World-wide, credit card fraud and other scams cost the public billions of dollars. While credit card fraud is the clear leader in sheer volume of money lost, "regular scams" still result in a significant amount of money being lost each year. Globally, credit card fraud resulted in losses of US$21.84 billion in 2015. The so-called "Nigerian scam", usually perpetrated via email, totalled US$12.7 billion in 2013. Overall losses are likely to be much larger however, as many scams go unreported.
While scams that come in over email are increasingly being picked up by spam filters, around 45% of scams in Australia (and likely other countries) are by phone and text message.
Email spam filters are using machine learning techniques to get better at identifying the wide range of scams that can arrive in inboxes. This is by far the most effective way of dealing with scams, as the average member of the public has been shown to be remarkably susceptible. However, very little has been done about phone and text scams. This is surprising given scammers have quite brazenly stuck to using the same number or area codes over significant periods of time.
[...] Google and Apple should, however, be able to do more independently of these agencies. With the advent of machine learning techniques being used to analyse emails, it will be also possible to apply the same technology to phone calls.
[...] The list of other scam types is fairly consistent, and so is identifiable by software interpreting the conversation in real time. Governments should apply pressure on companies like Apple and Google to tackle this problem. Until then however, it is worth using one of the third party apps (like: TrueCaller, Hiya ) to ward off scams.
Do you have suggestions on how these scams could be stopped ?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hojo on Monday June 26 2017, @06:39PM (6 children)
I don't answer the phone any longer unless it's from someone I know. Period. Plus I disabled voicemail, so no one (even those I know) can leave messages.
That means I don't get any junk, and also means that my ability to get emergency stuff is also limited. Note that I don't block texts. I do share, with a very limited few, my real email address.
The upside is glorious. I add anyone whose number I don't recognize to a "junk" list that goes straight to the nonexistent voicemail, so no one ever gets to ring my phone more than once.
The sad reality is that voice calling, like paper mail, is dead. Use it only for very limited purposes.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:21PM
Not drastic enough. I just stopped talking to people. I especially stopped talking to people I know.
I don't have a phone and I don't use email and I'm not on social media.
I live under a bridge and I don't interact with society at all.
The end result is I'm a hobo. And I'm so happy!
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Tuesday June 27 2017, @01:29AM
To quote a notorious right wing nut job, "Ditto".
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Tuesday June 27 2017, @05:54AM (1 child)
Phone scams aren't stopped because the medium used, namely the phone lines, make more money because the calls take place. They get paid for every call.
The "free market" solution would be for you to pay your phone company to block them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:08PM
Yeah, no. There can't be a free market with a monopoly imposed (or competition prohibited) by government guns.
One of many truly free-market solutions would involve boutique providers that include additional data tied to the funding network source of the originating phone call, and offering tools to allow users to route calls making use of said data. Not entirely dissimilar from how many US Internet networks drop all traffic from China entirely.
(Score: 3, Funny) by jdavidb on Tuesday June 27 2017, @02:14PM
I agree with everything you wrote except that I do not agree that voice calling being dead is sad. I'm overjoyed.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by driverless on Wednesday June 28 2017, @11:02AM
Ivan Danko: Chinese find way. Right after revolution, they round up all phone scammers, all phone scam funders, take them to public square, and shoot them in back of head.
Art Ridzik: Ah, it'd never work here. Fucking politicians wouldn't go for it.
Ivan Danko: Shoot them first.
(Score: 2, Troll) by LoRdTAW on Monday June 26 2017, @06:47PM (22 children)
Kill all humans. Until then, you can't stop greed.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:23PM (17 children)
You are greedy in that you want a phone service without spam; you want to dominate the would-be spammers; you want to be famous for killing the problem; you want people to pay you respect or, even better, money for solving this problem for them; you want to go down in the history books; you want to add a nice paragraph to your Wikipedia page.
So, why don't you and others innovate a solution to this age-old problem? The answer is simple: You are coerced to support the very telecom tech that irritates you; governments not only created the monopolies that run this tech, but they also protect them from facing the consequences of not meeting the needs of those greedy innovators who dwell in the market.
There needs to be a separation of business and state.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:28PM
Found John Galt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:31PM (1 child)
People will respond by saying "I'd like to solve the problem just to feel good about making the world a better place", but that's still greed: People are searching for that high one gets when one knows one has done well by others.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:41PM
Very few people are searching for the pure satisfaction of having done the world a favor, because the reward for selfless altruism is unending exploitation. Once someone discovers you're willing to work for free, you can expect everyone to dump all their shitwork on you, because you're obviously fucking worthless and deserve to be treated like shit.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:56PM (3 children)
Assholes.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:01PM
What else to expect from the ASSHOLE NIGGERS of SHITSTAIN NEWS.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:17PM (1 child)
Wow, I did not realize we had some TRULY fucking nutsos here.
