Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
AT&T Communications United States

AT&T CEO Interrupted By a Robocall During a Live Interview (theverge.com) 139

At an Economic Club event in Washington, DC today, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson was interrupted on stage by a robocall, pausing an interview in front of dozens of people and driving home that absolutely no one is safe from the spam epidemic. From a report: Over the past few months, regulators at the Federal Communications Commission have been feeling the pressure from lawmakers and consumers who are urging them to put an end to the relentless onslaught of robocalls people receive every day. Last year, consumers received over 26.3 billion of these scammy calls and the problem only appears to be getting worse. "I'm getting a robocall, too," Stephenson said during the Economic Club event, ultimately declining the call on his Apple Watch. "It's literally a robocall."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AT&T CEO Interrupted By a Robocall During a Live Interview

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @08:46PM (#58307810)

    There is almost NO security whatsoever, and even a total moron can install an app on his phone to spoof somebody's #, potentally ruining the victim's life.

    To not even have the most basic security in place when it was rolled out decades ago is criminal.

    • by helpfulcorn ( 668048 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @03:10AM (#58308716) Homepage Journal
      I always thought 911 was a joke, now it's caller ID too? Public Enemy will have to update their song.

      In reality, I don't answer the phone at all anymore unless it's someone on my contact list or they call repeatedly from the same number, then I know it's probably a person worth talking to.... probably.

      The question is, how long until robocallers start getting that people will do that?
      • The question is, how long until robocallers start getting that people will do that?

        About a year or two ago.

        • I get about 5 - 10 robocalls a day, and that hasn't happened to me yet... yet. Watch me just jinx myself and today receive back to back calls from the same number.
          • Well, admittedly there's every possibility it is someone actively trying to reach me who isn't trying to harass me and just refuses to ever leave a message. But if that's the case, then I guess the robocallers have won.

      • I only wish I could do this. However, my job required me to be on-call for a week at a time; it would be pretty impossible to program the phone with all the phone numbers of all potentials.
        • I only wish I could do this. However, my job required me to be on-call for a week at a time; it would be pretty impossible to program the phone with all the phone numbers of all potentials.

          Here's my solution: Set up a Google Voice number as your on-call number. Have it ring your mobile, your house phone, wherever you expect to be. Then set it up to report your Google Voice number as the originating number instead of the actual caller. Bingo, all calls to your on-call number show up as being from one sin

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )
      I remember when Caller ID first started to become a thing, I always said that it needed some form of out-of-band reverse lookup in order to be practical. I have no idea why it was never implemented alongside of it.... it always seemed feasible to me to develop an out-of-band protocol for trying to talk back to the number that *YOUR* phone thinks is calling you to see if it really is... If the caller is faking some other number, then the out-of-band protocol would end up reaching some other phone which wou
  • SHAKEN/STIR deployment should certainly be sped up, at least giving users the option to automatically decline caller-ID spoofed calls. This will make it easier on the abuse enforcement end to shut down their access to legitimate carriers, and also disable their grey routes (e.g. SIM boxes, shady VoIP providers).
  • Shenanigans!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Major_Disorder ( 5019363 ) on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @08:48PM (#58307824)
    I'm calling it. Who wouldn't shut off their phone ringer while doing an interview? BS, pure unadulterated BS.
    • The same type of people who NEVER turn their ringer off.

      Or who are too stupid too.

      I actually fancy myself to be someone who is at least somewhat tech savvy and my ringer is NEVER (intentionally) on unless I'm eagerly awaiting a call and yet today the thing made noises and vibrated. It usually doesn't. How the hell did that happen? I don't know. I just wanted to throw the phone against the wall.

      It wasn't a good time. Hasn't everyone wanted to throw their phone against the wall at some point? I mean if w

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Did it actually play the ringtone?

      If you set the phone to silent the incoming call is usually still displayed on the screen and on your smartwatch, maybe with vibration.

    • Even turning the ringer off wouldn't stop calls coming in. You would have to turn the sound off and put it into airplane mode but you would still get alerts in vibration mode.

      The best thing to do is to turn everything off. If something important enough to interrupt an interview like that a CEO of a big company would have someone with them or would have someone who knows how to get in touch with them while their phone was off.

    • Yeah, this is like Rudy Giuliani "getting a call from his wife" during a series of his campaign speeches.
    • Yup. This is BS. AT&T is complicit in this shit, because they profit from it.
      This was a stunt to either:

      A - Show how much of a problem it is and help them continue to pretend that they can't do anything about it, deflecting any pressure from the FCC, congress, etc.

