FCC Takes Long-Delayed Step Against Spam Text Surge (axios.com) 30
The Federal Communications Commission approved a long-delayed proposal to crack down on spam texts Friday night after Axios asked agency members why it hadn't moved on the issue. From a report: The number of spam text messages -- which can include links or other tricks designed to steal money or personal information -- has exploded, with the volume now exceeding that of robocalls.The proposal, which passed on a 4-0 vote, seeks comment on requiring cellphone companies to block texts from numbers known to be illegal or fraudulent. It had been awaiting a vote at the FCC for nearly a year.
The FCC will review feedback on the proposal before writing final rules, a process that can take months. The measure also seeks comment on whether carriers should use third-party analytics providers to inform blocking efforts, and whether the agency should push the wireless industry to authenticate text messages like it does for phone calls to deter robocalls, a senior FCC official told Axios. "The American people are fed up with scam texts, and we need to use every tool we have to do something about it," chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, told Axios ahead of the agency's vote.
The FCC will review feedback on the proposal before writing final rules, a process that can take months. The measure also seeks comment on whether carriers should use third-party analytics providers to inform blocking efforts, and whether the agency should push the wireless industry to authenticate text messages like it does for phone calls to deter robocalls, a senior FCC official told Axios. "The American people are fed up with scam texts, and we need to use every tool we have to do something about it," chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, told Axios ahead of the agency's vote.
Won't affect the primary source... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Usually all that does is inform the spam entity that your mailbox is active and it increases the price they receive from selling your data.
If the messages are from a legitimate company that you no longer want to receive messages from, then using the "unsubscribe" link is OK. Otherwise your best option is to just ignore the messages and wait for your account to be flagged as unresponsive to spam.
Re: (Score:2)
Some do, some don't. Unfortunately the ones that do are already the least obnoxious ones, like the non-partisan "remember to vote" texts and the ones urging you to vote for a specific candidate or party. They much more strongly partisan "the other side eats babies!" texts urging you to vote against someone or something more often don't.
IMHO it's worth responding with STOP. I wouldn't worry about it triggering a "we got a live one!" response on the other end. They already know if they're sent to a working
Privacy (Score:2)
Spam texts. (Score:2)
Ive definitely gotten an increase in spam texts asking me for one thing or another, and they're not political in nature. Occassionally one will be sent as a group text and some moron will reply with "STOP".
Pro Tip (Score:3)
Don't respond/acknowledge any text (or email/phone call for that matter) from a source you don't know, don't recognize, a service you don't have or a source you do know/recognize but you know doesn't have your cell number.
For a voicemail example, I actually got this one today from a "Private Number" ... (paraphrasing) "A purchase of an iPhone 14 has been made on your Amazon account, press 1 to confirm, 2 to decline." Amazon doesn't *have* my cell number, only my home number and, of course, they wouldn't be using a blocked/private number *and* I would have received an alert from my CC, which I didn't. I also ignore texts/voice mails about the extended warranty for my car about to expire as I don't have an extended warranty. I do report these calls to the FTC National Do Not Call Registry [donotcall.gov] -- for funzies, and the (remote) possibility that it might do any good...
Re: (Score:2)
I hate when messages use third parties for their official links. I get suspicious if they are legit or not.
Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Why so forgable? (Score:1)
I don't know why the system makes it so easy to forge the sender meta data. I've asked for explanations, and never get anything clear. Is the reason above my IQ? The best I can gather it appears defense of the status quo because too many are "just used to it" and hate change. Wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
In the traditional PSTN, the number 'forging' you are referring to works well for business, say you get PRI (23 lines plus data) but you support more than 23 phones (they are not all on the phone at the same time). With PRI you don't have a number dedicated to each channel, your phone system provides the calling number that is using a given channel right now. So your phones can have DIDs but they come through one of the channels on the same service.
The PSTN is built to provide this kind of service and it ta
Re: (Score:1)
> It is because our protocols have not kept up with end devices and use cases.
Then lets update the fuckers!
Re: (Score:2)
This is not entirely accurate--there is no gap here that VoIP doesn't fit into, this absolutely is 100% a carrier issue. I have a few blocks of DIDs that total a few hundred numbers, and I can use any of them on any of my lines when placing a call. If I try to specify a number that I do not own, AT&T (or whoever we happen to be using for service during a given contract period) will block it. This has been the case for two decades now.
The issue is certainly that the carriers who service those placing
Re: (Score:2)
It is neat that your provider has controls. That does not change the underlying protocols that are designed for this use case.
email to sms (Score:3)
I asked my carrier to turn off email to sms for my number. That resolved 90% or more of text spam. I aggressively block and report what remains.
Newest scam: high effort wrong number (Score:3)
I was fooled by one and she texted me for 2 weeks WALLS of very personal text, like it was from a real person, before asking me to invest in her crypto scam. I assumed at first it was someone made lonely by the pandemic.
In the span of a month, I get 3 just like it: Hot divorced foreign women with semi-broken English, faint praise ("oh, you're not a racist, you're so nice" "oh, you don't sexually harass me like most guys"), no sexual manipulation (no compliments on appearance, which helped fool me), all trying to get me to put money into a fake crypto exchange after days of conversation. It's weird, to say the least, but scammers are getting more thorough than they used to be.
Re: (Score:1)
Geez man don't leave us hanging...so how much did you make on the crypto?
Re: Newest scam: high effort wrong number (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like you're getting free phone sex there. I'm jealous, I have to pay.
Ho hum (Score:2)
They haven't eliminated email spam. Worse than ever.
They haven't eliminated phone spam. Worse than ever.
Why would anyone believe they can do anything real about sms spam?
Who decides (Score:2)
Who decides what is "illegal or fraudulent"? I mean short of a trial I don't know of any way that this could/would not be subjective.