On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:44:20 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number
> on the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are
> some lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)

All the phone spam I get has spoofed caller IDs, it's very easy to
do. When I was using the phone enough to need a VOIP account I spoofed the
caller ID to my landline number. I had to ask for the feature to be enabled
and was told that if there were complaints of abuse it would be turned off.

> It might be a chargeable feature in your area, but IMHO it's
> well worth a few bucks a month to be able to filter out spammers.

Really a chargeable feature - that's absurd in this day and age.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 2022-09-13, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:44:20 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number
>> on the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are
>> some lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)
>
> All the phone spam I get has spoofed caller IDs, it's very easy to
> do. When I was using the phone enough to need a VOIP account I spoofed the
> caller ID to my landline number. I had to ask for the feature to be enabled
> and was told that if there were complaints of abuse it would be turned off.

I was beginning to suspect that. :-(

>> It might be a chargeable feature in your area, but IMHO it's
>> well worth a few bucks a month to be able to filter out spammers.
>
> Really a chargeable feature - that's absurd in this day and age.

s/absurd/profitable/

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On 2022-09-12, Richard Falken
<nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z11168.fidonet.org> wrote:

> Re: Re: is there a way to
> By: Charlie Gibbs to All on Tue Sep 13 2022 02:44 am
>
>> In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number
>> on the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are
>> some lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)
>
> Not if you are calling from a clinic's call center and the grandpa does not
> recognize the number.
>
> THAT is the problem: having to call from an unrecognized number and having the
> call rejected. Even people expectig calls from random people falls for this
> sooooo often (ie. you tell some grandpa that a secretary will phone him with
> the "details" next morning, and the grandpa does not pick the phone up next
> morning because he fears she is a spammer).

That is a problem. However, a legitimate caller will leave a callback
number and often have a recognizable voice or mannerisms. Spammers seldom
go to that effort (but never say never...).

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:46:08 +1200, Richard Falken wrote:

> Re: Re: is there a way to
> By: Charlie Gibbs to All on Tue Sep 13 2022 02:44 am
>
> > In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number on
> > the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are some
> > lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)
> >
> >
> Not if you are calling from a clinic's call center and the grandpa does
> not recognize the number.
>
> THAT is the problem: having to call from an unrecognized number and
> having the call rejected. Even people expectig calls from random people
> falls for this sooooo often (ie. you tell some grandpa that a secretary
> will phone him with the "details" next morning, and the grandpa does not
> pick the phone up next morning because he fears she is a spammer).

So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming heline
has some kind of answering machine)

--
I find this corpse guilty of carrying a concealed weapon and I fine it
$40.
-- Judge Roy Bean, finding a pistol and $40 on a man he'd
just shot.

Re: Re: is there a way to
By: alister to Richard Falken on Wed Sep 14 2022 06:43 pm

> So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming heline
> has some kind of answering machine)
>

Because so many people does not have voicemail enabled or cares to check it out
if they do have it. Meaning you may call and leave a message and still make no
difference.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 16:03:42 +1200, Richard Falken wrote:

> Re: Re: is there a way to
> By: alister to Richard Falken on Wed Sep 14 2022 06:43 pm
>
> > So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming
> > heline has some kind of answering machine)
> >
> >
> Because so many people does not have voicemail enabled or cares to check
> it out if they do have it. Meaning you may call and leave a message and
> still make no difference.

It is impossible to make any system foolproof because fools are too
ingenious.

if you let a call go to VM because you don't recognise the number it does
not make sense to not check the message afterwards. if this is the case
then this solution is not for you.

--
Misery loves company, but company does not reciprocate.

alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming heline
> has some kind of answering machine)

'The clinic' or 'the bank' may not leave messages by policy due to 'data
protection'.

(specifically they have no way to verify that the person who picks up the
message is the person they wish to speak to, and the mere fact that somebody
is being contacted may be sensitive - 'the abortion clinic' as a topical
example)

Theo

On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 21:29:21 +0000, alister wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 16:03:42 +1200, Richard Falken wrote:
>
>> Re: Re: is there a way to
>> By: alister to Richard Falken on Wed Sep 14 2022 06:43 pm
>>
>> > So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming
>> > heline has some kind of answering machine)
>> >
>> >
>> Because so many people does not have voicemail enabled or cares to check
>> it out if they do have it. Meaning you may call and leave a message and
>> still make no difference.
>
> It is impossible to make any system foolproof because fools are too
> ingenious.
>
> if you let a call go to VM because you don't recognise the number it does
> not make sense to not check the message afterwards. if this is the case
> then this solution is not for you.

The point is that people have already been trained to not leave vm because
it's usually ignored anyhow. And often times, they get stage fright or
just don't want to be bothered to explain why they called and figure on
calling again some other time.

