Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
telemarketer calls are here to stay.
In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
a challenge/response service?
e.g.
- Somebody calls my phone number
- A voice from the VOIP provider says
"Please enter the two-digit code. If
you do not know the code and still want
to call, please send an email to Whoever@Whatever.com."
- If the caller knows to key "11",
and does so within a timeout period,
the call goes through and my phone
rings, otherwise the caller is just
cut off.
- If the caller sends me an email and
it looks plausible, I send them
a code from a list of codes I have
defined. If I send a code to the
wrong person, I just delete the code.
--
PeteCresswell
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com...
> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
> a challenge/response service?
>
> e.g.
> - Somebody calls my phone number
>
> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
> you do not know the code and still want
> to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>
> - If the caller knows to key "11",
> and does so within a timeout period,
> the call goes through and my phone
> rings, otherwise the caller is just
> cut off.
>
> - If the caller sends me an email and
> it looks plausible, I send them
> a code from a list of codes I have
> defined. If I send a code to the
> wrong person, I just delete the code.
Since that didn't work with e-mail, what makes you tink it will work with
VOIP?
Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings,
(PeteCresswell) chose the tried and tested strategy of:
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
> a challenge/response service?
>
> e.g.
> - Somebody calls my phone number
>
> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
> you do not know the code and still want
> to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
Would have thought any "hosted PBX" type service would be able to do this.
What you've just described is a standard IVR, with one small catch: two
digit menus. I know you could DIY with Asterisk but you may find that even
services based on it won't let you choose 2-digit menu entries.
--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
21:02:29 up 3 days, 9:16, 6 users, load average: 0.06, 0.07, 0.07
"I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
-- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010
Per alexd:
>Would have thought any "hosted PBX" type service would be able to do this.
>What you've just described is a standard IVR, with one small catch: two
>digit menus. I know you could DIY with Asterisk but you may find that even
>services based on it won't let you choose 2-digit menu entries.
Two digits is just what I came up with when writing the post.
Upon reflection, I'd say four digits bc that seems to be a common
length for extensions. Then the message could say "Please enter
the extension of the person you are calling...."
--
PeteCresswell
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:7067p6tt1f4fqppttsbrjgokmlr7r88sf5@4ax.com...
> Per D. Stussy:
> >Since that didn't work with e-mail, what makes you think it will work
with
> >VOIP?
>
> It seems to work for the people I correspond with that use
> Earthlink - or am I just wishing?
>
> What is the argument for it not working with email?
You're wishing. You're probably getting less than half of your true,
non-spam email.
For the E-mail challenge to be useful, it must quote some part of the
original message under challenge. That can be used to spam third parties.
The spammer creates the mail to the C/R system listing his desired target
as the forged sender, and when the C/R system challenges, its challenge
message delivers the spam payload to the spammer's target. This is why
most if not all spam detection systems classify challenges from C/R systems
AS spam.
In message <d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com>,
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> writes
>Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
>telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
>In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
>a challenge/response service?
>
>e.g.
>- Somebody calls my phone number
>
>- A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
> you do not know the code and still want
> to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>
>- If the caller knows to key "11",
> and does so within a timeout period,
> the call goes through and my phone
> rings, otherwise the caller is just
> cut off.
>
>- If the caller sends me an email and
> it looks plausible, I send them
> a code from a list of codes I have
> defined. If I send a code to the
> wrong person, I just delete the code.
Jeez! Just don't answer the damn thing and let it go to voicemail,
then call them back if you want.
If I were a friend, employer, supplier, customer etc. I'd soon find
someone else to be friends with or to do business with. It would really
piss me off having yet another 'password' to remember and that just for
the 'privilege' of speaking to you. Who do you think you are?
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:12:36 -0400, (PeteCresswell) scribe:
> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers a
> challenge/response service?
>
> e.g.
> - Somebody calls my phone number
>
> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If you do not know the code and
> still want to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>
> - If the caller knows to key "11",
> and does so within a timeout period,
> the call goes through and my phone
> rings, otherwise the caller is just
> cut off.
>
> - If the caller sends me an email and
> it looks plausible, I send them
> a code from a list of codes I have
> defined. If I send a code to the
> wrong person, I just delete the code.