      B - Start the lip service PR "effort" to show that they're trying to combat it. Such an "effort" will probably involve asking for public money to setup systems and tools to combat spam calls. It will assuredly include exceptions for the pow

  • by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @08:57PM (#58307860)

    They make far too much money from people answering spam calls.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      nothing will change so long as origin, intermediary, and/or terminating telcos make money per call, even though the tech has existed for decades (i.e. since the debut of the feature) to combat 'fake' caller id.

    • Do telcos actually make money off of robocalls? If so, how?

      I would imagine very few people now pay by the minute, and that most of the time robocalls just stresses the network for no additional revenue to the telcos. How much money do you think telcos make with each incremental call?
    • I'm not sure they do. The phone industry group/alliance (can't remember their name) has warned that most people don't answer the phone - which means they don't use them. And if we don't need them - we'll stop buying. And legit businesses will stop spending too and try finding their customers using a different technology (aka "Reminder - you have a doctor's appt tomorrow" or "I'd like to schedule time to fix your appliances"). This discussion was during a news conference on STIR/SHAKEN.

      The spammers

  • Load of Bullshit ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @09:24PM (#58307954)

    All that is required is:

    (1) Reverse Path Verification (That is, do not accept terminations from a network that could not be the originator)
    (2) Do not permit originators to set "Caller ID" to a number they have not rented (from the provider).

    Problem solved.

    However, this will never happen because in case (1) the terminating network makes money from terminating incoming calls. They will not make this money if they refuse to terminate the call. Therefore, they have an interest in not verifying anything at all as that will adversely affect their revenue stream.

    In case (2) the provider (call originator) makes money from originating calls. They do not care that the "caller id" is fraudulent (and they know it is fraudulent because they do know which customer to charge for the call origination). They have an interest in not preventing fraudulent "caller id" since that will adversely affect their revenue stream.

    There is absolutely no need for this Stirred and Shaken crappola that will do nought whatsoever.

    Furthermore, there is no evidence that dingy-doofus was interrupted on stage by a robocall SINCE HE DID NOT ANSWER THE CALL AND NO WITNESSES HEARD THE ROBOCALL. It was more likely his boyfriend calling to remind him to bring home some more lube.

    • Parent poster is absolutely correct.

      A database of which carriers can terminate which numbers is already in existence and used every day -- otherwise we wouldn't have phone number portability. It should be easy to determine if calling party identification is legitimate and that the source of a call is legitimate just based on whether you know if it is the termination path for a reversed call.

      There are some legitimate reasons for misidentifying a call (call origin does not match call termination path), but t

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I manage the telephony at two locations. For a while, I could send whatever caller ID I wished on the PRI at one location but the other location only allowed me to send caller ID from the pools of numbers that were routed to me over that circuit. If every telco enforced this it would cut down on the spoofing dramatically.

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )

      (1) Reverse Path Verification (That is, do not accept terminations from a network that could not be the originator)

      Not possible, since you only know the networks you are directly connected to... and the network you are connected to may only be just trying to forward you the details it was given itself. There may be any number of reasons that a call that you think should have come from network Y because that's the route that you would have taken to reach it from your network might instead be coming to you

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      A decent post ruined in the last sentence by a random outburst of homophobia. Come on AC, you can be better than that.

    • (2) Do not permit originators to set "Caller ID" to a number they have not rented (from the provider).

      That's not a "rented phone number". By federal law that's my number. I can take it to another provider. It's like owning a static IP, vs. renting one from your ISP. You get to take it with you.

      Which is good, because number lockin was a way to keep people from moving to another provider, and caused rates to go higher.

  • I've seen a dramatic drop in robocalls to my cell phone over the past two weeks. Prior to last Monday my average was ~ 5 robocalls per day. Last week I had 2 all week. This week I've had 2 so far. I haven't changed anything - I've had the same phone number for 20+ years and same carrier for 10+ years - so I don't know what happened.

    As much as I would like to think that John Oliver's move might have something to do with it, I still don't expect the FCC guys have any concern for us poor bastards on our regular consumer-grade cell phone plans.
    • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @10:11PM (#58308124)

      I have had none this year and one last year. Unsolicited commercial call, that is. Robo-calls I never had a single one in my life. Of course, here the robo-caller pays a $50'000 fine per incident and repeat offenders may go to prison. Europe is a bit ahead of the US in these matters.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • I still keep a land line for emergency use since I live in tornado alley.