On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 13:48:05 -0000 (UTC)
Joe Beanfish <joebeanfish@nospam.duh> wrote:

> The point is that people have already been trained to not leave vm
> because it's usually ignored anyhow. And often times, they get stage
> fright or just don't want to be bothered to explain why they called and
> figure on calling again some other time.

It is odd isn't it that in the days when only some people had tape
based answering machines they tended to get used but now that everyone has
a voice mail service it's almost completely unused. Familiarity breeds
contempt I suppose.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 13:48:05 -0000 (UTC), Joe Beanfish wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 21:29:21 +0000, alister wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 16:03:42 +1200, Richard Falken wrote:
>>
>>> Re: Re: is there a way to
>>> By: alister to Richard Falken on Wed Sep 14 2022 06:43 pm
>>>
>>> > So why would a legitimate caller not then leave a message (assuming
>>> > heline has some kind of answering machine)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Because so many people does not have voicemail enabled or cares to
>>> check it out if they do have it. Meaning you may call and leave a
>>> message and still make no difference.
>>
>> It is impossible to make any system foolproof because fools are too
>> ingenious.
>>
>> if you let a call go to VM because you don't recognise the number it
>> does not make sense to not check the message afterwards. if this is the
>> case then this solution is not for you.
>
> The point is that people have already been trained to not leave vm
> because it's usually ignored anyhow. And often times, they get stage
> fright or just don't want to be bothered to explain why they called and
> figure on calling again some other time.

if it is a professional calling with a legitimate reason then they will
leave a message.

if you are not happy to accept this then answer the call & live with the
fact that many are going to be fraudsters (personally I like to waste
their time & see how long I can keep them going)

--
The only rose without thorns is friendship.

On Thu, 15 Sep 2022 19:29:41 -0000 (UTC)
alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> if it is a professional calling with a legitimate reason then they will
> leave a message.

Not necessarily, if the subject of the call is confidential
(medical, legal or business) then they probably shouldn't.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

Re: Re: is there a way to
By: alister to Joe Beanfish on Thu Sep 15 2022 07:29 pm

> if you are not happy to accept this then answer the call & live with the
> fact that many are going to be fraudsters (personally I like to waste
> their time & see how long I can keep them going)

It is easy to know if a call is coming from a call center as soon as you pick
it up. I usually just hang up as soon as I realize it is a robocall. Legitimate
callers calling from a call center
will think the connection was cut due to bad coverage and redial. Spammers just
move on to their next victim.

--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

On 2022-09-15, Richard Falken <nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z11179.fidonet.org>
wrote:

> Re: Re: is there a way to
> By: alister to Joe Beanfish on Thu Sep 15 2022 07:29 pm
>
>> if you are not happy to accept this then answer the call & live with
>> the fact that many are going to be fraudsters (personally I like to
>> waste their time & see how long I can keep them going)

Try typing "scamming the scammers" into YouTube. You'll find some
hilarious accounts by people who are masters at wasting telemarketers'
time. The really good ones turn the tables on the callers who pretend
be security personnel trying to frighten you into giving them control
of your machine by claiming it has a virus.

> It is easy to know if a call is coming from a call center as soon as you
> pick it up. I usually just hang up as soon as I realize it is a robocall.
> Legitimate callers calling from a call center will think the connection
> was cut due to bad coverage and redial. Spammers just move on to their
> next victim.

A good tipoff is that delay before an agent comes on the line.
Many call centers use a dialer which they feed a list of numbers;
it works down the list and when a prospective victim picks up it
transfers the call to the next available agent. This takes several
seconds, during which the called party hears dead air. I realized
how reliable this is when I noticed that whenever my wife picks up
the phone and says hello twice, her next words are an angry demand
to be left alone.

My policy now is that if I do pick up and say hello, the party at
the other end has two seconds to say something or I hang up.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:19:34 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> A good tipoff is that delay before an agent comes on the line.
> Many call centers use a dialer which they feed a list of numbers;
> it works down the list and when a prospective victim picks up it
> transfers the call to the next available agent. This takes several
> seconds, during which the called party hears dead air. I realized
> how reliable this is when I noticed that whenever my wife picks up
> the phone and says hello twice, her next words are an angry demand
> to be left alone.

Some of them wait until they hear a voice before transferring the
call, if you pick up the phone and stay silent they hang up in a few
seconds.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 17:19:34 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> A good tipoff is that delay before an agent comes on the line.
>> Many call centers use a dialer which they feed a list of numbers;
>> it works down the list and when a prospective victim picks up it
>> transfers the call to the next available agent. This takes several
>> seconds, during which the called party hears dead air. I realized
>> how reliable this is when I noticed that whenever my wife picks up
>> the phone and says hello twice, her next words are an angry demand
>> to be left alone.
>
> Some of them wait until they hear a voice before transferring the
> call, if you pick up the phone and stay silent they hang up in a few
> seconds.

