Slashdot Mirror


FCC May Stop 911 Access For NSI Phones

An anonymous reader writes: It's generally known that if you call 911 from a cell phone in the USA, you will be connected to the nearest Public Safety Access Point, whether or not the phone has an active account. This is the basis for programs that distribute donated phones for emergency-only use. However, the FCC has proposed a rule change that would eliminate the requirement for telephone companies to connect 911 calls made by NSI (non-service-initialized) phones. The main reason for the proposed rule change are the problems caused by fraudulent 911 calls made through NSI phones. Yet respondents cited by the FCC show that as many as 30% of 911 calls from NSI phones are for legitimate emergencies. The comment period for the proposed rule change ends on June 6th, 2015.

47 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Trolling Douchebags by idontgno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The main reason for the proposed rule change are the problems caused by fraudulent 911 calls made through NSI phones.

    This is why we can't have nice things.

    I wonder if the FCC will start a crusade against fraudulent 911 calls made through anonymous VOIP services? Maybe all 911 services? 'Cuz they're clearly getting abused.

    Whew! I'm glad we're rid of that dirty bathwater. Too bad about the baby, though.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:Trolling Douchebags by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then disallow calling 911 from NSI phones and start giving away free but registered 911-only SIM cards with the phones.
      Heck, make it empty but upgradable pre-paid cards and telecom providers will probably pay you money to give them away.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Trolling Douchebags by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      70% are hoaxes.
      A solution would be for the Cell carriers to be required to "register" those phones for free for 911 service.
      Each must be attached to an id so you can bust people for swatting.
      Not ideal but a compromise solution.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:Trolling Douchebags by beelsebob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, the question is simple. Do receiving 70% of the calls from NSI phones being trolls cause more irreversible consequences than not receiving the 30% that are not trolls.

      It may well be that more than twice as many trolls in fact cause more legitimate emergencies to go unattended than simply not receiving the legitimate NSI calls causes.

    4. Re:Trolling Douchebags by war4peace · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's not what it's about. One could imagine a situation where kidnapped people would get their hands on a phone with no SIM card in it (or an inactive one) and dial 911. Take that away and it might kill people.
      Yes, fraudulent 911 calls are a problem. But I'd rather have 100 of those for each legitimate call from an NSI phone which might save one or more lives.

      This is yet another example where cost effectiveness mentality kills people.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    5. Re:Trolling Douchebags by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that this doesn't solve the problem. The problem that NSI calling addresses is that not everyone is prepared. Maybe I (as a brit) visit the US, and don't get a temporary SIM while I'm there - my SIM can't be used to make any calls at all... Except for that crucial 911 call that I wasn't prepared for.

      Handing out free 911-only SIMs doesn't make it so that someone who is unprepared can call.

    6. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Orange+Crush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can imagine a situation where I call 911 with my phone (with current paid-for service) and help can't get to me because they're too busy checking out 100 prank phone calls from unregistered phones

      This isn't about cost-effectiveness, it's about keeping our finite number emergency responders going after real emergencies.

    7. Re:Trolling Douchebags by halivar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, fraudulent 911 calls are a problem. But I'd rather have 100 of those for each legitimate call from an NSI phone which might save one or more lives.

      This is yet another example where cost effectiveness mentality kills people.

      What about people placed on hold because the emergency lines are tied up? Making decisions with your feelings can kill people, too.

    8. Re:Trolling Douchebags by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      What percent are hoaxes in registered phones?

    9. Re:Trolling Douchebags by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, fraudulent 911 calls are a problem. But I'd rather have 100 of those for each legitimate call from an NSI phone which might save one or more lives.

      The attitude that any cost is acceptable for the chance of saving a life is a common problem.

      There is a point where the resources devoted to your pet cause A could be more beneficial -- even in terms of saving lives -- if directed elsewhere.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    10. Re:Trolling Douchebags by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      This is called a risk assessment, and its something that most people (and the media) have no patience for: its far too levelheaded, and not nearly hysterical enough.

    11. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except, troll, 70% are not hoaxes. RTFA. Less than 10% are hoaxes, most calls are non-emergency calls, which plenty of people with non-NSI phones make as well.

