Florida Man to be fined $1.25 per robocall... all 96 million of them America's comms regulator, the FCC, will fine a Florida Man $120m for flooding the country with nearly 100 million robocalls in three months. The watchdog said that Adrian Abramovich of Miami ran a scheme that made more than a million calls a day – each with its caller ID information altered – with the aim of selling travel …
Neighbor spoofing takes place when the caller falsifies the caller ID to match the area code and first three digits of the recipient's phone number...
That explains the calls I've been getting on my mobile! Always my area code and first three digits. I never answer and I have an app that forever blocks them.
The problem with the 'neighbor spoofing' which I've been getting on my home phone and cell, is that the numbers being used may be a legitimate number to a real person.
I've had one of the spoofed calls and I called it back just to see if it was real.
There was someone on the other end and I asked why they just called me. They said that they didn't.
Most of the spoofs are from numbers that are not currently in service.
The truth is that if the FCC wanted to, and if they made this a priority, there are a couple of things that they could do to help shut these guys down. One of them includes mandatory jail time for repeat offenders.
<quote>The truth is that if the FCC wanted to, and if they made this a priority, there are a couple of things that they could do to help shut these guys down. One of them includes mandatory jail time summary execution for repeat offenders.</quote>
FTFY
I'm sure that the telephone network/networks he was using will pretend like they had absolutely no idea that their systems were being abused. 96,000,000 calls with fake caller ID never raised any concerns.
I don't believe for a moment that the FCC and FTC want to stop robocalls when they don't penalize the networks making it possible. Instead they claim they helped promote "Nomorobo" that was completely useless even before it launched.
This is a vastly reduced fine.
Under the TCPA _statutory_ damages of $11,500 per call are payable to the FCC (and $500 to each person personally affected).
This is tripled for wilful violations. Falsifying caller-ID data is automatic wilful violation, as is breaching do not call lists.
On top of that there are the FTC fines and individual states have penalties of up to $55,000 per call plus wilful violation penalties.
The idea is quite deliberately to bankrupt egrarious offenders and prevent them ever going into business again. Apart from the costs of fighting off "Big Government", the TCPA has a right of private action which allows those who were called to file in Small Claims Court for each call received - the death of one million paper cuts. Bankruptcy generally can't be used to avoid court judgements in the USA either.
The problem is that most don't fill out the form of the offender.
While you may have the fake phone number, you don't know the company that they represent.
So what do you put in the form?
The other issue is that the scammer will do two things. First live off the proceeds knowing that he's going to get caught. Second keep a set of dodgy books to hide money and also not report all of the income.
So if the guy made millions, he'll end up saying he can't afford to pay even though he lives in a 30 million dollar mansion in Florida and his 'divorced' er separated wife lives in another 30 million dollar mansion which by law, can't be repossessed or forced to be sold in order to make restitution. (Primary residence only.)
They'll make some token restitution and 6 months later, open up shop with someone else as the corporate officer and continue the scam.
The only way to nail them is to make it a felony with mandatory jail time.
I think I actually reported that one on the FCC website. I normally wouldn't bother but with multiple calls to multiple mobile phones within 24 hours, all playing the same message, I had good documentation.
If it gets the FCC to crack down on the scammers and their enablers, maybe it'll keep the phone network usable for a few more years until we get a usable replacement.
from the article: "When answered, they played a recorded message"
and that recorded message starts the moment my answering machine says "Hellloooo Baaaaby!" like the Big Bopper [followed by a pause, followed by a welcome to friends and family and 'for the rest of you' this number is on the national do not call list - I don't pick up the phone any more unless I hear someone I know leaving a message - no ringer either]. If the recording leaves ANY identifying information, a complaint is generated. And the answering machine message only has the back half of the thing, as it "starts talking" over the machine message EVERY! TIME!. Assuming it's not "just a hangup". I've been getting SEVERAL CALLS PER DAY lately, just like that. It's FORNICATING IRRITATING AS HELL! Can't use the phone as it was intended any more. If it weren't for DSL, I'd consider NOT EVEN HAVING ONE.
But how can you register a complaint with SPOOFED caller ID and NO identifying information in the recorded message??? I'm a RABID complainer to the FCC about these guys. I've got 'confirmed kills' on FAX spammers from a while back. I'd DROOL over a CONFIRMED kill with one of THESE BASTARDS! But they've rigged it so complainers like me can't touch them. You have to wait for the FORNICATING call center and bother to ask questions and get called back REPEATEDLY by them now that you've "established a relationship with them".