        It gets called about 6 times every day just after noon, and other 8 times every day between 8 and 9pm.

        I never answer it. It is meant for outbound calls only.

        I am fairly sure that a good portion of them are political ads, since this is / will be an election year, but the total volume has not really changed from this. I think it is the max that can squeeze in, in the "hot" hours.

        I work 3rd shift, so I have gotten used to sleeping throug

        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          This is what naked capitalism looks like. The next time some schmuck advocates a market based solution, remind them of the cold calling menace, and ask how well that market self-regulation has worked.

          Indeed. Horrible.

      • And yet you dont have codified free speech....This is a joke

        "Article 10 – Freedom of expression 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties
        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          What has that to do with anything? You have no argument and nothing worthwhile to contribute so you complain about something entirely different? Are you mentally challenged?

          • It was a response to the idea that somehow Europe is ahead of the US on this. We have to deal with the First Amendment, we cant ignore it. Robo calls ARE speech, its not as simple as silencing them.
      • by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

        Europe is a bit ahead of the US in these matters.

        The fine is $40,000 in the US.

        The problem is that there is no one to fine when the callers originate from India. Perhaps if the perpetrator cannot be found then they could fine the phone company? That fine would quickly motivate the companies to track down the actual originator of the call.

        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          They eventually have to sell you something. That is when you get them. Also, they will pay the long-distance charges.

          But the details do not matter. This works here and in the US is does not. That is what matters in the end.

    • Not for me— four social security scams, two Chinese consulate scams, but only one or two outright hang ups. Similar situation, same number 17 years.

      And for the jackass that screwed up his email address with mine for Mass Goalies, please tell them they need an unsubscribe function! They aren’t as fun as the ones from Irish politicians.

      • Indian recruiters. My profile is up in several places so that job candidates can look me me up. Any text change on the profile triggers a wave of non-technical people from India, pretending that they are from the USA, with technology jobs from around the world.

    • I could be technical problems.

      Facebook, Google, and Uber had technical problems recently.

      • I could be technical problems.

        That's what I've been wondering. The coincidence of the timing is interesting though.

        Facebook, Google, and Uber had technical problems recently.

        I've never used Facebook or Uber in any way, shape or form. Facebook of course has been known to build profiles of non-users but they've never had my phone number or any other information that I would enter in to it in the process of starting a profile. Uber should know little to nothing of me as I've never signed up for them or installed their app on any phone I've ever owned.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      How practical is it to just block all calls except for a specific whitelist?

      You could whitelist your friends and institutions like your bank who handily spoof their called ID number to the main switchboard one. Everything else just silently drop the call.

      How often does an unknown number make an important call to your phone? Do you want to talk to anyone who doesn't also have your email address to arrange to be whitelisted first?

      • Good idea, but in practice it doesn't work because these jackasses are spoofing numbers on top of their robocalling. I've had it happen more than once that they used a number that was in my contacts list. Ever since dumbass Facebook allowed people to be searched via their security number, this has been a major issue - they are simply scripting their searches to harvest numbers and forming a matching dataset with your friends/family, and then spoofing their numbers when they dial you.

    • by hawk ( 1151 )

      I've seen it, too.

      I changed my phone number a month or so, because after three years it was still on the list for every payday loan and bad credit scheme from the prior owner (texts *always* addressed to the same name).

      I still got the robocalls on a never before issued number, but they seem to have stopped.

      They had gone through the roof a couple (few?) months ago. Before that, Tmobile usually caught them as "spam likely", and now I'm not seeing them at all again.

      I suspect that someone found away around the

      • I suspect that someone found away around the screening, and then Tmobile figured it out.

        I do happen to be a TMobile customer, but I would think it would be awfully dangerous for Tmobile to play around with a technical approach to this problem - especially without warning customers. While the robocalling is overwhelmingly used for obnoxious (and sometimes outright illegal) purposes, there are also times when number masking is actually useful and legal. They're playing with fire if they are doing this.

        • by hawk ( 1151 )

          My understanding is that Tmobile simply shows "scam likely" as caller id and puts through the call, unless you choose to reject them.

          • My understanding is that Tmobile simply shows "scam likely" as caller id and puts through the call, unless you choose to reject them.