Yep, that's what I do and they almost always hang up on me. The
delay varies a lot though, sometimes it's long enough that a real
human waiting for an answer is likely to become confused. I do
still wait that long, but people who call me hate it. Some have
keyed into the fact that I deliberately pick up during a ring so
that it's obvious when they should announce themselves, but that
seems to take people a while to learn.

My guess is that the system waits until all the available workers
have been assigned a call. Hence sometimes it hangs up before I'd
even have a chance to say something if I wanted to.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:44:20 +0000, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2022-09-12, Richard Falken <nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z11166.fidonet.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Spam is killing telephones faster than email. I have not found much issue
>> experimenting with small email services (though I admit that any independent
>> server which is itself not extremely small has a high chance of making it to a
>> blacklist). However, phones have reached a point in which if you phone some
>> grandpa to tell him to show up at the Doctor's office asap because of some
>> urgent issue, the grandpa won't pick the phone up because he will believe you
>> to be a Mexican spammer selling car insurance of Internet subscriptions.
>
> This is where call display is worth its weight in gold. If we don't
> recognize the caller - or it's one that can't possibly be good (e.g.
> area code 800, 888, etc. or "BLOCKED"), we ignore it. It's quite
> effective, since few telemarketers will leave a message.
>
> In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number
> on the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are
> some lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)
>
> It might be a chargeable feature in your area, but IMHO it's
> well worth a few bucks a month to be able to filter out spammers.

FWIW, I took an old computer, installed a $80 telephone interface
card in it (a TDM410P clone with a single FXO and 3 FXS ports),
and loaded it with Asterisk (https://www.asterisk.org/).

This now sits between my POTS landline and my home telephones,
filtering out unwanted calls, and providing me with both PSTN
and VoIP telephony service.

With call display, the Asterisk server can determine the caller's
phone number, and filter out the calls I do not want to take. It
also grades the calls on how familiar I am with the caller, and
blocks or allows callers based on their grade, and an associated
schedule. Thus, some special personal callers can call at any time,
while most personal callers get shunted to voicemail between
9:30PM and 9:30AM, and business callers get shunted to voicemail
between 5:00PM and 9:30AM.

While the number of spam calls that I get hasn't dropped all that
much, most don't even last long enough to ring my home phones.

--
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"

On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 23:24:12 +0000, Lew Pitcher wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Sep 2022 02:44:20 +0000, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-09-12, Richard Falken <nospam.Richard.Falken@f1.n770.z11166.fidonet.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Spam is killing telephones faster than email. I have not found much issue
>>> experimenting with small email services (though I admit that any independent
>>> server which is itself not extremely small has a high chance of making it to a
>>> blacklist). However, phones have reached a point in which if you phone some
>>> grandpa to tell him to show up at the Doctor's office asap because of some
>>> urgent issue, the grandpa won't pick the phone up because he will believe you
>>> to be a Mexican spammer selling car insurance of Internet subscriptions.
>>
>> This is where call display is worth its weight in gold. If we don't
>> recognize the caller - or it's one that can't possibly be good (e.g.
>> area code 800, 888, etc. or "BLOCKED"), we ignore it. It's quite
>> effective, since few telemarketers will leave a message.
>>
>> In the case of your grandpa, he'll see your name and phone number
>> on the display and know it's safe to pick up. (Yes, there are
>> some lowlifes who are spoofing caller IDs, but that's rare.)
>>
>> It might be a chargeable feature in your area, but IMHO it's
>> well worth a few bucks a month to be able to filter out spammers.
>
> FWIW, I took an old computer, installed a $80 telephone interface
> card in it (a TDM410P clone with a single FXO and 3 FXS ports),
> and loaded it with Asterisk (https://www.asterisk.org/).
>
> This now sits between my POTS landline and my home telephones,
> filtering out unwanted calls, and providing me with both PSTN
> and VoIP telephony service.
>
> With call display, the Asterisk server can determine the caller's
> phone number, and filter out the calls I do not want to take. It
> also grades the calls on how familiar I am with the caller, and
> blocks or allows callers based on their grade, and an associated
> schedule. Thus, some special personal callers can call at any time,
> while most personal callers get shunted to voicemail between
> 9:30PM and 9:30AM, and business callers get shunted to voicemail
> between 5:00PM and 9:30AM.
>
> While the number of spam calls that I get hasn't dropped all that
> much, most don't even last long enough to ring my home phones.

To bring my post back to topic, on a Raspberry Pi, you could
install an OAK PRO module
https://switchpi.com/product/oak-pro-raspberry-pi-module/
which gives you one FXO and one FXS port, then install Asterisk
and have the same POTS telephone filtering as I described above.