Time to leave, fuck it I'm done, blacklisting soylentnews.org to save myself from my own bad judgment.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:30PM
Bye, ASSHOLE!!!!
Don't accidentally your own ass on your way out!
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:00PM (7 children)
It's on topic, you illiterate assholes; pick another downmod qualifier.
-----
You are greedy in that you want a phone service without spam; you want to dominate the would-be spammers; you want to be famous for killing the problem; you want people to pay you respect or, even better, money for solving this problem for them; you want to go down in the history books; you want to add a nice paragraph to your Wikipedia page.
So, why don't you and others innovate a solution to this age-old problem? The answer is simple: You are coerced to support the very telecom tech that irritates you; governments not only created the monopolies that run this tech, but they also protect them from facing the consequences of not meeting the needs of those greedy innovators who dwell in the market.
There needs to be a separation of business and state.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:14PM (6 children)
How about (-1: Discredited By History)
We're living right now in a Randian paradise where tech moguls pay the absolute minimum for labor and don't pay any tax. As a direct result of not taxing the rich, we have the Greatest Recession since the Great Depression. The epitome of greed is a society where millennial billionaire techbros go on record as saying on social media, why won't the poor, the old, and the jobless just fucking die already.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:53PM (2 children)
Recent history has proven that we are NOT in a "Randian" paradise; sorry, pal, but bailouts of centrally-managed fiat banking, economic "stimulus", etc., is the exact opposite of a world based on rigorous, free-market contract negotiation, dispute resolution, and enforcement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @09:14PM (1 child)
I'm living in the real world where Apple has a cash reserve of $250 billion and pays tax at a effective rate of 0.1%.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:47AM
That's why I give Apple my money. They are much better at managing it than I am.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @10:23AM (2 children)
Learn your shit before spouting off. Rand was vehemently against buying and selling legislative and bureaucratic pull in order to tilt the playing field in your favor like we currently have.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @03:16PM
Rand was also a welfare mooch
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @04:08PM
Ooooooh you're a randian? Not that I should be surprised in the slightest, it totally fits. But something about hearing you quote scripture just really slams the point home.
"Learn your shit" is laughable coming from you.
(Score: 3, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Monday June 26 2017, @11:56PM
The reason everyone is riding your ass is because you're talking about spam. This article is about scam.
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:45AM
I disagree with much of what you say in your ON TOPIC post.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:06PM (2 children)
It's on topic, you illiterate assholes; pick another downmod qualifier.
I mean, seriously, you gave "informative" (!) to "Kill all humans. Until then, you can't stop greed." Pig fuckers.
-----------------
You are greedy in that you want a phone service without spam; you want to dominate the would-be spammers; you want to be famous for killing the problem; you want people to pay you respect or, even better, money for solving this problem for them; you want to go down in the history books; you want to add a nice paragraph to your Wikipedia page.
So, why don't you and others innovate a solution to this age-old problem? The answer is simple: You are coerced to support the very telecom tech that irritates you; governments not only created the monopolies that run this tech, but they also protect them from facing the consequences of not meeting the needs of those greedy innovators who dwell in the market.
There needs to be a separation of business and state.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:16PM
Spam! Spam! Spam!
Damn, now I'm hungry.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:28PM
Wow, you're more fun than a barrel of monkeys.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:55PM
It's on topic, you illiterate assholes; pick another downmod qualifier.
I mean, seriously, you gave "informative" (!) to "Kill all humans. Until then, you can't stop greed." Pig fuckers.
-----------------
You are greedy in that you want a phone service without spam; you want to dominate the would-be spammers; you want to be famous for killing the problem; you want people to pay you respect or, even better, money for solving this problem for them; you want to go down in the history books; you want to add a nice paragraph to your Wikipedia page.
So, why don't you and others innovate a solution to this age-old problem? The answer is simple: You are coerced to support the very telecom tech that irritates you; governments not only created the monopolies that run this tech, but they also protect them from facing the consequences of not meeting the needs of those greedy innovators who dwell in the market.
There needs to be a separation of business and state.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by nobu_the_bard on Monday June 26 2017, @06:58PM (2 children)
I deal with this stuff a lot. There's various approaches. It's hard to stop calls for various reasons. Caller ID is easy to fake though. I have seen people's personal numbers get flooded because scammers used their number for the Caller ID; a friend of mine had to get his number changed twice because he was getting angry calls at all hours.
