Slashdot Mirror
TrapCall Service To Bypass Caller ID Blocking
cemaco writes in with news that TelTech, developers of the infamous SpoofCard service, have come out with something even more controversial: a set of services for revealing blocked caller ID numbers. The services take advantage of a loophole in the way caller ID blocking works — it has never been effective when calling an 800 number, because the recipient is paying for the call. So TelTech instructs you how to forward blocked calls (transparently) to their 800 number; the call comes back to your phone in seconds with the formerly hidden caller ID revealed. Advocacy groups for victims of domestic violence are concerned. Victims of annoying calls hiding behind caller ID blocking are rejoicing.
Advocacy groups for victims of domestic violence are concerned.
Why? Because this doesn't allow victims to harass their abusive partners anonymously? I fail to see what legitimate use caller ID blocking has in a domestic dispute. If anything, this should be a benefit since it destroys the anonymity of a harassing caller.
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
The "if you've got nothing to hide..." argument is quite the slippery slope. It's a bit authoritarian to criminalize everything you don't personally do or agree with yourself, isn't it?
If you have to hide your number you are likely up to no good, why not just make it illegal to hide your caller id
If you don't let the police into your house, you are likeley up to no good. Why not just get rid of search warrants and make it illegal to deny the police entry to your house?
yeah because battered women have just so much money to throw around on cell phones...most of them are so screwed financially that they spend a period of time in a shelter.
but the way that you put quotes around abuser shows where you really stand on this.
How would those people afford to have a permanent phone number to call from, then? You can get a prepaid phone for around $20 per three months.
... I always felt that blocked calls were the equivalent of someone showing up at your front door with a paper bag (with eye-holes) over their head...
Sounds like my past couple of dates.
"There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
I shouldn't have to reveal my number just because the other party wants it
...and I shouldn't have to receive/answer anonymous calls just because the calling party wants it that way. As it is I let 'blocked', 'private', or 'unknown' calls bounce to voicemail. If its important enough they can leave a message, and I'll know who is call before I choose to talk to them.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
They sell one product to FALSIFY the callerID (spoofcard) not to block it. The other product reveals callerID that was blocked.
So if someone is using spoofcatd, this new service will not affect them at all... the spoofed callerID will be displayed. Big deal.
Or to put it another way, why on earth would anyone even expect me to talk to them if they're not prepared to reveal who they are?
It is not necessarily WHO you are but WHERE you are calling from that is the issue here. If I was a battered wife hiding in a refuge, but still wanted to talk to my abusive husband, I would want to know that I can call him but that he can't trace the call back to where I am calling from.
A mobile phone would solve the geographical part of this problem, but would leave the caller open to unwanted return calls. Hiding the number completely leaves the power in the hands of the caller.
-= This is a self-referential sig =-
The company offering this unblocking service should offer a free service to victims of abuse where they can call the company (by way of an 800 or 888 number), and the company will place a monitored and recorded call to the person in question (i.e. connect the two, but record the conversation and have an operator either always listening, or available at the push of a button).
This would allow them to make a call that doesn't reveal their location, and would make a heck of a lot more sense than having private phone calls with someone who has the potential to cause you extreme harm.
So go spend $700 on a phone system for the crisis line. You call in, enter your code, and then dial out from the crisis number. My TalkSwitch can do that for my small business without breaking a sweat. The CallerID that goes out is the number from the business. In my case, that sucks, because if you call my office an bounce to my cell, the incoming number is my office number, not the original caller. In this case, it's just a simple matter of training for the volunteers.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
If a battered wife wants to talk directly to her abusive husband, then she is absolutely stupid. Sorry. Battered wives should talk to abusive husband thru lawyers and police officers only.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
1000 to 1? 10,000 to 1? Even higher, with most people going through their entire lives never needing to block their number, but often having people they don't know or don't want to talk to blocking theirs?
If a victim of domestic violence wants to contact their abuser for some reason, but doesn't want the latter to know their number, I'm certain there will be several groups willing to pass on a message -- family, friends, domestic violence shelter, church groups, what have you. There is no need to hide the vast majority of morons, salesmen, and other jerks from blocking their number when they are calling me.
I would go so far as to say that people should have the right to say that they will not accept calls where the originating number is hidden -- just have a recorded message in the phone company switch that says "We're sorry, but the party you are contacting does not accept blocked caller-ID calls. Please remove the block and try again."
Because that's over kill. There is no justification for requiring that the number be shown. The fact of the matter is that the number can be spoofed and some of us don't want our number to show up for one reason or another.
I shouldn't have to reveal my number just because the other party wants it, if they really want it they should have to ask. That way I get a say in whether or not my number ends up on a list.
