Florida Man Behind 100 Million Robocalls Hit With $120 Million FCC Fine (chicagotribune.com)

In a massive strike, the Federal Communications Commission issued a $120 million fine on a massive robocall spoofing operation it deemed a threat to public safety. From a report: The FCC announced Thursday morning that it would leverage the fine against Adrian Abramovich, a Miami man who the commission said made almost 100 million spoofed robocalls over a three-month period at the end of 2016. The FCC argued that Abramovich's operation made the phony calls to trick consumers into answering them and listening to his advertising messages. The fine was based on 80,000 spoofed calls the commission had verified.

A complaint filed by the FCC against Abramovich in June 2017 alleged he had broken the Truth in Caller ID Act -- which prohibits callers from falsifying caller ID information to disguise their identity with intent to harm or defraud -- in perpetrating "one of the largest -- and most dangerous -- illegal robocalling campaigns that the commission has ever investigated."

Comments

Capital Punishment?

[Camel Pilot]

Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[hairyfeet]

I don't believe in capital punishment, not when there is something a LOT worse...Hoe Squad. In the south we have farm prisons and hoe squad, where they chunk your ass out in a field at the crack of dawn and work your ass like a dog until dusk....day after day after day.

This is a hell of a deterrent, I even had to LMAO at an episode of cops where they chased a criminal in a car covered in flames who refused to stop until he crossed the border to the next state. When the cops asked him "Man what is wrong with you? You could have killed yourself over a simple theft charge, why didn't you just stop?" and he said "Didn't want to go to the hoe squad" and promptly confessed to a robbery in the state he had just made it to LOL.

You want to teach someone that what they did wasn't the smartest thing? Throw their ass on a hoe squad, trust me they won't forget it.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[subanark]

I completely disagree with you, since:
1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Nidi62]

Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

Death by 1000 cuts seems an appropriate method

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Oswald McWeany]

Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

I think his phone number should be made public and distributed to everyone that got robocalled. And he be barred from getting a new phone number.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Camel Pilot]

I completely disagree with you, since:
1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

1. Assertion without justification
2. Taking away ones ability to be productive or "have fun" is stealing a piece of someones life of which they will never get back
3. This is like blaming a homeowner that is burglarized because he didn't lock the doors or have a security system installed and made it too easy on criminals. Totally illogical.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[KiloByte]

Since he has aggregately stole or taken away several human lifespans... I say capital punishment would be appropriate.

This. Somehow, people are afraid about travelling by plane but don't think twice before entering a car, despite the chance of dying in the latter being many times higher. Or, they are more than a bit hateful against concentration camp operators while having no ill will against those running a coal power plant, despite the latter causing more deaths and sickness (concentration not death camp, distinction is important!)? A robber who takes a few $150 cell phones can land multiple years in the slammer while a bank executive who deprives millions of their livelihood gets a slap-on-the-wrist fine, if anything at all.

A single spamming or robo call campaign can take multiple life spans from the victims. Let's have the punishment take this into account.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[nwaack]

I had a different image in my head when I read 'hoe squad.'

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Nidi62]

You know what else works really well? In Saudi Arabia, they will chop of the hand of people convicted of theft. It's more than just a deterrent, it actually makes it much more difficult to steal again. Impossible, in fact, if you get caught twice. Fuck yeah.

Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit. At the very least he is now dependent on government support for survival.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely disagree with you, since:
1. We should not practice eye for an eye.
2. He did not take away our lifespan, he took away our ability to be productive or "have fun". I think jail does that too.
3. We have partly ourselves to blame for making this easy to accomplish.

1. Assertion without justification
2. Taking away ones ability to be productive or "have fun" is stealing a piece of someones life of which they will never get back
3. This is like blaming a homeowner that is burglarized because he didn't lock the doors or have a security system installed and made it too easy on criminals. Totally illogical.

1. Assertion without justification
2. Assertion without justification
3. Assertion without justification
4. Assertion without justification

Wow I'm really digging your argument style.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[jm007]

why are you feeling guilty for something you didn't do? bet you're a whitey who's been convinced he should shoulder the guilt of others just because of his skin color.... inflicting racism back on yourself is just as stupid as inflicting upon others

Re:Capital Punishment?