Oh, and there's no pit in hell deep enough, no jail cell damp and cold enough, no punishment HIDEOUS AND CRUEL enough, for these GOSH DARNED MOTHER-FEELING ROBO-CALLERS (word substitution for humor)! They deserve a triple-eternity sentence with DAILY TORMENT, to the point where they insanely scream "I DESERVE THIS!"
"They should of course go to those who were called. Automatic credit on their phone bill. NO LAWYERS involved, please!"
My thoughts exactly. Dial some code. The telecoms company charges the caller number - the real one, not the spoof, as if the recipient was a premium number. The company also adds a commission. The call comes in via a different telecoms company? No problem, just bill them and let them charge the caller, adding their own commission. It would need some policing - it would be unacceptable to let recipients flag anyone who called them - but the first claims against a number could be held until there were sufficient to ensure that it was a problem caller. The only way out for the robocaller would be to fail to pay their bill. That's just a matter for the credit control department of the telecoms company to deal with.
At some level it's the big company, receiving thousands of identical complaints, that can paint a picture clear enough for FCC to see and understand. I assume that most of the junk calls that hit my system are spoofed numbers, especially when it's the local area code, given that I only know one person with the same code as me and they would register as known. If the house phone rings then it's the job of the answering machine to take the call.
Of course, the real problem is that it is too easy to spoof a caller ID. Perhaps if that could be prevented, so that unverified stuff presented as withheld or out of area, a lot of the scammers would find it harder to reach real people.
There is spoofing the Caller ID which has some legitimate reasons although technically its not spoofing.
That said, the phone company knows the correct number from the call.
They know where the call originated.
The problem is if the call comes from a SIP provider. (E.g. Vonage) They don't know the IP address of the originating caller, just the number which would be registered to the SIP provider. Once you know this.. you can shut down those robodialers and call centers in India running the scam. (Or some other country where its harder to track down the caller. )
If you made the SIP provider liable... you can bet they will be much more cooperative.
The problem is if the call comes from a SIP provider. (E.g. Vonage)
You just treat it as withheld if you don't trust the source. If the SIP provider has robust policies in place that make it very difficult to spoof a number then you allow their CID through. If they don't then you block it. For many years (it may still be true with more justification now) that was BT's excuse for not passing on international CID, that they couldn't guarantee its accuracy. We ended up in the situation that if a call entered the country on a BT-terminated cable then it would present as INTERNATIONAL, if it came in via Mercury (remember them?) then you'd get a proper international CID displayed.
" I assume that most of the junk calls that hit my system are spoofed numbers,"
So do I, but the TCPA provides joint and several liability (caller and the hirer), so if you can grit your teeth and drill down far enough to identify the company, you can file in small claims.
The fun part is asking the judge to order the hirer to name who they hired or face contempt of court - this is how you can get the FCC involved.
The calls, 96 million of them in total, were presented on caller ID as coming from travel companies like TripAdvisor, Expedia, Hilton, and Marriott.
...
"Neighbor spoofing takes place when the caller falsifies the caller ID to match the area code and first three digits of the recipient's phone number, instead of the caller's number or the number where the call was actually originating."
So, er, which is it? Pretending to be TripAdvisor, or neighbour spoofing? I don't quite see how it could be *both* for the same call...
Being a yank (well, living in Yankistan) I don't know about Canadian law, but in the U.S. there are exceptions to robocalling and "Do Not Call" violations. Chief among them are "calls from politicians". You wouldn't want to miss out on the latest saga of how your brave representatives are perpetually fighting for your welfare, would you?
There are many valid reasons for "spoofing" a phone number, eg someone from the hospital phones you and present the main switchboard number to you. Or any large organisation where calling back the specific number which called you might not be the best option. How do you police that in a way that doesn't cause problems for those who have a valid need for the service?
Calling for this sort of "law" is why the world is swamped with petty little laws that cause no end of problems for the majority in often misguided attempts to thwart a minority. Draconian kneejerkery on UK gun and knife laws have caused problems for many people but no significant effect on either gun or knife crime. The obvious government style "fix" would probably be to order telcos to limit how many and how often a phone call can made.
Been dealing with these garbage can calls for months - both on my mobile and on my land line. As a techie, I knew they were manipulating the caller ID system, but all my non-techie friends & family fell for it. I did notice the calls stopped a few weeks ago - glad they caught the guy.
Now, if the $1.25/call fine was only distributed to those of us who endured the calls....
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