It would be trivially easy to do this with your own Asterisk server - but
I don't know of an ITSP that offers it the way you speak of out of the
box.
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com...
> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
> a challenge/response service?
>
What is wrong with the Telephone Protection Service? http://www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps/
I have my VoIP lines registered, and never get telemarketing calls.
Per Malcolm Loades:
>Jeez! Just don't answer the damn thing and let it go to voicemail,
>then call them back if you want.
- This is a cell phone and each incoming call - even to voicemail
costs .34.
- Reviewing voice mails takes man hours.
- As volume increases, then the voicemail que becomes laden with
spam voice mails and eventually signal-to-noise gets to the
hand.
>If I were a friend, employer, supplier, customer etc. I'd soon find
>someone else to be friends with or to do business with.
100% agreement. I'm just trying to figure out *some* workaround
as telemarketing calls increase. Right now, my cell phone is
getting more telemarketing calls than legitimate calls. It
isn't there yet, but it's becoming useless as a practical matter
is definitely on the horizon as the frequency of telemarketing
calls increases.
Per Harry Stottle:
>What is wrong with the Telephone Protection Service?
>http://www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps/
>I have my VoIP lines registered, and never get telemarketing calls.
Wait awhile.
I am in the USA where the analog is the "Do-Not-Call List".
A year ago my experience was the same as yours. I even got a
check for a few dollars once as my part of the settlement in a
suit brought by the government against one of the offenders.
But telemarketers are going offshore and using VOIP and Skype to
spoof CallerID and make untraceable calls.
All I'm getting now in response to filing complaints are lame
letters explaining that there's nothing they can do bco the
abovementioned trend.
--
PeteCresswell
On 31/3/11 16:27, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Malcolm Loades:
>> Jeez! Just don't answer the damn thing and let it go to voicemail,
>> then call them back if you want.
>
> - This is a cell phone and each incoming call - even to voicemail
> costs .34.
>
> - Reviewing voice mails takes man hours.
>
> - As volume increases, then the voicemail que becomes laden with
> spam voice mails and eventually signal-to-noise gets to the
> hand.
>
>> If I were a friend, employer, supplier, customer etc. I'd soon find
>> someone else to be friends with or to do business with.
>
> 100% agreement. I'm just trying to figure out *some* workaround
> as telemarketing calls increase. Right now, my cell phone is
> getting more telemarketing calls than legitimate calls. It
> isn't there yet, but it's becoming useless as a practical matter
> is definitely on the horizon as the frequency of telemarketing
> calls increases.
>
How about maintaining a callerid whitelist, and all calls that aren't in
the whitelist get forwarded to either voicemail, or a recorded message
inviting the caller to email you.
This would be very simple in asterisk (can be done with dialplan logic),
although I don't know any providers that have a similar system.
Per Thomas Kenyon:
>How about maintaining a callerid whitelist, and all calls that aren't in
>the whitelist get forwarded to either voicemail, or a recorded message
>inviting the caller to email you.
That was my kneejerk reaction. But it seems like a white list
isn't part of the functionality of most cell phones.
The ghetto white list seems tb adding numbers to the phone's
directory and giving them names like "Junknn" or just "Xn".
But the voicemail problem remains: these guys leave voice
messages that have tb reviewed/deleted or legitimate voice mails
get lost in the noise.
All moot IMHO now that I know Members Of Congress are being
inconvenienced too.... that being the case, there's sure tb
meaningful action in the near future and I'm going to just lay
back and wait.
--
PeteCresswell
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com...
> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
> a challenge/response service?
>
> e.g.
> - Somebody calls my phone number
>
> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
> you do not know the code and still want
> to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>
> - If the caller knows to key "11",
> and does so within a timeout period,
> the call goes through and my phone
> rings, otherwise the caller is just
> cut off.
>
> - If the caller sends me an email and
> it looks plausible, I send them
> a code from a list of codes I have
> defined. If I send a code to the
> wrong person, I just delete the code.
> --
> PeteCresswell
Hi,
Their are several ways something to this effect could be relatively simply
implemented.