--
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills, We Trust"

On 17 Sep 2022 08:13:14 +1000
not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:

> Yep, that's what I do and they almost always hang up on me. The
> delay varies a lot though,

There is another scam that involves calls that only ring for a
short time and hang up or hang up almost immediately if answered. These are
call back bait - if you call back to find out about your missed call it
goes to a high rate premium number. You find out how badly you've been
scammed when the bill comes in.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> There is another scam that involves calls that only ring for a
> short time and hang up or hang up almost immediately if answered. These
> are call back bait - if you call back to find out about your missed call
> it goes to a high rate premium number. You find out how badly you've been
> scammed when the bill comes in.

This is the “One Ring” or “Wangiri” scam
Interestingly I receive such calls after using WhatsApp and talking/chatting
with specific friends. I suspect they have installed some kind of mall ware
on their mobiles, so that the scammers get their contacts.
Fortunately I was not so stupid to answer such call anyway :)

Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2022 08:13:14 +1000
> not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>
>> Yep, that's what I do and they almost always hang up on me. The
>> delay varies a lot though,
>
> There is another scam that involves calls that only ring for a
> short time and hang up or hang up almost immediately if answered. These are
> call back bait - if you call back to find out about your missed call it
> goes to a high rate premium number. You find out how badly you've been
> scammed when the bill comes in.

Huh, I didn't know about that one. My landline phone doesn't do
Caller ID though, so it wouldn't work on me that way. On rare
occasions automated scam and political advertising messages have
been left on my answering machine though (I guess they detect the
beep). A convincing message left there could probably trick me into
calling back.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On 2022-09-17, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On 17 Sep 2022 08:13:14 +1000
>> not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, that's what I do and they almost always hang up on me. The
>>> delay varies a lot though,
>>
>> There is another scam that involves calls that only ring for a
>> short time and hang up or hang up almost immediately if answered. These are
>> call back bait - if you call back to find out about your missed call it
>> goes to a high rate premium number. You find out how badly you've been
>> scammed when the bill comes in.
>
> Huh, I didn't know about that one. My landline phone doesn't do
> Caller ID though, so it wouldn't work on me that way. On rare
> occasions automated scam and political advertising messages have
> been left on my answering machine though (I guess they detect the
> beep). A convincing message left there could probably trick me into
> calling back.

"This is the Canada Revenue Agency. Please call back immediately
regarding your tax return. Be aware that failure to reply, or
not replying truthfully, can result in severe penalties."

Yeah, right.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

On Sun, 18 Sep 2022 00:22:09 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

> "This is the Canada Revenue Agency. Please call back immediately
> regarding your tax return. Be aware that failure to reply, or
> not replying truthfully, can result in severe penalties."
>
> Yeah, right.

That would be a skilful spammer, most assume you're in the USA.
I've had no end of issues with my First National and Bank of America
accounts, also problems with my amazon.com prime account, the FBI seem to
have lost interest they were after me by email some years back.

Perhaps these spammers think Ireland is a suburb of Boston.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/

On 18/09/2022 08:29, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2022 00:22:09 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "This is the Canada Revenue Agency. Please call back immediately
>> regarding your tax return. Be aware that failure to reply, or
>> not replying truthfully, can result in severe penalties."
>>
>> Yeah, right.
>
> That would be a skilful spammer, most assume you're in the USA.
> I've had no end of issues with my First National and Bank of America
> accounts, also problems with my amazon.com prime account, the FBI seem to
> have lost interest they were after me by email some years back.
>
> Perhaps these spammers think Ireland is a suburb of Boston.
>
Joe Biden seems to think it is...

--
"Strange as it seems, no amount of learning can cure stupidity, and
higher education positively fortifies it."

- Stephen Vizinczey

On 2022-09-18, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Sep 2022 00:22:09 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "This is the Canada Revenue Agency. Please call back immediately
>> regarding your tax return. Be aware that failure to reply, or
>> not replying truthfully, can result in severe penalties."
>>
>> Yeah, right.
>
> That would be a skilful spammer, most assume you're in the USA.

Yup. In the e-mail version, they even attach Government of Canada logos
to make it look more convincing.

> I've had no end of issues with my First National and Bank of America
> accounts, also problems with my amazon.com prime account, the FBI seem
> to have lost interest they were after me by email some years back.

For a while I was getting bogus notices of outstanding traffic tickets.
They did a good job of sounding threatening while omitting minor bits
of information like location, licence number, etc. One of them attached
a photo of a street I've never seen, complete with a time stamp stating
that it was UTC+2. Since our time zone is (currently) UTC-7, that was
a bit of a giveaway.

> Perhaps these spammers think Ireland is a suburb of Boston.

I don't even know what street Canada is on.
-- Al Capone

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

> It is odd isn't it that in the days when only some people had tape
> based answering machines they tended to get used ...

And the tapes were easy to archive.
Try to save/download voicemail. No such option.
--