Sort of like how you have to pay a fee to get out of the telephone book, why it is that the phone companies can put it in without permission is beyond me.
If you are going to call my house, you are making something happen inside my home, probably without my permission. If you are going to do that, I have a RIGHT to know who you are and where you are calling from.
Don't want me to know who you are? Fine, don't call me.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
The service doesn't reveal your number if they're calling YOU, only if you're calling THEM. According to the article, the reason that domestic abuse people are concerned is because there are situations where an abused spouse might need to call her abuser (such as calls about their kids) but doesn't want to abuser knowing the number where they're calling from.
Personally, I think this is a pretty flimsy excuse. Abuse victims shouldn't be in contact with their abusers, period. If they need to deal with custody issues, they should be doing it through a third party or from a disposable cell phone or pay phone. And if an abuse victim is stupid enough to be contacting their abuser using their new home phone, then there is nothing you can do to protect them anyway (you can't stop someone from being a dumbass).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
A battered wife may need to talk to a relative, call a place of work, someplace where the abuser can hunt down the phone number. I had an abuser who managed to get his hands on the cell phone of someone I knew, and got my number from their cell phone. Now my number is blocked. Now I am safe.
And as for the morons below who are complaining about the wanting to talk, well they have a lot to learn about spousal abuse, and the court systems, and reasons for calling. It's not the place to get into it, but guys, keep talking about the technology and not about things you know absolutely nothing about.
If a battered wife wants to talk directly to her abusive husband, then she is absolutely stupid. Sorry. Battered wives should talk to abusive husband thru lawyers and police officers only.
If a Slashdot poster doesn't understand why a battered wife might want to talk directly to her kids, then the Slashdot poster is absolutely stupid.
Besides that, it's also a complete fallacy.
because women that have left home under bad circumstance find out where the guy is and call him.. from mom/sister/shleter/etc. and block the caller ID because they don't want to be found and beat up again.
Perhaps they need to discuss custody or divorce, etc, the point is that they don't want to be found. A restraining order is just "words" when somebody shows up to beat you up.
And that is why we need to strike all these sexist laws from the books. Justice can't be justice when there's an explicit bias toward one party.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Amen to that. My first wife's mother was killed by an ex-boyfriend who was out on bail for "menacing with a pistol"* and who had a restraining order. He bought a shotgun & a combat knife with an active restraining order.
* - menacing with a pistol = put a loaded gun to her head, handcuffed her to him, and lost his nerve trying to suicide by cop.
So buy a $30 pay-as-you-go cellphone. Problem solved.
Trouble is, the law is usually written fairly. Domestic abuse is domestic abuse no matter who does it. The trouble is with the judges who presume guilt on the part of the man.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
A battered wife may need to talk to a relative...
Recognizing that most Slashdotters have not been in relationships it might be appropriate to point out that not all battering victims are female. There are plenty of violent women in this society beyond the occasional crazy female astronaut who drives cross country in diapers.
Leave the gun, take the cannolis.
Is avoiding revealing your whereabouts to a violent spouse so widespread an issue that it overshadows everybody else's natural need to know who the hell is calling?
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
You seem to be assuming that the legal system always works perfectly, and instantly.
What if the abuse has just happened? What if the woman had to flee to a shelter without any notice and now needs to contact her children to tell them where she is? What if the case hasn't gone through yet?
There are many many situations you probably can't think of where this sort of thing could be necessary.
Sure an abuser shouldn't have custody of the children, but the reality is that they frequently do, and we need to deal with the reality of the world not just with ideals of how it should work.
And security will do what to stop the guy from waiting nearby for her to leave? The biggest security in women's shleters are that their locations are kept as secret as possible.
Said, "It's just like dice but it's got more sides And it tells me who lives and who dies"
"Now my number is blocked. Now I am safe."
It's been a while since I've seen such a childishly naive and ignorant statement on Slashdot.
If not being found is important to you, you need to consult asap with a pro ( I don't mean the police, but a really good PI, who makes his or her living finding people. Those who find people for a living know how you can arrange to be much harder to find, and Caller ID is not even the tip of the iceberg ).
It's not the place to get into it, but guys, keep talking about the technology and not about things you know absolutely nothing about.
This gets modded insightful? There is no content in this post other than "You're wrong, but I'm not gonna tell you why. Just take my word for it, because I claim to be authoritative on the subject."
If you feel so strongly that the "morons" are wrong about those subjects, then either add to the discussion or STFU. "It's not the place to get into it" has never been a valid reason on Slashdot. It's called an open discussion.
So you have a restraining order. If he calls you, prosecute. It's pretty simple, right?
"That which does not kill us makes us stranger." -Trevor Goodchild