- Blind Menu and (Blind) Sub-Menu - i.e. doesn't have to authorise a
code, can just be unknown menu options or more specifically menu option
sequence(s) (e.g. "code 11" would be menu option 1, followed by menu option
1, puts you through, etc.)
- Conference Bridge - a code protected, free (private) conference room
could be used in various configurations, formats or guises, etc.
- An Introduction / Pre-Transfer Message - for example simply recording
an "alternate or alternative" message will lead anyone unaware or
uninitiated to conclude they have the wrong (an automated) system or will
need to give relevant credentials to proceed, whereas your solicited callers
will have been advised to simply hold for an extra, 30 seconds (or push any
key to proceed - your choice of how you configure the system), etc. (this
should filter 80% of your calls if done correctly). I.go.
+ "Thank you for calling. For caller identification and purpose
confirmation, please state (or confirm) first your (authorised) name after
the beep, then after the second beep please confirm (state your authorised
purpose for calling). Your inputs will then be verified and you will be
disconnected or connected to the relevant party accordingly".
+ More simply, something like "Hi and Thanks for calling" (in a very
salesman type voice), "you have been placed in a queue to be connected to
one of our operators". "Please hold" (possibly with border line totally
intolerable music and periodically repeating message - keep the message to a
mere 5 or more [hundred] minutes long (your solicited callers know to press
a key [to be connected]).
+ Etc., etc., your own variations here - e.g. "Please enter your
authorised staff ID now. Beep"., etc. (possibly add after a pause "sorry
your input has not been recognised. Try again. [Repeat message. Beep]." or
"sorry you are not an authorised user / your staff ID is not valid, not
recognised, not authorised", etc.
+ Please enter the extension you require. ([Optionally]Pause...
[Optionally] Sorry... that is not a valid extension)
+ (?Gleefully, joyfully or excitedly?) "Sorry, are offices are now
closed. Please try again tomorrow." (Loud screeching tone)
+ (Second) Ringing Tone, Busy Tone
+ Hi! This is Mary. I am sorry I cannot take your call but please
leave a message after the tone. Beep. (Generic standard type "pretend"
answerphone / voicemail greeting or message). (Pause).
+ Please enter your food order codes. Beep. (Pause)
+ This is an AUTOMATED system. Blah blah.
+ If you need an operator, dial 123-123-1234 (provide a genuine
telephone [network] operator number), if you need sales dial 123-123-1235,
etc., etc. (potentially provide an invalid or out of service number for
other entries). Repeat message several times, etc.
+ This number does not accept incoming calls. (Optionally: [If you
are an authorised / permitted / requested / expected caller] Please enter
your number after the tone and the system will (usually) call you back
(usually within two months).
- Call Transfer / Forwarding System - As (others / you previously
suggested), 4 digit extension code.
Various services offer these facilities for free, and / or integrated with
their (free) service(s).
"News Reader" <some@where.invalid> wrote in message
news:in2eda$8fs$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>
> "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
> news:d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com...
>> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
>> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>>
>> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
>> a challenge/response service?
>>
>> e.g.
>> - Somebody calls my phone number
>>
>> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
>> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
>> you do not know the code and still want
>> to call, please send an email to
>> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>>
>> - If the caller knows to key "11",
>> and does so within a timeout period,
>> the call goes through and my phone
>> rings, otherwise the caller is just
>> cut off.
>>
>> - If the caller sends me an email and
>> it looks plausible, I send them
>> a code from a list of codes I have
>> defined. If I send a code to the
>> wrong person, I just delete the code.
>> --
>> PeteCresswell
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Their are several ways something to this effect could be relatively simply
> implemented.
>
> - Blind Menu and (Blind) Sub-Menu - i.e. doesn't have to authorise a
> code, can just be unknown menu options or more specifically menu option
> sequence(s) (e.g. "code 11" would be menu option 1, followed by menu
> option 1, puts you through, etc.)
>
> - Conference Bridge - a code protected, free (private) conference room
> could be used in various configurations, formats or guises, etc.
>
> - An Introduction / Pre-Transfer Message - for example simply recording
> an "alternate or alternative" message will lead anyone unaware or
> uninitiated to conclude they have the wrong (an automated) system or will
> need to give relevant credentials to proceed, whereas your solicited
> callers will have been advised to simply hold for an extra, 30 seconds (or
> push any key to proceed - your choice of how you configure the system),
> etc. (this should filter 80% of your calls if done correctly). I.go.