    12. Re:Trolling Douchebags by mark-t · · Score: 2

      True... but with a phone with an active account, the caller can be held accountable for making a non-emergency call to 911.

    13. Re:Trolling Douchebags by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Kind of like how back before cell phones were ubiquitous, you couldn't generally run down who the heck made a call to 911 from a pay-phone, you mean?

    14. Re:Trolling Douchebags by responsibleusername · · Score: 2

      I totally agree, we should also not use credit cards because there is fraud there, I don't want my bank wasting time on transactions that could be fraudulent that could tie up mine so lets stop that. Also, there is fraud in insurance claims so we should all just pay cash up front and get rid of all insurance as well. Seriously, if 30% are legitimate that is a huge percentage of legit calls to discard. Take some time to find ways to reduce the amount of fraud and increase funding of 911 to compensate, how this is even an issue? I'm sure the cell networks are more than happy to reduce their own costs though.

    15. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One could imagine a situation where kidnapped people would get their hands on a phone with no SIM card in it (or an inactive one) and dial 911. Take that away and it might kill people.

      I can imagine it, doesn't mean it will happen ... ever. But instead of making fun of people, explain it in simple terms.

      Kidnappings are very rare. Everything after that is even more rare. All the "might" after that simply means that it is less likely to happen. At some point, there is practically no chance of it ever happening.

      Might get kidnapped
      Might get a cell phone
      Might not be enable
      Might be charged enough to work
      Might get rescued

      Any break in that is an escape clause for the need. I'm not kidnapped, I don't need. No cell phone access, I don't need. Already is active, don't have a need. Dead battery, don't have a need. Kidnappers find out I called 911 on their disabled phone that happened to be charged, kills me before I can be rescued.

      Yes, it is ridiculous example, but it needs to be made for the people who don't want to think things through. Yes, stupid people exist, make stupid suggestions that sound all great and wonderful .. until ... logic is applied. These are Emotional arguments.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    16. Re:Trolling Douchebags by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      They're given out free to people in abuse shelters and the homeless which is probably the source of almost all of the legitimate traffic and the majority of the non-legitimate traffic as well (homeless folks tend to have mental problems as the root cause of their homelessness).

      As to pranks, we've had E911 as a requirement for over a decade now, shouldn't be too hard to locate the perps if they keep doing it.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    17. Re:Trolling Douchebags by khallow · · Score: 2

      True... but with a phone with an active account, the caller can be held accountable for making a non-emergency call to 911.

      That's not going to happen because otherwise people will stop calling 911 for real emergencies. You don't want people to wonder if the heart attack they are witnessing is enough of an emergency that they should risk calling 911.

    18. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

      70% are hoaxes.

      The number is actually more likely in the range of 90-99%, if the official source is anything to go by. That "30% legitimate" number used in the summary was in regards to one county in Maryland in 2008 that was monitored for just one month, and it stands as an outlier that's an order of magnitude greater than some of the other numbers in the report. Why it was cherry-picked for the summary, I don't know, but here are all of the ones I found in the report (including the outlier):

      in late 2006 from jurisdictions in four states, [an earlier report showed] that between 3.5% and less than 1% of 911 calls placed by NSI devices were legitimate calls relating to actual emergencies

      Indiana estimated that over 90% of all NSI calls received were not legitimate

      North Carolina similarly reported that between May 15, 2008 and June 15, 2008, PSAPs [Public Safety Answering Points, i.e. emergency call centers] across the state received 159,129 calls from NSI devices, of which 132,885, or 83.51%, were non-emergency calls, and an additional 11,395, or 7.16%, were “malicious” non-emergency calls

      Tennessee states that during a three-month period in 2008, of over 10,000 NSI calls only 188 were valid emergencies.

      Sonoma County, California indicates that between April 2011 and April 2013 only approximately 8% of calls from NSI devices were to report an emergency or crime

      California, for example, stated that between October 1, 2007 and May 15, 2008, PSAPs across the state reported 266 active repetitive callers who placed over 77,000 calls to 911, mainly using NSI devices. Of the 266 callers identified, 85 had placed 200 or more calls, and eight callers had made more than 1,000 calls.

