Slashdot Mirror
CallerID Spoofing to be Made Illegal
MadJo writes "US Congress has just approved a bill that will make it illegal to spoof CallerID. From the bill: 'The amount of the forfeiture penalty (...) shall not exceed $10,000 for each violation, or 3 times that amount for each day of a continuing violation, except that the amount assessed for any continuing violation shall not exceed a total of $1,000,000 for any single act or failure to act.'"
That's a law that should be more proactive than reactive.
How about an additional law that makes telephone companies responsible for allowing caller ID spoofing to happen?
Or is that too difficult to prevent?
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
This isn't "NannyState" at all, this is an attempt at stopping scammers and other slimeballs from taking advantage of people.
"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson
Does this mean I won't be able to call my ex girlfriend up at 3am with a phone number she doesn't recognize, and proceed to breathe heavily into the phone?
But seriously, I think it's a good idea. They've closed the door to many a tele-scammer. Hopefully now all those geriatrics who get their social security card stolen will have a little more security.
When the police/people see the incoming phone records, will it show the spoofed number or the real number?
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
So...If they get caught 3 times in one day, they can do it as much as they want that day? And...If they get caught 100 times, they can do it all they want forever? Fun.
There's a campaign going on at Binary Freedom right now that some of you may be interested in.
http://binaryfreedom.info/node/163
Basically, there are several arguments against this law
1. It doesn't do anything
Criminals will still make calls and spoof, so it won't stop fraud. Police can already track down spoofers with the same amount of non-spoofers who are using their phones for illegal purposes.
2. It costs money
We're gonna have to spend money to catch spoofers.
3. Jurisdiction
If the phone companies want to stop spoofing, they should design a secure system instead of relying on the congressional police
4. Privacy
It strips privacy that is gained by spoofing.
5. Legitimate use
It has legitimate uses such as for telecommuters who want the name when they make business calls to be the company's. Or how about a business that has several people using one phone line? They might want the sales associate's name to appear, which would be done through spoofing.
Fact of the matter is, this gains us nothing. If I can write a fake name on a letter and mail it, why can't I do the same with my phone?
According to the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8, Congress isn't allowed to regulate communications. Therefore this is unconstitutional.
Libertas in infinitum
Well, around here the police department spoofs their caller ID info. Any time you get a call from anyone at the police station downtown, it only shows four zeros as the caller ID. It is different from when it says ID unavailable.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
My parents insist on using a calling card. When they call me, what comes up in my caller ID is the city where whatever bank they got sorted through is located. For instance, my caller ID will show some 1-800 number and say "MONTGOMERY, AL" or some such city. Would this fall under spoofing?
"We shall grapple with the ineffable, and see if we may not eff it after all." - Douglas Adams
Fines for corporations should certainly have a minimum value, but they should have NO upper ceiling. When companies like Microsoft or Phillip Morris or ExxonMobil are fined $200 million dollars - as most of them have been - they don't even blink. It's completely useless. The law in America in this regard is completely idiotic in this regard.
A-Bomb
If I send my landline phone# from my mobile phone, is that "illegal spoofing"?
--
make install -not war
Good, now I'll stop getting cold calls from "caller unknown". If my phone displays "caller unknown", I just made $10k.
I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
So I'm actually reading the legislative action on this bill (through Thomas, provided by the link), and it doesn't appear as though there's been any kind of a vote on this. Am I, you know, missing something? Or does somebody not understand that a bill actually has to be voted on by each full chamber (both the House and the Senate) in an identical format, before it can be said that "Congress" has approved anything?
I have saved hundreds and hundreds of dollars over the years for a feature I could have used maybe, once or twice.
Seems like a bargain to me.
Sheesh, you don't have to buy product offered to you.
I am not a technophobe, I have two land lines and four cell phones. The Cell phones come with caller ID "for free".
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Leave it to Slashdot to predictably label fraud as a "feature" and laws designed to prevent it "nannystate".
There are several services out there that will do this real-time before you even answer the call. Like PDXUSA, they compare the ANI with the ID of the carrier originating the call, and the CID to see if they are consistent, then the CID display on your phone will indicate the CID, the ANI, and indicate if the CID is legit or not.
If you call someone in another state and the phone company gets paid for the call, it's interstate commerce.
If any of the phone companies involved are incorporated in another state, then it's also interstate commerce.
As far as the feds are concerned, the parties to the commerce are the people using the phones, all the carriers, and anyone and everyone who is paying the bill.
You can argue that the feds have no business regulating intra-state phone calls. It's been at least 70 years since the feds started regulating the phone system. I'd be surprised if the courts haven't ruled on federal regulation of purely intra-state phone calls yet.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
My real name is not Strange Ranger.
Why should I have to reveal my real number when placing a call?
Yes I know this is a forum and calls are more "personal".
But sometimes I call companies. Or heck maybe city hall.
Where does the tracking and ID'ing end?
Operator, give me the number for 911!
