Slashdot Mirror
After Bomb Threats, FCC Proposes Letting Police Unveil Anonymous Callers (cnbc.com)
Police should be allowed to unmask anonymous callers who have made serious threats over the phone, the Federal Communications Commission has proposed. From a report: The proposal would allow law enforcement, and potentially the person who's been called, to learn the phone number of an anonymous caller if they receive a "serious and imminent" threat that poses "substantial risk to property, life, safety, or health." Specifics are still up in the air. The FCC is asking (PDF), for instance, whether unveiled caller ID information should only be provided to law enforcement officials investigating a threat, to ensure that this exemption isn't abused.
That privacy laws don't already provide for this scenario.
WTF?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
At least on landlines isn't that what *57 is for?
If people aren't truly anonymous then some won't submit their tips.
I think we should just turn off the ability to block or spoof CallerID (except for the verified commercial numbers who are granted exceptions after proving their identity). Problem solved.
Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
If you're a bomber, terrorist, or hoaxter and you're fucking dumb enough to call in "anonymously" from a phone line that can be traced to your personal information, you kinda deserve what you get.
And I think everyone knows this already.
As with most privacy/rights degradation rules and laws, they aren't done for their stated purposes. They will twist this for uses in other situations in order to repress freedom of speech.
So we complain about unwanted unblockable robo calls for a decade and are ignored, but when it bothers the government then we have to fix it? Fuck you fcc. Fuck you.
When a person is "unmasked" so law enforcement (i.e. the National Security Advisor) can get a better understanding of who is colluding with a foreign government to undermine the U.S. election or government, that's horrible. But when law enforcement (i.e. police) wants to know who is calling in a bomb threat, that's acceptable?
The hypocrisy runs deep.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The telephone system existed just fine for a century BEFORE the advent of Caller ID. There are already ways for the phone companies to provide the caller's information to law enforcement if they can demonstrate that a crime occurred or is going to occur. That, and I'm fairly certain that blocking Caller ID doesn't have any effect on emergency calls, the E911 systems get your info and location regardless of whether or not the consumer CID is blocked.
This sounds more like businesses and politicians are probably butthurt that people can call them up and anonymously tell them what fuckwits they are. Bomb threats didn't just start happening in the 1990s, and there have always been ways to trace those types of calls. Fuck this shit.
Hello citizen, we are conducting our daily search of your premises. This is to ensure you do not have any bombs.
except it won't, as some simply won't submit their tips.
So that justifies just tossing away our constitutional rights? Um, I'm not so sure that's a good idea.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
The FCC, of all people, should show leadership in implementing the obvious. It's a shame they haven't. My PowerPoints somehow ended up on the internet with my cell number still on the last slide. My phone gets flooded with SIP-spoofing robocallers.
There are times you need high security, trust and credential-based accountability. Different times, you need cheap, easy, free-wheeling communication that allows high anonymity and will accept a lot of junk communication as a consequence. I think we currently have this, and just pretend it's well regulated, when it's obviously not.
1. We need one very secure phone system in which spoofing is extremely difficult and well regulated. It's misuse involves tough criminal penalties and a well-funded unit, with global reach, for investigation of its mis-use. It's okay if its expensive. For many it will be worth it.
2. We need one phone system that is very lightly regulated and allows spoofing, anonymity, etc. It must allow for rapid innovation, have stable, well-understood interconnect standards, allow lots of small competitors, be cheap and globally available.
A reasonable conceptual starting point is something similar to SIPRNet and NIPRNet, but architected for citizens and businesses.
except it won't, as some simply won't submit their tips.
More than 90% of bomb threats are hoaxes. Either there is no bomb, or the "bomb" is inert. The most common reason is pranks at schools, such as kids hoping to get a test canceled.
all this piecemeal crap, hell, just kill the ability to mask the caller!
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Constitutional right? You have a constitutional right to make anonymous phone calls? How about throwing rocks from behind bushes? Do you have a right to do that too?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Given that the orange Commander-in-Chief gets his 'news' from Fox, I think we can expect to see a sharp rise in emergency actions like this based on shows like 24. We are, as a nation, fairly itching for waterboarding, call tracing, bad-guy-blowing-up men of *action*. Disagree? Whatcha got to hide, snowflake?
Agreed. Nathan's hot dogs are fucking trash. They're one step from putting a Slim Jim in a bun.
How could this be "abused?" I can think of no reason that anonymous calls should EVER be allowed in the first place. This is ridiculous. At the very least, people should be able to choose to block all anonymous calls. Obviously anyone with half a brain isn't going to make a threatening call over a traceable line anyone, so this only affects non-criminals. Again. Every. Single. Time.
So it will save us from hoaxes but the real bombs will be a total surprise now. And there will be more real bombs now that fake bombs can't create the wanted panic anymore.
And then, when (not if) this is abused for other anonymous tips, anonymous tiops will just go away leaving police wityh less information than they have now. There are many reasons a person with real information may want no further involvement and will only provide that information if they are quite sure that will end their part in it.
How about throwing rocks from behind bushes? Do you have a right to do that too?
No, but I'm allowed to hide behind those bushes and say just about anything I like. I'm not defending a right to anonymous calls, just pointing out that throwing rocks at people isn't really a First Amendment issue.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
That's not the right I was making reference to. You have more than just free speech rights.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101