      Peoria, Illinois similarly asserts that it got numerous calls from NSI phones that were used to harass the 9-1-1 telecommunicators and pump as many as 25 calls per day into Peoria's system, while few if any actual 9-1-1 calls came from these types of phones

      Maryland indicated that 30% of calls to 911 from NSI handsets were legitimate in Montgomery County during the one-month period studied in 2008

      There were a number of additional statements from various jurisdictions recounting their experiences with NSI E911 calls that used vague terms such as "vast majority", "biggest problem", "totally inundated", "inundated with phone calls from these phones with the only purpose being to harass the call takers/dispatchers", and "fraudulent calls to 911 from NSI devices constitute a large and continuing drain on public safety resources". There were also a number of statements describing the sorts of problems these calls are causing, such as "calls from a single child in one night nearly immobilized the call center's ability to receive actual emergency calls" and "receiving 911 calls from a non-initialized cellular phone [...] tied up one of our 911 trunks and made it unavailable for emergency calls", so it's clear that it's a major drain on their limited resources, since these calls account for a disproportionate amount of the total call volume, yet account for a disproportionately low amount of the legitimate calls.

    19. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Gaerek · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's the other side of the coin you aren't thinking about. This coming from someone who works at a PSAP and answers those emergency lines. First, in my experiences, the number of legit 911 calls from NSI phones is no where close to the 30% cited. It's probably closer to 5-10%. Most are butt dials or kids playing with a deactivated old iphone their parents gave them. The real problem is the amount of time we have to spend dealing with these fraudulent or illegitimate calls from NSI phones. It's time that could be spent, oh I don't know, answering a legitimate call. Instead, I have to rebid the phone to try to get phase 2 location information which is sometimes quick, but other times can take significant time. Not to mention place a call for service which takes time, but also ties up resources that could be better spent, oh, I don't know responding to a legitimate call. Or, its someone who knows they can only dial 911 and abuse that...use your imagination to how that could be used. Although your "what if" is plausible, it's highly improbable. And leaving NSI phones the way they are could cause a delayed response to a legitimate emergency, which could kill someone.

      And keep in mind, what I consider a legitimate call isn't necessarily an emergency call either. It's pretty damn rare to get a legitimate emergency call from an NSI phone. Usually it's someone reporting a stolen phone or some other low priority. This isn't about cost effectiveness, it's about efficient use of limited resources. It sucks watching officers do the 911 hangup/open line wild goose chase when there's legit emergencies to respond to.

    20. Re:Trolling Douchebags by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 4, Informative

      35% of 911 calls are for non-emergencies, in some areas it's as high as 75%. People call asking for directions and such too. I've called my local police direct number and it gets routed to 911 automatically.

    21. Re:Trolling Douchebags by mark-t · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you are completely misunderstanding the kinds of non-emergencies that people call in to 911... here's a big hint, they are *never* related to situations where someone's life or long-term safety could be reasonably believed to be in some kind of danger. Heart attacks, even though they can often not be fatal, are well within the domain of emergency. Examples of what are *NOT* emergencies are calling 911 to get driving directions, or finding the nearest liquor store, or complaining that the stores are closed and you need to buy a present for your friend for their wedding tomorrow morning (that's an emergency, right?). These are but a sampling of the kinds of the actual non-emergencies that people call 911 about, and the caller is fined appropriately (although in many cases, they are given a warning if it is their first such infraction, and if it happens again, then they are fined). A friend of mine that used to be a 911 dispatch operator always had some really funny stories to tell about some of his more memorable callers. What is less funny, however, is the fact that such calls can and sometimes do interfere with their ability to properly handle real emergencies, and it is why the behavior needs to be discouraged. I don't advocate disallowing 911 calls from non-activated phones personally, because I think it may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as it were... but I can completely understand the reasoning behind why it may be desirable.

    22. Re:Trolling Douchebags by chilenexus · · Score: 2

      > automated plane systems which could save thousands of lives per year because it might crash once or twice.

      I haven't heard of a plane that has crashed twice, usually once will do the job.

    23. Re:Trolling Douchebags by chilenexus · · Score: 2

      Was that their "business" line or their "emergency" line? I've tried calling my local PD for non-life-threatening stuff I've witnessed before, and the non-emergency number appears to keep even less helpful hours than banks. Since police departments aren't normally geared for the customer-service mindset, they don't tend to set up their interfaces in a manner that makes sense to the callers in the same way it was intended by the receivers. And no one really expects to call and find the police department closed if there isn't a gun or knife threatening your life.

    24. Re:Trolling Douchebags by chilenexus · · Score: 2

      I'm curious what the call rate is at centers like that - what gets portrayed in the media is either a room with 20-40 people constantly taking calls all day long, or a closet with 2 people in it, who get a couple calls a day. The closest one I've actually been in was a backup fire dispatch center that was about to be decommissioned (it was really old) in favor of its replacement, and it had room for 3-4 (uncomfortably). How many calls per hour would you estimate your center receives, and how big is the area it serves, population-wise?

    25. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Minwee · · Score: 2

      I haven't heard of a plane that has crashed twice, usually once will do the job.

      I see that you have never flown American Airlines.

    26. Re:Trolling Douchebags by Gaerek · · Score: 2

      I work for a county sheriff's dept. There's close to 2 million population wise in the county, but our jurisdiction covers only about 500,000 people. The incorporated municipalities within the county cover the other 1.5 million or so. My center dispatches police only. We're what's known as a Primary PSAP. We receive the initial 911 call from the public. From there, we determine whether the emergency is police, fire or medical in nature and triage the call accordingly. If it's fire or medical, we transfer it to the proper fire/ems Secondary PSAP. Almost all of our employees at the center are cross trained to do dispatch and call taking, though we don't do both at the same time as what happens in smaller centers. All of our call takers are also responsible for answering non-emergency lines, internal communications lines (dedicated lines for the officers to call in), hot lines (or ring downs, depending on what term you use) from other agencies, in addition to the 911 lines.

      All that said, we receive over 1000 calls per day from the public, which translates to somewhere around 300-350 calls for service daily. Of course, this number varies based on many different things. Day of the week, time of the year, holidays, etc. For example, Monday mornings are usually very busy because people who put off calling over the weekend, are going to try on their way to work, or before work. Friday and Saturday nights are usually pretty busy as well. At any given time, we'll have anywhere from 1-7 dedicated call takers on shift. This number varies based on time of day, day of the week, whether breaks are being given, etc. Our center is very lucky in that we have nearly 90% of our optimal work force. Most centers are operating near 70% due to the high turnover and difficulty and time needed to train new dispatchers (my training, including classroom and on the job took 22 weeks from start to finish, and less than half that started with me made it through).

      Calls per hours is difficult to calculate. We could just take 1000/24 to get about 42 calls per hour, but that really doesn't fit what the actual experience is. I still haven't figured out why, but calls come in in waves for some reason. It could be dead for 30 minutes, with only 4 or 5 calls coming in, then all of a sudden the phone blows up and you have 5 call takers answering lines constantly for an hour, and having to put some lines on hold to deal with the volume. Staffing is set up to deal with the spikes. And we know basically when the spikes typically happen. We do have a decent amount of downtime, but when the calls come in, you need enough bodies to answer them.

      Having said all that, there are some centers that are literally 1 person, they answer phones and dispatch. Then you get others that look like the call center in "The Call" (terribly inaccurate movie, btw) that service big cities, like LA or NY. I'd imagine most centers are more like the one I work in. Not huge, but not small. Anyway, hope that answered some of your questions. Got a bit long winded. Anything else you're curious about? Ask away.

  2. They probably got tired of calls from Demetri by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

    Hello, 9-11? This is Demetri again. The aliens are back, and this time they brought Brett Favre with them!

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  3. we might as well by rossdee · · Score: 2

    just toss old cell phones in the trash then
    thats probably bad for the environment

  4. Another gift to the corporate oligarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yet another government gift to the corporate oligarchy. Now if you want access to 911 you'll have to pay Big Communications for it.

