Slashdot Mirror


US Cell Phone Users Discover SMS Spam

The Llama King writes "It's a bigger problem in Europe and Japan/Asia, but as SMS text messaging or "texting" becomes more popular in the United States, its users are discovering that spammers like it too, according to this Houston Chronicle story. Cell phone companies are trying to stem the spam flood before it starts, worried that users will turn off their phones, thus denying providers revenue."

7 of 314 comments (clear)

  1. Easy Solution by Davak · · Score: 4, Interesting


    An easy solution exists for this. The cell phone shouldn't accept text messages from someone the user has called the number previously or unless the number exists in the contacts listing.

    What's the odds of getting messages from someone whom you have never spoken with on the phone previously?

    Of course, this could be an enabled or disabled option.

    Daval

  2. sad thing is I don't even want to disable SMS. by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have found that the IM forwarding feature on some of the more recent betas of AOL Instant Messenger to be quite handy.

    GF could message me from AIM and I could call her back without her or I incurring any charges (incoming SMSs are free).

    So now I am going to get spammed by SMS because it has to be EXTREMELY easy to send to number@mobile.att.net. Great.

    What I am more worried about is my phone auto-answering. I was at work and heard a voice coming out of my phone. It was a telemarketer. The phone actually picked this call up by itself. Great. I had to call AT&T and have them investigate to remove the minute charges...

  3. Re:only two things are certain in life.... by caluml · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You pay to receive SMSs? That's messed up.

  4. Re:only two things are certain in life... by smokin_juan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the big question is: why the hell do SMSs cost 5-10 cents? for god sakes, i condense my conversation and take a fraction of the bandwith of a voice call so these rat-bastards can charge extra for it. it just ain't right unless you're talking about spam-deterrent, and spam-deterrent it ain't. it's just another case of companies charging money where they can, not where they ought to. i'll be more than happy to pay for the blades AND the razor but for fuck sakes charge the right price for 'em. and you may wonder why the economy is tanking - because, as i've outlined above, it's ficticious bullshit and wether or not people realize it, they're sick of it.

  5. Re:only two things are certain in life.... by marshac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Title 47 does seem to provide for protection against SMS-style spam. The reason is that for it costs YOU money to receive the unsolicited ads.

    'to any telephone number assigned to a paging service, cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call;'

    So I believe that if you wanted to, you would have grounds for a lawsuit under current law.

  6. Agree - now to implement "sender pays" email by Quizo69 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to say that the way it works here in Oz is great for the most part - the sender pays for the SMS message, not the receiver.

    The only change to this is if you SMS someone who is overseas and who is using AutoRoam (GSM rest-of-world-only, sorry USA). Then I can SMS that person and only pay for a local SMS, the overseas portion is billed to the person overseas at the time.

    I've never had any SMS spam (other than one or two SMSs from my phone provider which were borderline spam advertising new services but not overly disturbing).

    Now imagine if the sender pays system were implemented in email in some fashion.... we'd kill spam virtually overnight!

    The big issue with email is that, like P2P music trading, it's been free for so long that people don't want to go back to a paying system. So a solution to spam would need to involve return credits of some sort, so if I email my friend it costs me 1c but he can negate that automatically, so only those spammers whose emails aren't wanted don't get their money back. The devil's in the details though, but food for thought!

    Quizo69

  7. Won't tolerate it. by Scutter · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I absolutely refuse to tolerate any SMS spam on my cellphone. My gripe is not so much the cost as the inconvenince of having my phone go off every thirty seconds, then trying to sift through to figure out what's legitimate. The first time I get an SMS spam, I'm having the "feature" disabled on my phone since SMS will then become completely useless.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"