[jm007]

just to add an option, if we take those 80,000 confirmed calls and assume about 1 minute for each, we get about 2 months; seems like a fitting sentence on the hoe squad lol

Re: Capital Punishment?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe because he has a conscious and cares about other people. Maybe because he isn't a self centered douche bag who realizes there are other people on this earth. Maybe because his parents raised him properly and taught him how to respect all human life.

I don't know, maybe just a few things. I didn't see any reverse racism. I just saw a person talking about the injustices that are committed daily against a certain group of people solely based upon their skin color.

Racism is real. Don't try to water it down with your made up bullshit.

Oh look a white man who stood up for a black man. They must be a reverse racist. LOL.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Jon314]

What the hell is wrong with you? What glamor is there in getting gender reassignment surgery in prison? What glamor is there in being in prison?
Gender reassignment is a medical issue, not a fashion choice.

  Anonymous Cowards should be forced to do physical labor as a punishment for the stupid stuff they say while hiding. It would take away some of the glamor in it.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[ChrisMaple]

You misspelled "mental" as "medical".

Re:Capital Punishment?

[ChrisMaple]

Ammendment XIII, Section 1, reads as follows:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. [emphasis added]

Quite simply, you're wrong. In addition, hard labor is not cruel (unless you're a liberal), nor is it unusual.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[KiloByte]

if we take those 80,000 confirmed calls and assume about 1 minute for each, we get about 2 months

The article says 96 million calls; that means 183 years. The agency indeed confirmed only 80000; ie 55 days. It's the equivalent of a battery after which you land in hospital for a few months; victims lost productive awake time while lifespan lost to murder also includes sleep and dementia (observing family members in their 80s-90s, I wouldn't be very sad to lose that time of my life).

Thus, as you say, that hoe squad would be appropriate for what was proven. On the other hand, what was alleged (and within the current law the agency has no reason to bother proving more), I consider the crime to be as harmful as multiple murders, and that it should be punished appropriately.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[jcr]

I would entirely approve of flogging the motherfucker to death.

-jcr

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mental issues are medical issues, jackass

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Lead Butthead]

I don't believe in capital punishment, not when there is something a LOT worse...Hoe Squad. In the south we have farm prisons and hoe squad, where they chunk your ass out in a field at the crack of dawn and work your ass like a dog until dusk....day after day after day.

Doesn't this count as cruel (and unusual) punishment?

Re:Capital Punishment?

[Fly Swatter]

Give each victim one stone, allow them to throw it at him as penance. Of course this is set up to happen all at once in a town square. You're right, this sounds familiar.

Re: Capital Punishment?

[jd]

Efficiency isn't guilt, it's intelligent. Racism and bigotry are inefficient and stupid.

(Ok, to be fair, most racism is due to brain abnormalities leading to subnormal intelligence, it's not their fault.)

Re: Capital Punishment?

[jd]

This proves that in the new C standard, assert() should take two parameters. One for the assertion, one for the justification. (Ok, we call it the postcondition, but who's judging?)

Re:Capital Punishment?

[KiloByte]

So multiple murders were alleged but all that was proven was 55 days of kidnapping. I think we have to sentence based on what was proven; for that which was not proven we must not assume guilt.

The penalty in this case wouldn't be meaningfully different, thus bothering to prove anything more would be a waste of taxpayers' money. The law doesn't allow for a prison sentence, merely a fine -- and $120M is enough to bankrupt the culprit into the ground.

Camel Pilot and me argue that it would be reasonable to consider this crime to be on par with multiple murders (as the harm to society is comparable, merely split between many people), but that would require changing the law, and lex retro non agit.

Re:Capital Punishment?

[quonset]

Also makes it virtually impossible for that person to ever hold a respectable or half-way decent job and virtually dooming him to a life of ostracism, poverty, and whatever crimes he can still commit.

Then perhaps they shouldn't have been a criminal and this wouldn't be an issue.

Re: Capital Punishment?

[Reverend Green]

Democrat partisans sure do love the Gulag.

Advertising...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, I want them to go after the idiots that are doing the phone IRS or Treasury calls where the robot caller says a warrant is issued for your arrest, or you are being sued, etc. and is phishing for PII or getting a payment

THOSE calls are dangerous for people

Re:Die Scum

[pgmrdlm]

Why do I have to deal with bigot scum like you on a regular basis.

Florida Man

[Moof123]

What can't he do?!

Re:Florida Man

[GrumpySteen]

What can't he do?!

Exercise good judgement.

Re:Florida Man

[Trailer Trash]

What can't he do?!

