On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 2:31 PM Keith Medcalf <kmedc...@dessus.com> wrote: > > > On Thursday, 11 July, 2019 11:18, Christopher Morrow > <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:00 PM Paul Timmins <p...@telcodata.us> wrote: > > >> Chris it would be trivial for this to be fixed, nearly overnight, > >> by creating some liability on the part of carriers for illicit use of > >> caller ID data on behalf of their customers. > > >'illicit use of caller id' - how is caller-id being illicitly used > >though? > >I don't think it's against the law to say a different 'callerid' in > >the call session, practically every actual call center does this, right? > > The problem is that CallerID is not really the CallerID. It is some > fraudulent shit created by the caller. This is not how "CallerID" was > originally sold. It was sold as being the ID of the Caller. If it is not > the ID of the Caller then Fraud is being committed and the bastards should be > castrated (or worse), and the CEO and Directors of the carrier responsible > for fraud getting through to the end-user should face the same penalty. >
This is why I said ANI in one of my messages, yes. you CAN, however, in the network see the callerid, and ANI and tell what's going on... (credit where due: a kind caller noted to me: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1028 which may make the use of 'someone elses' callerid by 'me' illegal) -chris > > See then how quickly this gets fixed. You will fall off your chair and it > will be a "solved problem" before your arse hits the ground! > > -- > The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a > lot about anticipated traffic volume. > > > >