I used to also only take calls from numbers I know, but that's not an option now. I have more responsibilities than ever and sometimes end up talking to someone important for the first time from a cold phone call in the earning morning hours.
I'm fond of this guy's approach, have thought about signing up and seeing how it works out: http://www.jollyrogertelco.com/ [jollyrogertelco.com] If anyone around here has used a service like that, would be interested to know about how it worked out.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:18AM (1 child)
This (or a more civilized version of this) is what Google Voice was intended to provide. An automated answering system that could weed out known scam/spam as well as learn your preferences regarding specific callers.
The problem is that Google Voice has been mostly neglected, and one can never point all ones advertising and phone publishing toward it because Google may "sunset" it without warning.
Also both Google and Bing now go out of their way to prevent using their search engines to find the actual owner of given phone numbers, (so you can track down the scammers). Instead they lead you to an endless stream of charlatans trying to extract $30 to provide you with 4 year old information. Every one of those "services" could be put out of business tomorrow if Google would just open up search results to actual phone numbers.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:36PM
It'd be of limited use if they did make searching numbers easier. Most of the scammers don't directly own the numbers (fake caller ID) or proxy through compromised PBXes (real caller ID with legit number, but false pretenses) just like with spam mail. Only a small number use their numbers they actually own, but even those change extremely frequently. The search engines wouldn't do much more than provide a lot of incomplete or misleading information similar to those websites.
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Monday June 26 2017, @07:07PM (6 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:33PM (2 children)
The trouble is you could very easily kill Rachel from card services, except your dick is tricking you into thinking maybe if you kept her alive, you might have a chance of fucking her. And that's the problem. The solution is obvious. Cut your fucking dick off, because your dick is making you act irrationally.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:50PM (1 child)
Wait, how do you kill her with your dick? Is this like an immediate stab wound, or a slow disease kind of death?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:18PM
Choke on my cock!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:36PM (1 child)
That's an excellent variation on what I've been saying for several years now, with regards to passing laws and creating protocols that are supposed to protect us from terrorism: How can we expect to be protected from terrorism if our country can't even protect us from robocalls?
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday June 26 2017, @07:52PM
Obviously robocalls are terrorism. The government is powerless to completely stop either.
But I wouldn't mind if the government carpet bombed the telemarketers.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:53PM
Damn Rachel from card-holder services!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:09PM (1 child)
You have the two worst things in the world of logistical progress:
Old technology that must not break.
Monopolies created and protected by government.
What did you expect?
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday June 26 2017, @09:15PM
Telephone PSTN access can be controlled by the means of caller-ID and in addition with a PIN-code for cases this won't catch. If a realtime link can be established with your bank then you can rig your phone to require a funds transfer before a call is let through.
The problem with the PSTN system is that caller-ID may be faked. And a bank connection can be hard to get. Also VoIP is likely to be the thing which makes investment in PSTN kind of questionable. Ie, use my VoIP (IP) number or stuff it etc.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:00PM (2 children)
You cannot fix/cure/stop stupidity with technology. The absolute best that you could ever hope for is to try to use technology to bring awareness about the problem.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday June 26 2017, @09:18PM
Technology is excellent to build firewalls that keeps most of the scum locked out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:37AM
Too bad the "brown" note doesn't exist. I could have proved useful against telemarketers.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Monday June 26 2017, @08:10PM (2 children)
"""
Total 419 losses around the world- The best 419 statistics ever published untill our 419 Unit published its first edition of 419 stats in March 2006, were given by Special Agent Craig Spraggins of the US Secret Service, who was Special Agent in Charge of the now defunct Joint West African Fraud Task Force in testimony before a US Congressional subcommittee in 1998.
He said that estimated US losses per annum were $300 million, and estimated total losses worldwide per annum were $750 million (making the rest of the world's figure $450 million per annum).
You can multiply that by the number of years 419 has been running (25 plus) to arrive at a figure of some $82 Billion plus dollars. There is no need to lower the estimates or take a more conservative point of view, since it has been a faster growing business since the year 2000 with an explosive growth since 2003.