Beat Triangle Man.

Re:Florida Man

[skids]

Yeah! ...Robocalls my ass. That was just his super speed. And a case of JD.

What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

A complaint filed by the FCC against Abramovich in June 2017 alleged he had broken the Truth in Caller ID Act -- which prohibits callers from falsifying caller ID information to disguise their identity with intent to harm or defraud

I doubt, this will hold up in court. The victims were neither harmed (unless every robocall is harmful), nor defrauded (they got to talk to vacation salespeople selling legitimate vacation-packages)...

Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them...

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them.

The first amendment keeps the government from preventing speech before the fact.

It does NOT keep the government from, after the act, penalizing a crime, of which fraudulent speech was a central element, in which harm was deliberately (and improperly) caused.

Truth is an absolute defence. Fraud? Nope.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[Snotnose]

The victims were neither harmed (unless every robocall is harmful),

I don't answer numbers I don't recognize due to these assholes. If a friend or family member has an emergency and calls me on a borrowed phone, which I don't pickup as I don't recognize the number, then you damned well better believe I've been harmed.

Fuck this guy. IMHO a lifetime in prison is too good for him. Make an example out of him. Then extradite a couple of the fuckers from other countries and do the same to them.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

penalizing a crime, of which fraudulent speech was a central element

While I agree, that fraud is not protected by the First Amendment, our hatred with spam in general — and with this guy in particular — is not based on content. Even if we were to stipulate, for the sake of argument, that this guy's calls were fraudulent — and he is disputing it — that'd be irrelevant to my observation anyway.

Because you and I would be just as irritated, if we kept getting calls politely reminding us, that 2x2=4...

How to make such behavior illegal in a country with the First Amendment, I do not know...

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

I hate him too. But I do not see, what law he broke. And we are a country ruled by laws, not men. We can't lock him up just because we hate him...

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

Re-read what you quoted. It doesn't say 'causing harm or defrauding', it says 'with INTENT to harm or defraud'. And nowhere does it say that they 'got to talk to vacation salespeople ...'. It says they talked to people CLAIMING to be legitmate companies, but were in fact fake. In other words, fraud.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

You don't see what law he broke? You quoted it directly in your original post. He broke the 'Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009', which prohibits doing what he did - spoofing caller ID 'with intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value'.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

Our hatred of spam may not be based on content, but the law and the prosecution of this guy is ENTIRELY about content. He is not charged with 'irritating people', he is charged with spoofing caller ID to defraud.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

he is charged with spoofing caller ID to defraud.

I addressed this point first, by asking, how could his calls be possibly interpreted as fraudulent. They can not be — he'll win in court.

After I addressed this point, I made a different observation:

Sadly, the First Amendment keeps spammers (of all kinds) protected from most measures that could be taken against them...

This was about spammers in general — including ones, whose claims are squeaky clean. We hate them with passion, but can not make their practices illegal...

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

How can they possibly interpreted as fraudulent? He claimed he was selling discounted vacation packages from real companies like Expedia and TripAdvisor when that was not true. That is fraudulent. In fact, it was TripAdvisor who tipped off the FCC as to what he was doing.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

It says they talked to people CLAIMING to be legitmate companies, but were in fact fake. In other words, fraud.

Your passionate hatred dims your wits. TFA makes no such allegations. Indeed, it does not cite the actual text of his messages at all — but if you have some other source, I'd be most interested in reading the actual verbiage of the recordings.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

From http://www.miamiherald.com/new...

Abramovich's scheme involved calling unsuspecting customers with a prerecorded message instructing them to “Press 1” to hear more about an “exclusive” vacation deal offered by a well-known travel or hospitality company, like TripAdvisor, Expedia, Marriott, or Hilton, the FCC said.

They would then be transferred to a call center, where live operators would attempt to sell them one or more “discounted” vacation packages, like timeshares.

But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

Also, TFA DOES indeed make such allegations.

Consumers also were subject to fake robocalls offering "discounted" travel services by real companies including Expedia and TripAdvisor.

Emphasis mine

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

That article does not cite the words in the recording either. Take a deep breath, get what wits you've got back together, and try to substantiate your accusation.

to “Press 1” to hear more about an “exclusive” vacation deal offered by a well-known travel or hospitality company, like TripAdvisor, Expedia, Marriott, or Hilton, the FCC said.

They would then be transferred to a call center, where live operators would attempt to sell them one or more “discounted” vacation packages, like timeshares.

