US House Passes Ban On Caller ID Spoofing

smarek writes "The 'Truth in Caller ID Act' passed the US House of Representatives on Wednesday. The legislation is trying to outlaw Caller ID spoofing. In some cases, this spoofing has led to individuals giving out information that has led to identity theft. Last year the NYPD discovered over 6,000 victims of Caller ID spoofing, who together lost a total of $15 million. A companion bill has already been passed by the Senate, and the two are on their way to 'informal conference to reconcile any differences.' The bill that results will most likely pass." PCWorld's coverage notes that callers will still be able to block their information entirely, and that the bill may have negative consequences for legitimate phone-related services, such as Google Voice.

Comments

Re:What they didn't bother to do.

[lwsimon]

So sad, but so try. Why did this have to be posted as an AC?

Re:What they didn't bother to do.

[lwsimon]

:)

Re:Yet another legal solution to a technical probl

[causality]

You, sir, have just uncovered the glaring flaw of gun control legislation. Guess what - only criminals use guns to commit murder. If you're willing to commit murder, then illegally purchasing a firearm is child's play by comparison.

The willful ignorance of this self-evident fact tells me that gun-control is more like a religious issue. Statism is definitely on the rise in the USA and has been for quite a long time. Statism is all about expanding governmental size and power for the sake of power alone. A citizenry that can readily defend themselves are less dependent on police protection, and police power is the major vehicle for the expansion of state power. In order to have a steady supply of excuses for expanding government, you must have a dependent, helpless citizenry that fears events which government can try to regulate. Personal physical safety is such a category that is unusually close to home, especially when compared to more abstract economic issues.

The legally-recognized ability to defend yourself from physical threat is also an extremely individualistic quality. There is something of a war against individualism because it is contrary to the homogeneous, conformist, docile, group-think society that readily lends itself to central control. Along with this comes the weakening of the importance of the nuclear family, since that's a unit of society that could have its own customs, traditions, and independent thought and therefore does not lead to the desired homogenization. That's why there is so much emphasis in the media placed on group identities such as membership in a protected minority. It's the exact opposite of regarding people as individuals who should be dealt with on the basis of the content of their character, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. advocated. It's also why any talk of "diversity" is about people who superficially look different and rarely has anything to do with a diversity of ideas and philosophies.

On a more practical note, as soon as they figure out how to keep drugs and weapons out of high-security prisons, then and only then will it be reasonable to discuss keeping such items out of the rest of society. Until then, the correct approach is to harden the targets of crimes. That's why every state which has enabled conceal-carry permits has seen significant reductions in violent crime. Even those who do not carry guns benefit from those who do, because the nature of concealment means that a criminal has no way to know if a given target is armed or not.