> + "Thank you for calling. For caller identification and purpose
> confirmation, please state (or confirm) first your (authorised) name after
> the beep, then after the second beep please confirm (state your authorised
> purpose for calling). Your inputs will then be verified and you will be
> disconnected or connected to the relevant party accordingly".
> + More simply, something like "Hi and Thanks for calling" (in a
> very salesman type voice), "you have been placed in a queue to be
> connected to one of our operators". "Please hold" (possibly with border
> line totally intolerable music and periodically repeating message - keep
> the message to a mere 5 or more [hundred] minutes long (your solicited
> callers know to press a key [to be connected]).
> + Etc., etc., your own variations here - e.g. "Please enter your
> authorised staff ID now. Beep"., etc. (possibly add after a pause "sorry
> your input has not been recognised. Try again. [Repeat message. Beep]." or
> "sorry you are not an authorised user / your staff ID is not valid, not
> recognised, not authorised", etc.
> + Please enter the extension you require. ([Optionally]Pause...
> [Optionally] Sorry... that is not a valid extension)
> + (?Gleefully, joyfully or excitedly?) "Sorry, are offices are now
> closed. Please try again tomorrow." (Loud screeching tone)
> + (Second) Ringing Tone, Busy Tone
> + Hi! This is Mary. I am sorry I cannot take your call but please
> leave a message after the tone. Beep. (Generic standard type "pretend"
> answerphone / voicemail greeting or message). (Pause).
> + Please enter your food order codes. Beep. (Pause)
> + This is an AUTOMATED system. Blah blah.
> + If you need an operator, dial 123-123-1234 (provide a genuine
> telephone [network] operator number), if you need sales dial 123-123-1235,
> etc., etc. (potentially provide an invalid or out of service number for
> other entries). Repeat message several times, etc.
> + This number does not accept incoming calls. (Optionally: [If you
> are an authorised / permitted / requested / expected caller] Please enter
> your number after the tone and the system will (usually) call you back
> (usually within two months).
>
> - Call Transfer / Forwarding System - As (others / you previously
> suggested), 4 digit extension code.
>
> Various services offer these facilities for free, and / or integrated with
> their (free) service(s).
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
>
> News Reader
>
>
>
P.s. Google Voice (http://google.com/voice) for example (free and offers a
wealth of [cell] mobile number integration options) provides:
"
a.. Define which phones ring, based on who's calling, and even ListenInTM on
voicemail before answering the call. We use smart technology to route your
calls. So, if you're already on a Google Voice call, we'll recognize it and
use call waiting to reach you on the phone you're on.
"
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.invalid> wrote:
> Per Thomas Kenyon:
> >How about maintaining a callerid whitelist, and all calls that aren't in
> >the whitelist get forwarded to either voicemail, or a recorded message
> >inviting the caller to email you.
>
> That was my kneejerk reaction. But it seems like a white list
> isn't part of the functionality of most cell phones.
You can change the ringtones so give a distinctive ringtone to people in
your contacts list, and then a different tone (silent maybe) to people not
on it. That allows you to still check incoming calls that aren't recognised
before ignoring them.
> But the voicemail problem remains: these guys leave voice
> messages that have tb reviewed/deleted or legitimate voice mails
> get lost in the noise.
I wonder if phones can choose to divert or not based on CLID?
> All moot IMHO now that I know Members Of Congress are being
> inconvenienced too.... that being the case, there's sure tb
> meaningful action in the near future and I'm going to just lay
> back and wait.
Do US folks pay for incoming calls diverted to voicemail? I can see why you
might not like that.
"Theo Markettos" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:ebi*Zztzt@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
> "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.invalid> wrote:
> > Per Thomas Kenyon:
> > >How about maintaining a callerid whitelist, and all calls that aren't
in
> > >the whitelist get forwarded to either voicemail, or a recorded message
> > >inviting the caller to email you.
> >
> > That was my kneejerk reaction. But it seems like a white list
> > isn't part of the functionality of most cell phones.