But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

Not one word in that paraphrase is fraudulent... The call-centers, likely, did have some deals to sell from some of those companies. As well as many others. Were they "discounted"? Likely, they were — compared to some nebulous "list price" — as everything else is, in most stores you walk in to.

No fraud... Unless FCC bankrupts him with the legal fees — an abuse of process we all should denounce regardless of its target — he'll win in court.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[bws111]

Do you have reading problems? Here, I'll make it easier for you: But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

So no, the call centers DID NOT 'likely have deals from those companies'. And since they were not affiliated with the companies, they COULD NOT be selling 'discounted' packages from those companies.

Except for 'press 1', EVERYTHING in the message was fraud.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[suutar]

I'm not certain of the exact content of his robocalls but it _sounds_ like he was presenting himself as an agent of a company that he was not actually affiliated with, and since I assume that in some way he's getting money out of this, that's a lie to get money. Which is, as far as I'm aware, pretty much the definition of fraud, no?

Re: What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[jd]

SCOTUS has ruled many times that commercial speech doesn't get full 1A protection. This is commercial speech. Problem solved.

For more problem solving, please call this number...

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[mi]

But neither the call center nor Abramovich were affiliated with the well-known brands presented to the customer during the prerecorded message.

If you ever come to read the actual wording of the calls, I'm sure, you'll see for yourself, that they never claimed to actually be so affiliated.

For example, consider: "Are you interested in purchasing a vacation from a reputable company like Expedia at a special low price? If yes, press #1 now!" It suggests, the asker is offering something from Expedia, but, in fact, he is talking only about a "company like Expedia"...

since they were not affiliated with the companies, they COULD NOT be selling 'discounted' packages from those companies

Neah, that's not a proof either. I can sell you a Sony TV without being affiliated with Sony.

Anyway, let's wait, how it plays out in court... Or, at least, until the actual words used by the recordings are published by someone.

Re:What "intent to harm or defraud"?

[Ungrounded Lightning]

That's and additional ding against him.

But the particular fraud he was charged with is falsifying the caller I.D.

This fraud would get some people to answer when they otherwise would not, wasting their time on the call they otherwise wouldn't have accepted. Damage.

Spoofed numbers

[Solandri]

made almost 100 million spoofed robocalls over a three-month period

Phone numbers are spoofable so a company with a pool of phone lines (e.g. a customer service center) can make phone calls using any of those lines, and all those calls will show up as being from their single public-facing number on Caller ID.

If we're not going to update the phone system so this spoofed phone number is generated by the phone company instead of by the caller, then let's at least make it a crime to spoof the number to one that isn't yours.

Re:Spoofed numbers

[bws111]

Uh, that is a crime. In fact, it is the crime he is charged with.

Headlines that start "Florida Man" are awesome.

[slacktide]

They even have a twitter feed for it! https://twitter.com/_floridama...

DEATH PENALTY!

[slashmydots]

Oh good, he owes money he doesn't have and thus doesn't have to pay. So what? Give him life in prison or the death penalty and see if anyone still wants to make robocalls?

Google Duplex Joke or comment?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, no one is going to nail the opportunity to relate any Joke or comment on Google Duplex, which is going to do something similar but "legally".

120 million for first call

[WillAffleckUW]

OK, but where are the fines for all the other calls?

I hear GITMO is nice this time of year.

Interesting

[Locke2005]

I get robocalls from spoofed caller IDs on a weekly basis. It's obvious that they are spoofing the caller ID, because the first 6 digits are exactly the same as my own number, and I don't know anybody whose phone number is close to mine! So... how do I go about getting the people that keep harassing me arrested and charged with violating the Truth in Caller ID Act? I can't ask for their real number to call them back on, because it's a recording -- it doesn't even give me a chance to request that they remove me from their list.

Re:Interesting

[Wargames]

I get Transcription Beta "Agreed insurance plan at the price you can afford and we make it ___________________ ___________ we ________________ _________ in your area including CIGNA Blue Cross Edna United and many more press want to get a hassle free assessment or press two to be placed on our do not call list thanks for your time and be heathly and blessed..."

A 20 second recording, and as many as 8 of these in a day. Listening to the message and pressing 2 does not seem to make them stop or increase in frequency. Recently I've been getting fewer and fewer.

AT&T rep said nothing they can do about this.

I guess SS7 and SMTP need sheriff's.

Re:Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

> first 6 digits are exactly the same as my own number

Better than the ones I've been getting from (206) 946-3400 which is the local IRS office here in Seattle. The guy told me to send a check for over $1,000 and I was scared at first since I googled that number and found it was the IRS's number!

That's been happening for a couple of years now, and Trump hasn't done a damn thing about that scam. I'm sure people have been fooled by it many times.

Trump may not have done anything, but... Fake IRS chats with a bot as Jolly Roger floods his call center with more bots

Re:Interesting

[anegg]

You fight back by registering a complaint with the FTC. Although you can't determine the actual number that they are calling from , you can register the circumstances of the call, which may eventually be used to bury the butthead. I suspect that those 80,000 verified scam calls could not have been verified without complaints detailing the call being filed.

My favorites to report are the ones where the robocall leaves a voicemail that includes a callback number... sometimes the crims like to help themselves get caught.

Re:Interesting

[anegg]

Filing complaints is a pain in the neck, and an imperfect process - agreed. I don't do it all of the time, but I try to do it some of the time. I want to get back to when I could answer the phone with a reasonable level of confidence that it was someone I wanted to talk to, especially when the CallerID shows a local call... so if we all do a bit, it will add up.

Re: Interesting

[jd]

The FTC takes backhanded. We know that, that's what led to net neutrality (Title 2) being revoked illegally.

Re: Interesting

[anegg]

Are you perhaps confusing the FTC and the FCC? It is the Federal Trade Commission that is regulating robocalls, not the Federal Communications Commission.

Re:Interesting

[Locke2005]

My digits place me in Gaston, Oregon... not exactly a hotbed of call centers! (Also not exactly where I lived when I got the number 20 years ago, but close.)

Re:What's with the phone system

[Locke2005]

How, when the phone system lets you pretend to be any number you choose?

A real punishment

[yorgasor]

I say, make the time fit the crime. Send him to jail. His cell has a single phone that can ring at any time, including the night. It does so, quite frequently. Each call is a recording with some bogus sales pitch. At some time during the sales pitch, which could last up to 5 minutes, a 5 digit code may or may not be given. This code can then be entered into an interface on the wall, which will deliver a food pellet. This is his only way to eat (although he can get water). He may get time in the yard, but if he misses an important call, he might miss his food.

Re:A real punishment

[Jason Levine]

I was thinking something similar but with a negative feedback. Hook up a single phone on his wall. Have it hooked up to wires that run across this cell floor (as well as bed, toilet, and any other surface he might try to climb on). Anytime the phone rings, it delivers a mild electric shock to him if he doesn't answer it in 5 seconds. Not enough to permanently harm/kill him, but enough to cause him pain. Then, you publish his number. "Anyone who has received a robocall, call 555-555-5555 to shock a robo-caller!"

Extra irony points if you have a robo-caller call this guy constantly.

Re:A real punishment

[ChrisMaple]

That would depend on the interpretation of the 8th Amendment. To be prohibited, must a punishment be both cruel and unusual? Or is either enough to trigger a prohibition? The punishment would certainly be unusual, but I wouldn't call it cruel when compared to other punishments already allowed.

Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system.

[TechyImmigrant]

>The real question is this: How can we design a system where, continuously, profitability is [nearly] only possible by playing according to well established rules?

Charge a small amount, e.g. $0.50 per call.

Problem solved.

I *just* got one of these calls today, dangit!

[MobyDisk]

I've gotten calls like this with phone numbers similar to local friends, but up until today it never was actually one of my friends. I answered, thinking it was my neighbor, and *bam* robocall. How can they possibly make any money off of this? Who doesn't recognize it as a robocall and hang-up immediately? And of that percentage, who actually buys stuff?

Re:I *just* got one of these calls today, dangit!

[ToTheStars]

How can they possibly make any money off of this? Who doesn't recognize it as a robocall and hang-up immediately? And of that percentage, who actually buys stuff?

There is an art in these scams to being a little bit "obvious", so that anyone who's skeptical or sensible gets weeded out. Then, the people who make it to the end (when the human scammer gets involved, which is the part that is "expensive" for the scammer) are really gullible and ready to hand over a bunch of money.

Re:What's with the phone system

[Ichijo]

When you make a call, if you don't own the number you're pretending to be, your phone company should not allow the phone call to go through. Done.

Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system.

