Re: FCC proposes $10 Million fine for spoofed robocalls

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

How is it envisioned that this will work?
I mean, I'm all for less spam calling... and ideally there would be
some form of 'source address verification' on the PSTN/phone
network... but in today's world that really just doesn't exist and the
motivations to suppress fake sources are 'just as good' as they are on
the intertubes. (with crappier options in the gear - SHAKEN/STIR are
really not even available in the majority of the switch 'gear' right?)

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:08 AM Kain, Becki (.) <bkain1 () ford com> wrote:
> Would be nice to have these stopped.  I received 10 of them yesterday, pretending to be apple icloud support
>
>
>
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> On Behalf Of Javier J
> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 8:38 PM
> To: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
> Cc: nanog <nanog () nanog org>
> Subject: Re: FCC proposes $10 Million fine for spoofed robocalls
>
>
>
> It is so bad that I am not above us bribing politicians in foreign countries to crack down on this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 3:37 PM Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com> wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, U.S. FCC Chairman Pai and Canadian CRTC Chairperson Scott made
> the first official cross-border SHAKEN/STIR call.
> https://www.fcc.gov/document/pai-scott-make-first-official-cross-border-shakenstir-call
>
>
> Today, the U.S. FCC announced a proposed nearly $10 million fine for
> spoofed robocalls.
> https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-proposes-nearly-10-million-fine-spoofed-robocalls
>
> A U.S. telemarketing firm spoofed the caller-id of a competitor to make
> approximately 47,610 political robocalls shortly before a California State
> Assembly primary election.
>
> I think this case is somewhat unusual for robocall spoofing, because the
> alleged perpetrator, victims, and 'crime scene' occured within the same
> jurisdiction.
>
> While the FCC likes to announce large enforcement actions in splashy
> press releases, its actually bad about collecting fines. The FCC must
> rely on the Justice Department to initiate separate prosecution to
> enforce payment from non-license holders because the FCC can't do that
> itself.  So don't expect anyone to actually pay soon (or ever).