>
> You can change the ringtones so give a distinctive ringtone to people in
> your contacts list, and then a different tone (silent maybe) to people
not
> on it. That allows you to still check incoming calls that aren't
recognised
> before ignoring them.
>
> > But the voicemail problem remains: these guys leave voice
> > messages that have tb reviewed/deleted or legitimate voice mails
> > get lost in the noise.
>
> I wonder if phones can choose to divert or not based on CLID?
>
> > All moot IMHO now that I know Members Of Congress are being
> > inconvenienced too.... that being the case, there's sure tb
> > meaningful action in the near future and I'm going to just lay
> > back and wait.
>
> Do US folks pay for incoming calls diverted to voicemail? I can see why
you
> might not like that.
No, we don't - because such a diversion does not yield use of airtime.
We also have a federal "do not call" list and laws that say that
telemarketers are supposed to respect the list else get fined. Some of our
states had also passed similar laws and had similar lists prior to the
federal list taking precedence.
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message news:u4d9p65loa4b5c3ci2hi23n1q89ikeiem0@4ax.com...
> Per Thomas Kenyon:
>>How about maintaining a callerid whitelist, and all calls that aren't in
>>the whitelist get forwarded to either voicemail, or a recorded message
>>inviting the caller to email you.
>
> That was my kneejerk reaction. But it seems like a white list
> isn't part of the functionality of most cell phones.
>
> The ghetto white list seems tb adding numbers to the phone's
> directory and giving them names like "Junknn" or just "Xn".
>
> But the voicemail problem remains: these guys leave voice
> messages that have tb reviewed/deleted or legitimate voice mails
> get lost in the noise.
>
> All moot IMHO now that I know Members Of Congress are being
> inconvenienced too.... that being the case, there's sure tb
> meaningful action in the near future and I'm going to just lay
> back and wait.
> --
> PeteCresswell
Perhaps you need to lobby your Congressman as to why the US and Canada
have to have a different cellphone charging model from (almost) the rest of the world.
Everywhere else inbound calls are free, (unless the handset is roaming outside its home country), and the party calling the
cellphone paysa higher rate than for a landline calls. Cellphones have special non-geographic area codes so the caller knows the
score.
In the UK, telemarketing calls to mobile phones is not perceived as a great problem
because of the cost to the caller. I can't recall ever getting one, my landline gets
an average of two each weekday.
Per D. Stussy:
>
>No, we don't - because such a diversion does not yield use of airtime.
>
But, in the end, we pay bc we have to check/review/purge
voicemail and, unless one uses a land line to do that minutes get
charged - unless I'm missing something and calls to retrieve
voice mail are not chargeable minutes.
>We also have a federal "do not call" list and laws that say that
>telemarketers are supposed to respect the list else get fined. Some of our
>states had also passed similar laws and had similar lists prior to the
>federal list taking precedence.
From what I've read so far, those lists have become obsolete in
light of offshore telemarketers using VOIP and Skype - and,
according to letters I get from the Penna Attorney General's
office in response to complaints, relaying calls multiple times
before they get to the target.
Per Graham.:
>Perhaps you need to lobby your Congressman as to why the US and Canada
>have to have a different cellphone charging model from (almost) the rest of the world.
>
>Everywhere else inbound calls are free, (unless the handset is roaming outside its home country), and the party calling the
>cellphone paysa higher rate than for a landline calls.
Good catch!.... that's the first new idea I've heard in awhile.
I wonder, though, how popular it would be with cell phone users
who perceive a major benefit of their phones tb making them more
available to the people they serve.
I definitely think twice before calling cell phones of my
relatives in UK and DE bco that feature.
--
PeteCresswell
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:pb79p6hkpoh5vhuvgg7gkks7b2dbo244ok@4ax.com...
> Per Harry Stottle:
>>What is wrong with the Telephone Protection Service?
>>http://www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps/
>>I have my VoIP lines registered, and never get telemarketing calls.
>
> Wait awhile.
>
> I am in the USA where the analog is the "Do-Not-Call List".
>
> A year ago my experience was the same as yours. I even got a
> check for a few dollars once as my part of the settlement in a
> suit brought by the government against one of the offenders.
