[VoiceOps] Fake Voicemail Anti-Robocall Tactics

[Carlos Alvarez]

But the ridiculous side of this is that there are valid reasons to "spoof"
numbers.  We have two customers who need to do it all the time, and it's
legal, as well as demanded by their customers.


On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 9:37 AM <paul at timmins.net> wrote:

> Legal or not it’s genius. Humans will notice right away and it’ll cost for
> the robocallers.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 16, 2021, at 11:23 AM, Calvin Ellison <calvin.ellison at voxox.com>
> wrote:
>
> 
> Today we received a notice from one of our underlying carriers that
> included the following statement:
>
> * If a customer spoofs an ANI that they do not own, the clec's can forward
>> to call to a voiceless Voicemail which appears to be FAS.
>>
>
> Is there any legal device that actually supports this practice? I'm
> looking for a specific statute, FCC rule, precedent in a judicial ruling,
> or the like.
>
> The FCC has ruled that the SIP 608 response code is to be used for
> signaling when a call is rejected. I doubt the FCC or FTC has ruled that
> terminating carriers are permitted to cause loss of trust and revenue
> between upstream intermediate and originating carriers.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> *Calvin Ellison*
> Systems Architect
> calvin.ellison at voxox.com
> +1 (213) 285-0555
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> *voxox.com <http://www.voxox.com/> *
> 5825 Oberlin Drive, Suite 5
> San Diego, CA 92121
> [image: Voxox]
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20210216/be1a961c/attachment.htm>