Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday November 07 2018, @02:23PM   Printer-friendly
from the believe-it-when-you-see-it dept.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/11/06/fcc-caller-id-authentication-2019/

Even if you don't agree with Ajit Pai's stance on some important issues, you might still want to hear about his latest campaign against robocalls. The FCC chairman has demanded (PDF) the adoption of a robust call authentication system to prevent caller ID spoofing, telling American carriers to implement the technology no later than 2019. Pai has sent letters to the CEOs of 14 voice providers to ask them to conjure up concrete plans to adopt the SHAKEN/STIR framework, which would validate legitimate calls across networks before they reach recipients. That would block spam and scam robocalls from going through, so you don't have to be wary of answering calls anymore.

"Combatting illegal robocalls is our top consumer priority at the FCC. That's why we need call authentication to become a reality -- it's the best way to ensure that consumers can answer their phones with confidence. By this time next year, I expect that consumers will begin to see this on their phones," Pai said in a statement.

He asked the carriers about their implementation plans and warned that if it doesn't seem like the call authentication system is on track to get up and running by 2019, the FCC will take action. Pai didn't elaborate on what the FCC will do, but the agency says it "stands ready to ensure widespread deployment to hit this important technological milestone."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by MrGuy on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:41PM (3 children)

    by MrGuy (1007) on Wednesday November 07 2018, @04:41PM (#759029)

    "legal" robocalls are limited to businesses you have an existing relationship with.

    Which is a loophole large enough to drive a truck through, unfortunately. And companies are, in general, not well disposed to give you tools to manage "preferences."

    Let's say I buy something from company X. I buy it with a credit card. I don't have a profile, or give them a phone number. But they can go to a data broker and associate a phone number to my credit card profile. Hey, we have a "business relationship," so now they legally can call me. They can call me not just about my order, but to offer me "special offers," i.e. ads. And, troublingly, they can have "affiliates" call me, so I might get offers for things I not only don't want, but for things not even necessarily sold by the vendor I purchased from.

    Or, I can sign up for some service online, and they can bury somewhere in their terms of service that they can share my information with "affiliates" and use it for marketing products I might be interested in. Hey, "consent!"

    Also, what defines a business relationship is a little squishy, and you can already see companies pushing the boundaries. Facebook, for example, sold phone numbers provided exclusively for two factor authentication to advertisers. [engadget.com] Imagine you giving a phone number for 2FA being considered having a "business relationship" to target calls.

    Say what you will about e-mail marketers, but at least they're required to give you clear choices of what to opt in or opt out of, and are required to honor those preferences. The "business relationship" loophole doesn't give as much explicit control, and doesn't necessarily have any clear, easy, and quick "opt out" mechanism.

    Separately, the "only companies with a business relationship" applies to companies, but there are likely other exceptions. The US national Do Not Call list has exemptions, [ftc.gov] and I'd expect similar ones would apply to robocalls. There's an exemption for non-profits calling on their own behalf (which, in theory, do NOT extend to telemarketers calling on a charity's "behalf," but this is again potentially abusable). And, most troublingly for anyone who lived through the last few weeks, "political cals" are exempt from the "do not call" list. It's not clear if these are only calls specifically on a candidate's behalf, or "issue" calls from interest groups or PAC's (and if it's not clear, well, you see where it goes...)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:05PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:05PM (#759105)

    The size of the loopholes is really a large part of the problem. For a period of years, the only robocalls I'd get were from people who had one of those exemptions. Never wanted to hear from them and didn't have any choice in the matter.

    Robocalls should be limited to situations like appointment reminders where there's reason to think that it benefits the person receiving the call and they have the option to opt out of it. The only reason for the current exemption is so that politicians and non-profits can reach people who haven't clearly asked to be contacted.

    • (Score: 2) by EvilSS on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:24PM

      by EvilSS (1456) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:24PM (#759109)
      I don't disagree, but you would agree there are legitimate uses for robocalls, yes? And I know for myself, even with the election going on, 99% of the calls I get are for scams using spoofed numbers, not even companies that would fall into the loose definition of being legal under current law.
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:25PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 07 2018, @07:25PM (#759110)

    Relationship only exists for 90days and only with the original company, it cannot transferred to another, from the time when YOU CONTRACTED them. They must stop when you verbally request it. They are not entitled to call on your cell phone. Also you must not be in the Do-Not-Call database, the phone number are to scrubbed monthly w/ new list to stay in compliance.

    The biggest market out for Robo-call - Is the Do-Not-Call list. Since a phone drops of the list at the end of 5 years. Just compare last months to this to get "free" valid numbers to calls. See fell of this list, so you can be called and the number is good (people do not like changing their number that often. so they about a 60day to get to you.

    The is one reason I do not use Do-Not-Call. Also the orginal list was a number and you can many in there. Now it is limited to 3 or 4 AND require email address... do not want to give government more free tracking info than I have to.