I sort of hope it passes, for selfish reasons. I direct the support department at a VoIP provider and I cannot tell you how tired I am of people's endless, nonstop whining about their caller ID, and how they want it changed, and why can't I make it look like they're calling from somewhere else... on and on and on. This will give me a convenient excuse to tell them to shut up.
On a slightly more serious note, though, it's amusing to note why the bill is being introduced. Senator Stevens was blithering about how it's important because people rely on caller ID for "critical information". I cannot imagine what could possibly be considered "critical" about caller ID information, particularly considering what a half-assed hack the entire system is anyway and the lack of any real standards. Please note that caller ID is entirely different from ANI (automated number identification).
Caller ID is a fine example of a semi-convenient feature that people took and ran away with. The general population now sees Caller ID as the Oracle at Delphi, infallable and impossible to live without, and go absolutely apeshit if it's wrong (which is quite often, believe it or not). I guess people just don't understand the technology, but to "rely" on caller ID information is ludicrous.
I remember about fifteen years ago, maybe a bit more, when Caller ID was virtually unheard of, and the Bells were just starting to roll it out to homes. My parents got the little box from Radio Shack, signed up with the service, and my friends and I would rush over to the ID box with childish glee every time the phone rang, cause hey! How cool is this, man!
But in the end that's all we thought about it. It was a cool little novelty. That people take it so seriously now baffles me.
We used to deal with the phone ringing and not knowing who it was in advance with the following method: a) answer the phone, b) don't answer the phone, or c) let them leave a message and get back to them if we feel like it.
Somehow, though, what I don't remember is that the pre-Caller ID era was some kind of a Dark Ages where nobody got anything done.
But you'll never convince the public of this.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
I block it just fine on verizon.
I have all phone lines and voip lines going into a asterisk server. if you dont have a real caller Id string and are not on my blacklist your call goes through.
It's quite easy to block UNKNOWN CALLER. and cheap too. a asterisc pots card is $29.00 on ebay and an asterisk server is pretty much free. (P-III 500 is more than enough horsepower) all you need is a voip phone handset or adapter to go to regular phone ($19.00 ebay sipura spa-2000)
Way better than any answering machine you can buy, I can block anything I want, I can force unknown callers to a special mailbox that states " I do not answer unknown calls" or better yet a 30 minute "hello? hello? I cant hear you. wait a second. can you hear me now? hello? can you speak louder? I can kind of hear you now, what was that?"
wasting a telemarketers time is a wonderful thing. when they get that you are honey potting them to waste their time they add your number to the do not call list on their own.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
No, use apples and apples. The societal good must outweigh the societal cost, not merely the dollar cost. Societal costs include:
- The additional liability of every single person and business subject to the law
- The opportunity cost of inventors who might be able to devise beneficial uses of a banned practice.
- The general deterioration of faith and understanding of the government due to the addition of yet another unnecessary law. (Yes, I can say for a fact that it is unnecessary because, well, we've survived without it for quite some time)
I'm sure you can think of a few more hidden costs if you take a couple minutes.
...or is it just a coincidence that this law comes up after "SpoofCard.com Terminates Accounts of Paris Hilton and 50 Other Customers for Using its Service to Break Into Voicemail Boxes"?
I think not.
Anyway, please people, the whole reason for this law is not to make spoofing a thing of the past, but to make sure only cops and feds are allowed to spoof caller ID to harass, intimidate and spy on me by pretending to be my loved ones, creditors, ex-girlfriends who want their DVDs back, one night stands who I never called back, etc. I mean, how naive are we about them spying on me? Laws are about power and who has it. That's why they won't let me buy a tank on eBay.
Damn government.
i am the opposite of tom_good, i am the XOR of ]=9fÆ"ÝÕ and ÖÆ\KF, i am 746F6D5F6576696C00.
- Monetary: That's the fines. To somebody like Paris Hilton, the fine means nothing. In fact, to most people, the amount of the fine is trivial. In my state, the fine for speeding is $5 for each MPH over the speed limit. If I get a ticket for going 45 MPH in a 25 MPH zone, my fine is $100.
- Administrative: If you get too many tickets within a certain period of time, you lose your right to drive. They take your license away. It doesn't matter if you are rich or poor. You get too many tickets, you lose your license. Just ask Paris Hilton.
- Incarceration: Drive without a license? You're going to jail. Doesn't matter if your are Paris Hilton or some bum on the street. Hell, in my state, you'll get jail time for serious enough speeding infractions. Even if you can afford the $5 for each mile ticket, if you're caught going 120 in a 55 MPH zone, you're going to jail. Doesn't matter if you can afford a $325 ticket or not.
Doing a percentage scale for tickets is just stupid. In Sweden, a speeding fine is calculated at 14 days pay. Would you really miss 14 days pay no matter what you earned?$100 means nothing to me. If I were to lose $100 walking down the street, I would never even notice. So why do I not just drive like a maniac? Read on...
What about if you earned $500,000 per year? Your fine would be $19230.76. But if you earned $500k/yr, would you really care that much about a $20k fine? Jail time and loss of license are much bigger deterrents to the wealthy.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock