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.

Comments

Trolling Douchebags

[idontgno]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[mwvdlee]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[beelsebob]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[war4peace]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[beelsebob]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[Orange Crush]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[halivar]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[aardvarkjoe]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[mark-t]

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?

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[afidel]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[Anubis IV]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[Gaerek]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[TheCastro1689]

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.

Re:Trolling Douchebags

[mark-t]

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.

Another gift to the corporate oligarchy

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Are we primarily talking about 'swatting' attacks?

[Applehu Akbar]

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.

Obvious point of comparison?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

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.

Re:Obvious point of comparison?

[EvilSS]

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.

Re:Are we primarily talking about 'swatting' attac

[Gaerek]

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.