            Indeed that is what they do. However in my case, the past few weeks now I've even seen fewer of those. I used to see around 5 "scam likely" calls every day. Now I see fewer than 2 per week. The shift happened abruptly, just a few weeks ago now.

  • Basically the only thing pushing back against the tide are around 2,000 nutjobs with homebrew Asterisk servers trying to robodial back against 100,000+ autodialers dumping billions of calls on the telecom network.

    Thanks to robodialers being employed everywhere, they're pushing voice calls into obsolescence. My job moved to a closed SIP network off of PSTN years ago, and I only have 2 relatives left alive who send me PSTN calls, the rest text. When those 2 people die---no more need for voice service.

  • No issue where I am (Score:2, Interesting)

    by rgbe ( 310525 )
    I've never had a robo call in my life. I don't live in America. I don't know the laws in my country, but the problem just does not exist here. I've had the occasional (like once every 2 years) have a random person call me regarding a survey or trying to sell me something.
    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      I've never had a robo call in my life. I don't live in America. I don't know the laws in my country, but the problem just does not exist here. I've had the occasional (like once every 2 years) have a random person call me regarding a survey or trying to sell me something.

      The robocalls are typically from Indian call centers, to primarily English speaking countries rich enough (and populous enough) that they can get $100-200 US from them without batting an eye. So relatively rich countries, typically England,

  • by aaarrrgggh ( 9205 ) on Wednesday March 20, 2019 @10:09PM (#58308112)

    While we are at it, how about home, office, secretary. Oh, and the same for all the other carriers, land and wireless. I sense a good Kickstarter coming.

  • If only it weren't so fucking obvious. If he were frequently pestered by robocalls he'd be like the rest of us and simply never answer his phone, especially during an interview.
    This is on par with that stupid Bill Gates bullshit "here's a jar of mosquitoes - see how big a threat Malaria is now?"
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @12:18AM (#58308422)
    ... the call was to ask if he was happy with his long-distance phone carrier.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21, 2019 @04:27AM (#58308854)

    ... says only country where this regularly happens.

    You just gotta get over the idea that everyone has a god given right to advertise to anyone anywhere. But getting that particular meme out of the US consciousness is going to be difficult.

  • I know you can setup asterix virtual PBX to have an automated system that makes callers answer some type of prompt to get your phone to ring. I don't think it will work on smartphones, but there must be some sort of thing that can do this.

    That way anyone you know who calls you gets through automatically based on their phone number, anyone else will have to use touch tones to answer a basic question (like picking your name out of a 1-9 numbered list) or do some very easy math.

  • by Vermonter ( 2683811 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @05:42AM (#58309026)

    We're always told - don't pick up, don't engage. But the truth is, if we want to stop these robocalls, then if you can you *should* answer, you *should* engage, and you should try to keep a live person on the line with you for as long as possible. This will cost the scammers money... after all, talking to a human isn't free; that human is getting paid. Or if they aren't paid by the hour, then if they are busy with you who (presumably) knows its a scam, then they are unavailable to be scamming others.

    If we as a culture decided to waste a few minutes of the scammers' time with every phone call, then they would quickly lose their value, and many scammers would go out of business.

  • 1. Get a Google Voice phone number (or some other IP number)
    2. Use it on all web sites, credit applications, loyalty cards, etc
    3. Never answer it
    4. If a number doesn't leave a voice mail, block it
    5. Check the voice mail, if it's a scammer, block it
    6. If it's a real call, let them know your real number
    7. Now, setup a 'fake' email
    8. Use it on all web sites, credit applications, loyalty cards, etc.
    9. Check it from time to time in case email you want gets in there so you can update that one email
    10. Move t

  • I remember seen a news item 15 years ago or so where a British dude was been sued because he was misusing a premium number that charges the caller when receiving a call, basically he was receiving a lot of telemarketer calls and robocalls so he decided to convert his number to one that charges when receiving a call and would happily stay a long time with them on the phone while earning 50p per minute.

    This would help solve a lot of this issues.

  • by sad_ ( 7868 ) on Thursday March 21, 2019 @06:47AM (#58309228) Homepage

    i hear a lot of US people complain about robocalls, it seems to be a real, serious problem.
    it's something i never ever hear about with my friends, colleagues, family, etc here in EU.
    i'm really interested to know/hear why this seems to be a US only(?) problem, what's stopping robocallers in EU?

  • It's literally a robocall.

    Really? So you mean it's not figuratively a robocall? The pervasive unnecessary use of the word "literally" needs to stop.

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...