  5. Are we primarily talking about 'swatting' attacks? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Prank calls to emergency services have been going on long before 911, but I'm sure that burner phones, which seems to be the category of device we're dealing with here, would be ideal for calling in those false emergency reports designed to send SWAT teams to the home of someone you don't like.

  6. The other 70% by snsh · · Score: 2

    What's the breakdown of the other 70%? Are they mostly prank calls?

  7. Obvious point of comparison? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, for NSI phones, the figures are reportedly 70% fraudulent, 30% legit.

    But what am I supposed to compare that to? What are the numbers for wired phones? Cellphones on contracts? Prepaid cell phones?

    This seems like pretty important information if one hopes to make a decision. Nobody wants bogus 911 calls cluttering up the system; but is 70% fraud similar? Modestly worse? Terrible?

    Also, if we deem 911 access to be a social good(which is why NSI 911 calls work at all, and seems pretty reasonable), why not split the difference and allow someone to 'register' an NSI phone(having their particulars on file with 911 dispatch is likely to discourage spurious use and potentially be useful for locating them in an emergency if they are unable to provide clarification themselves thanks to injury or exigent circumstance) without signing up for a paid calling plan? So long as it is 911 only, it's still no competition for actual calling plans; but it's less draconian than just killing NSI 911 entirely.

    1. Re:Obvious point of comparison? by EvilSS · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would imagine they are much lower, since all those other devices are traceable back to an account holder. Even on prepaids you need to jump through some hoops to get a true "burner" phone that can't be traced back to you.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  8. 30% by gurps_npc · · Score: 2
    As many as 30% are "legitimate"?

    That sounds really bad. But we need the percentage of "legitimate" calls made from regular phones to really know if it is bad or not.

    If that comparison number is less than 60%, than they have no real argument. But if say 90% of regular phone calls to 911 are legit, then they have a more reasonable argument.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  9. Just flag the NSI calls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Flag the NSI calls. If the 911 dispatcher can tell that a call is coming from a NSI phone, they can apply the appropriate level of skepticism.

    It's better than disabling all the phones.

    1. Re:Just flag the NSI calls by EvilSS · · Score: 2

      They already do this.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  10. Need more info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would like a break down of the break down of the 70% on pranks vs stupidiy calls and a compare on how many regular phones numbers get of valid prank and stupidly calls

  11. Re:People abuse 911 anyway by Malenx · · Score: 2

    I'd imagine 911 can charge fines to land lines and service cell phones for wasting their resources on non-emergencies. NSI phones might be harder to squeeze fines out of.

  12. Re:Proposal by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

    "If this is an emergency, hang up and dial 911".

    Oh. Wait.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  13. I wonder.... by bobbied · · Score: 2

    How many of the "fraudulent" 70% are from small children who are given an old cell phone to play with.

    How many parents don't know that any cell phone which previously had service can make 911 calls? How many of these just get handed to Jr. to shut him up when he's begging to play with Mom's smart phone? How many times does Jr. manage to press the right buttons to dial 911? I'm guessing it's a lot..

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  14. The important statistic is.... by duckintheface · · Score: 2

    what percentage of valid mobile 911 calls are made from NIS phones? Strangely, that number does not appear in the federal report. Saying that 30% of NIS calls are valid focuses on the problem. But if 1% (or more) of valid mobile 911 calls come from NIS phones, that is a valuable service that definitely should not be terminated without a plan for cost-free replacement.

    Also, the blather about how inexpensive mobile phones are is seriously flawed. I recently dropped my full featured Verizon plan and changed instead to a minimal pre-paid plan. What I discovered is that Verizon plays lots of dirty tricks to cheat poor people of their money. For example, they tell you that you must pay monthly, but what they mean is every 30 days. If you set up auto-pay via credit card based on their web site, you will be ok until there is a month with 31 days. Then they cancel your service and seize the balance in your account, which could be hundreds of dollars. Even if you owe only $5, they take all the money in your account.

    --
    "He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
  15. Easy solution by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Keep 911 for real emergencies.
    Add 922 for fake emergencies.

