cost) to determine whether it is just worthless garbage, but my cost to send is zero.
My actual profession is a logician...and it is a conundrum because I have worked myself into a corner with the unintended consequences!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Attempting to decipher the present administration activities must present quite the challenge.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Fees to block spam calls
- "Free" spam call blocking app (Note: all data used on the phone is logged and used for advertising purposes)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Moderation Problem in another guise...
Automated messages are "basically free" (zero marginal cost to send), just like spam e-mails, so of course there's a lot of them, very small response rates pay nicely.
And public service (for example, positively identifying the source of a call, and taking real action when caller ID data is faked) costs money, so no, the big telecoms aren't interested.
Now, if you are alert, you will notice that this is a call to make anonymous calling impossible, and, like Techdirt, I think that has quite a bit of value for whistleblowers and generally enabling the first amendment. I don't know how to resolve the dilemma.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Moderation Problem in another guise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Moderation Problem in another guise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Moderation Problem in another guise...
Some level of de-cloaking is required.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The Moderation Problem in another guise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There isnt a hope in hell of Pai doing anything because the telecoms companies are getting backhanders for not stopping these calls and so is Pai. His whole aim is to do whatever he can to ensure the phone services and internet services for yhe public are as useless as they can be while ensuring the providers glean as much profit as possible. This is why he was given the job, not to make sure the public got good deals and protection from rip offs and scams?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Have fun with them
For some reason they always hang up on me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Have fun with them
lol - some of them are complete idiots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Have fun with them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Have fun with them
If everyone else played with scammers like this, their scams would start to become unaffordable, and there would be no reason to do it any more. After all, I'm sure it's like any other call center and they have to hit certain metrics like scam victim per calls or credit cards per calls or whatever. They don't want to spend 15 minutes per call with someone who wastes their time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Have fun with them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Have fun with them
Tom Mabe apparently did prank a "telemarketer" in 2011 and recorded it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIVfrBFc5og
Rather humorous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom Mabe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Microsoft discovered malware in my Linux!
The only way to cut down on these annoyances is to get a phone you can block numbers. My Panasonic blocks up to 250. This only works for repeat offenders, but there are plenty of them. I see the phone light up for one silent ring & it says CALLER BLOCKED.
I have gotten the one spoofing my own ID MANY times. Right, I'm calling myself from my own phone!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When can we nerd harder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: When can we nerd harder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My favorite is the broken english IRS call complete with background that makes it sound like a Grand Central train station pay phone. Then they threaten to have you arrested, lol - do not respond as they will then swat you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't get it. Either those numbers are far lower than the real number of robocalls (I get 6 or 7 every week consistently) or they have a means of identifying robocalls. If the latter, why don't they simply use that means to prevent them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They are quite pathetic, most just leave a no message message.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
States should make their own rules
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not 100% perfect, but it has been getting 99% of them for me. The ones it doesn't get, you can enter into the Database and tell it what type of call it was, so that you help block it for others. It does overall work well. Go check it out. The call blocking list is completely worthless. Trying to get the government to do something more? Try a free market solution instead.
Your Cellphone provider may have some free and Paid options also. I know for T-Mobile that I use, you can turn on, ScamID which will block Scam calls. That is free. But it only blocks those scam calls they know about as HiYa as blocked some of those for me also. But that doesn't block Telemarketers, or Spoofed numbers, or other types of calls.
https://hiya.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There, fixed/broke that for ya!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Solving the wrong problem
Scam calls are annoying, but trying to suppress them is treating a symptom, not the disease. The right way to kill off scams is to make them unprofitable to operate regardless of the delivery vehicle used. Instead of trying to make it hard to deliver their message, focus on trying to make it hard to profit from them even when they "succeed."
For the credit card scams, develop mechanisms to prevent the scammer from using the card information even when the victim falls for the scam. For example, set up card charges so that the vendor provides a challenge code to the customer, which the customer must process through an app or a smartcard for the charge to complete. This would restrict the scammer to at most one successful purchase per victimization. If the challenge code includes the dollar amount, the victim will need to be told how much the charge will be, which forces the scammers either to take small wins or to hope for victims so vulnerable that they authorize huge purchases over the phone. (Such people probably exist, especially if you consider victims with reduced mental capacity. Even so, many victims aren't in that category, so this cuts into profitability.)
For the personal information scams, reduce the marketability of having that personal information. For the U.S., publish all the Social Security Numbers and associated names. They're probably floating around on the criminal markets anyway, thanks to Equifax, so there's not much point in letting institutions keep pretending that knowing the SSN is proof of identity. Reclassify that as public information and force the financial institutions to use some actually secureable data for proof of identity, preferably something that can be easily updated in the case of another breach.
For the loan and IRS scams - those I don't have a good answer. The obvious answer is "educate recipients on how to recognize a scam", but the authorities have been trying that for years and it clearly hasn't taken. Many of those are just lead-ins to personal information or credit card scamming though, so the mitigations above should help here too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My solution has become not to answer the phone unless I know you. If you are not in my contact list then as soon as you hang up, no matter who you are, your number is going in the block list. It is the one sure way, I no longer deal with robocalls or political spam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whitelists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stupid people
There seems a limitless pool of people who simply have no working brain, no ability to even try to discern if something is legitimate or not so that even the most obvious scams fool people repeatedly.
And until the person picking up the phone become bright enough to ignore this stuff and the spammers starve from lack of response, nothing will improve much.
But then, if enough people started showing critical thinking skills, the churches and casinos would go out of business too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]