"""
Here's why I don't believe the figures:
a) those ones come from the secret service, nothing says pulled-out-of-someone's-arse more than a government study.
b) 25 times $750m is not $82b - the site we're supposed to trust can't even do simple arithmetic. Maybe these are imperial millions and billions, and the scale factor between them is more like 180 than 1000.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by tfried on Monday June 26 2017, @08:49PM (1 child)
I did not bother to up all the sources from TFA (which appear to be more than a single one of first glance). In fact I'm not overly interested in seeing any specific figure on "the" economic loss, here. But what I'm really wondering is: Who else would you possibly trust to come up with anything resembling an impartial and comprehensive study, on the topic?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday June 26 2017, @11:05PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday June 26 2017, @10:36PM
So ... does anyone know where the money actually going? It's not like it's being funnelled into the "Reimburse Bill Gates for eradicating malaria nearby" fund, I'll bet.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:53AM (7 children)
Make it illegal to spoof your Caller-ID to a number you don't own. The phone companies already know who's actually making the damn call, they aren't going to miss charging for it. Throw some liability on them if their records aren't complete so they can't weasel out of it. Then actually enforce the damn do-not-call list.
Lately I've been getting between 1 and 5 calls per day that are robo-calls with numbers spoofed to local area codes. It's getting quite tempting to cancel cell service entirely and just rely on Google Voice on the PC when I need to make calls.
(That, or trap Hastur in your voicemail answering message. Relative difficulty levels are up to you.)
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday June 27 2017, @01:43AM (1 child)
It already is. Email spam is illegal too, but that hasn't stopped it from happening.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Informative) by edIII on Tuesday June 27 2017, @05:48PM
No, it isn't. In the U.S, only Mississippi makes Caller ID spoofing illegal in that way. Right now I could call someone spoofing the numbers to my heart's delight.
If it was illegal in every state, I could be starting investigations on each and every telemarketer call that comes into my network. I can't. There is nobody to call, no departments in the upstream carriers, no desk in the local police to complain to, etc. Technically, for some people, I AM the telephone company. They are paying me for telephone service, and call me for support. Heck, I'm even the operator :) As the telephone company, I doubt even the Attorney General for the State of California would give a shit about a faked Caller ID on on a call that came through on my network.
I've been through this once before. I acted as a telephone company and for three days dealt with upstream carriers, and even the local police, and nothing got done. I was basically told that tracing the line (like the movies) was practically impossible. Unless the FBI got interested or something, the chances of me tracking it down were NIL. I got no's in every single direction I turned. This was with a formal complaint of harassment that I was trying to handle.
That's what needs to change. I can do everything correct on my end, and I already limit the Caller ID to only the numbers that have proof of ownership. Really easy when I know all of my customers. On the other end though, there are VoIP companies that are NOT as stringent with what can be passed. There are no agencies, no websites, no support of any kind to track down the carrier that was involved, much less the paying customer. That's with/without a legal subpoena.
To my knowledge, the only people truly capable of tracing a line are the FBI/NSA. That's only because of the mediation switches that are picking up all telephone traffic for DCSNet. At the carrier level, we have ANI which is sparsely and unreliably populated.
Step One: Make Caller ID spoofing illegal
Step Two: Actually enforce it, and allow VoIP companies to file complaints.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @09:17AM (4 children)
Ain't the whole thing centralized? Why is it possible to spoof anything easily?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:14PM
Typically, legitimate businesses with multiple internal offices want to keep their internal numbers private while both allowing outgoing calls from said internal numbers and presenting a single point of contact to the outside world. This would be one such reason to "spoof" CallerID, so that no matter where the call originated from inside the businiess' phone network, the CallerID would always see the primary business name and number displayed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:17PM
And no, "the whole thing ain't centralized" when it comes to CallerID. You can build your own PBX phone system using software and hardware (Asterisk comes to mind), tho I do believe you will require one small bit of cooperation from whatever phone company you'd use. Such help is regularly given out to businesses that maintain their own PBX systems - including spammers with call centers.
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:43PM (1 child)
Pretty much, the system wasn't designed with the idea that computers would exist someday to make everything easier.
The spoofed Caller ID is just a field you fill in on most PBXes. I could claim 1-111-111-1111 was my number if I wanted to.
There's no actual centralized database of all phone numbers. Everything's stored in separate relative databases. It's not super easy to figure out the precise owner of a number sometimes, and sometimes things get confused (like more than one company thinking they own a number).
Thing is, there's a lot of people, for good reasons and bad, that like the system as-is and/or don't want the government to touch it. The government has a habit of not doing much helpful in this field beyond what a layperson can understand.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 27 2017, @02:41PM
The government has a habit of not doing much helpful in this field beyond what a layperson can understand.
The average layperson can easily understand "nuke from high orbit", and offering to apply it
to telemarketers, or indeed any kind of cold caller, is likely to be the single most effective way of
getting elected to high office ever proposed.
Indeed, if ISIS were to propose mass murder of telemarketers, they would probably
get elected to office in the USA.