[EndlessNameless]

This is the age of digital communication. It's time to update the communications protocols; if our solution is political rather than technical (e.g., we rely on reactionary regulatory agencies or Congressional "inquiries"), then we're fucked by definition. We can do better.

Upgrading the PTSN switches to support authentication or CAPTCHAs will be very expensive.

And you pretty much have to do them all, otherwise callers from a switch without authentication support won't be able to reach people on the new hardware.

So you're faced with a classic externality. The phone companies are the only ones who can fix the problem, but they aren't really being affected by it. They see no reason to spend the money. Traditionally, these issues have been addressed by regulation.

This is why America needs a functional federal government without partisan identity politics. Stop the constant screaming about liberals or privilege (whichever side you're on), and only support politicians who will work across the aisle to fix problems that affect everyone.

The fundamentally insecure and broken POTS/cellular infrastructure is one of those things. It shouldn't matter whether you're a D or R---the protocols are so outdated that there is no justification for using them anymore except rampant greed.

Re:Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system.

[ChrisMaple]

If a telephone company proposed a solution, do you think any Public Utilities Commission would allow the rate increase needed to pay for it?

and??

[ohgary]

So someone in 2016 did bad stuff and was fined more money than he could ever pay back. Issue still exist in 2018 and is easy to fix. FORCE telcom's to not route calls from numbers that dont provide valid caller ID.

That's it?

[SuperKendall]

I was kind of hoping for a YouTube live stream of him being drawn and quartered. Are we not at that stage of societal decadence yet?

% of net worth

[AntronArgaiv]

I'd like to see this rule applied to banks, and other large corporations when they're caught violating the laws.

Also: one down, how many gazillion of these bottom dwelling worms to go? I'm still getting 2 or 3 robocalls a day with faked caller ID on my cellphone.

Florida Orange

[PopeRatzo]

Maybe we should just block all phone calls coming from Mar-a-Lago and see if that fixes the problem.

The calls...THEY'RE COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!

Obligatory Simpsons

[DontBeAMoran]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Re:What's with the phone system

[Ichijo]

While they have that information, given call volumes it isn't exactly realistic to use a database lookup to provide it.

And that's why DNS cannot possibly work with today's volume of lookups.

what do you do about VOIP?

The VOIP company should provide the same lookup information to the phone company they connect to.

Don't know what you're complaining about

[PuddleBoy]

Based on the number of robo-calls I got on my cellphone *just today*, I figure about 10% of all robo-calls are coming to me. If there are a few others out there like me, then we account for half of those calls.

Seriously, WTF? It's gotten to the point where those calls are disrupting my day. If it's my bank or someone important, I need to answer. I may have to change my number (that I've had for 15+ years).

On a related rant, one of my coworkers eventually had to change her work phone number because a robo-call shop was using her number as their number on CallerID. Jeez - this is out of control.

Re:Don't know what you're complaining about

[Streetlight]

As far as I know changing your number won't make any difference - you'll get just as many robocalls. I don't think you can hide from these callers. I likely get as many of these calls as anyone else. Considering all the calls every US telephone gets, if the FCC fined all the robo callers $1,500 per call, we might wipe out the national debt fairly quickly. That is, of course, if they could collect that money. My guess they're not going to collect much from Adrian Abramovich, the name mentioned in the original post.

Re:What's with the phone system

[mishehu]

Ah, another one of these. Sadly you have no idea what you're breaking or how things work on the PSTN or what legitimate services you would be breaking by this statement. And furthermore, there's limited options for caller identity verification out there for VoIP calls.

Re:What's with the phone system

[Ichijo]

What would break that wasn't just a hack in the first place?

Re: Ridiculous numbers imply a ridiculous system.

[Reverend Green]

Of course not. But the PUC would surely approve any rate increase needed to pay for the telecom CEO's new yacht. Priorities...

Re:What's with the phone system

[mishehu]

You mistake "hack" with "this is how it is by design". Caller ID was never meant to be authoritative. That data is called ANI, and you often only get to see it when you have a toll free number (as you, the non-carrier, do get the right to know whose call you're agreeing to receive and pay for). And in the SIP world things get even more interesting with the From, the rpid, the PAI, and other headers, plus any isup that might be mapped over from the ss7 network and so on. I can think of about 1 or 2 possible services out there to authenticate those headers and cryptographically sign them, but that is dependent on a trust network basically. It isn't infallible either.