    This is the message for 922:
    "Thank you for calling the prank emergency line. Your prank will be recorded and the best ones will be added into a 'best of' compilation of the year. Thank you."

    Putting an incentive (the "best of" compilation) will push a lot of those pranks to the new number ("Hey man! My prank was chosen! I rule!") and those compilations could be sold as profit to help pay for both 911 and 922 services.

  16. I call bullshit on the 911-only phones by nbauman · · Score: 2

    I don't believe that you can donate your old cell phones to be used as 911-only phones by victims of domestic violence, etc. It's an urban myth.

    I checked it out once because of a 90-year-old neighbor. He had a stroke, and he was lying in the bathroom for 24 hours, unable to call for help, until one of his children came over for their daily check-in.

    I tried to find out where in New York City I could get one of those 911-only reconditioned cell phones, that he could carry with him and use if something similar happened again. I researched the Internet, made several calls, and couldn't find one.

    But who needs one? Low-income people can get a free Assurance or Safelink phone, that they can use to call 911 and everything else (like doctors and relatives). So why would anybody want a phone that could do nothing but call 911?

    I just called another nationwide service (which I am not identifying because I don't want everybody calling them), and the woman answering the phone told me that they really don't provide people with reconditioned 911-only cell phones. They collect the old phones, turn them into Verizon, and Verizon gives them "Help" phones which are cheap cell phones with free minutes on them.

    Try it yourself. Call one of those services and ask them whether they can give you a reconditioned phone. They can't.

    Think about it. You can buy a low-end wireless phone new for $15 retail (and probably $5 wholesale). In order to "recondition" them, you'd need a technician to check it out, to make sure it's working. People would be using them for life-threatening emergencies, so they have to work reliably. You'd have to repackage and distribute them. It's cheaper for a phone company or any agency to just buy new phones in bulk. But why bother? Why not just let people get a phone directly from Assurance or Safelink?

  17. FCC cannot prevent fraud by flamer63 · · Score: 2

    As an experienced person in the 911 industry, there was some fraudulent calls, but the larger volume of non 911 calls came from a cell phone refurbishing company that would dial 911 as a testing procedure and then hang up. Do this hundreds of times a day, and you can see the issue with saturating 911 trunks with test calls opposed to real emergency calls. The ability to call 911 from an uninitialized mobile phone evolved from the same ability with a land line in a building to call 911 without service. The problem is that wireless phones are mobile, and can be difficult to track in a reasonable amount of time. Therefore is ripe for abuse and potential abuse. Some kind of identification would be ideal, but there is also burden placed on some entity to do that for essentially free, or as someone suggested having a low-cost SIM that would only call 911. That still doesn't prevent abuse just ties the caller/TN to an account or transaction paid by a customer. Still plenty of room for fraud if someone was determined to commit it.

  18. Re:Are we primarily talking about 'swatting' attac by Gaerek · · Score: 3, Informative

    Coming from someone who works at a LE Comm center and has taken a "SWATing call..." the simplest versions are someone using Skype or similar service to dial into a LE non-emergency number. That's how the one call I took worked. We didn't activate SWAT either, it was apparent when officers were on scene nothing was going on. As other have said, the more sophisticated methods involve ANI/ALI spoofing. Not easy, but not impossible. Haven't seen this method used, but heard about it.

    We cannot normally get subscriber information on wireless phones. The information we get is the phone number, the tower it's pinging off of, and sometimes location information gained either by triangulation from nearby cell towers or the phones internal GPS. It works this way whether its an activated phone or an NSI phone. So regardless of which, I can get at least some degree of location information off of ANY wireless phone. (The scene in the movie The Call where they say we can't get location information because it's a prepaid is complete bullshit, fabricated for the sake of the plot).

    The real issue is having to use finite resources to respond to fraudulent or illegitimate calls. When you consider most police departments and 911 call centers are short staffed as it is, it makes this an even bigger problem.

  19. Re:Proposal by Minwee · · Score: 2

    "If you know the name of the felony being committed, press one. To choose from a list of felonies, press two. If you are being murdered or calling from a rotary phone please stay on the line."