>
> But telemarketers are going offshore and using VOIP and Skype to
> spoof CallerID and make untraceable calls.
>
> All I'm getting now in response to filing complaints are lame
> letters explaining that there's nothing they can do bco the
> abovementioned trend.
>
As far as I am aware, in the UK, and I think it also applies to the rest of
Europe, even if a marketing call is from outside the European area, but it
contains marketing material concerning a company trading in the European
area, that call is treated in terms of legislation as originating from the
EU, so the company promoting the call is still liable for prosecution, even
if it is from an off shore call centre. Spoof callerID would make no
difference as the callers would still have to give details of the company to
try and make sales, and once that company information is given, the evidence
of illegal marketing calls is obtained, and can be acted upon.
"Harry Stottle" <thiswontwork@nowhere.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TFglp.2900$Dj5.919@newsfe10.ams2...
> "(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
> news:pb79p6hkpoh5vhuvgg7gkks7b2dbo244ok@4ax.com...
>> Per Harry Stottle:
>>>What is wrong with the Telephone Protection Service?
>>>http://www.mpsonline.org.uk/tps/
>>>I have my VoIP lines registered, and never get telemarketing calls.
>>
>> Wait awhile.
>>
>> I am in the USA where the analog is the "Do-Not-Call List".
>>
>> A year ago my experience was the same as yours. I even got a
>> check for a few dollars once as my part of the settlement in a
>> suit brought by the government against one of the offenders.
>>
>> But telemarketers are going offshore and using VOIP and Skype to
>> spoof CallerID and make untraceable calls.
>>
>> All I'm getting now in response to filing complaints are lame
>> letters explaining that there's nothing they can do bco the
>> abovementioned trend.
>>
>
> As far as I am aware, in the UK, and I think it also applies to the rest
> of Europe, even if a marketing call is from outside the European area, but
> it contains marketing material concerning a company trading in the
> European area, that call is treated in terms of legislation as originating
> from the EU, so the company promoting the call is still liable for
> prosecution, even if it is from an off shore call centre. Spoof callerID
> would make no difference as the callers would still have to give details
> of the company to try and make sales, and once that company information is
> given, the evidence of illegal marketing calls is obtained, and can be
> acted upon.
Per Harry Stottle:
>As far as I am aware, in the UK, and I think it also applies to the rest of
>Europe, even if a marketing call is from outside the European area, but it
>contains marketing material concerning a company trading in the European
>area, that call is treated in terms of legislation as originating from the
>EU, so the company promoting the call is still liable for prosecution, even
>if it is from an off shore call centre. Spoof callerID would make no
>difference as the callers would still have to give details of the company to
>try and make sales, and once that company information is given, the evidence
>of illegal marketing calls is obtained, and can be acted upon.
It *might* even be the same here in the USA - I don't know enough
to say. But if it were, diligence/budget of the enforcers would
be a determining factor.
We're coming out of eight years of "anything goes" (i.e.
"deregulation") where one of the tools was emasculating
regulators by cutting their budgets to the bone.
Now we are experiencing the consequences of some of that
deregulation (as is much of the world) and I would imagine that
budgets are tight for other reasons than idealistic ones.
--
PeteCresswell
"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:d8e6p6pjh4b5egd835qv1dmmieuce8kb04@4ax.com...
> Finally stumbled on to comp.dcom.telecom and now realize that
> telemarketer calls are here to stay.
>
> In that context, does anybody know of a VOIP provider that offers
> a challenge/response service?
>
> e.g.
> - Somebody calls my phone number
>
> - A voice from the VOIP provider says
> "Please enter the two-digit code. If
> you do not know the code and still want
> to call, please send an email to
> Whoever@Whatever.com."
>
> - If the caller knows to key "11",
> and does so within a timeout period,
> the call goes through and my phone
> rings, otherwise the caller is just
> cut off.
>
> - If the caller sends me an email and
> it looks plausible, I send them
> a code from a list of codes I have
> defined. If I send a code to the
> wrong person, I just delete the code.
> --
> PeteCresswell
Per Ria Elaine:
>My doctor's surgery uses 3 digit extensions. When you call, a voice says
>"please enter the extension number you want if you know it, or enter 500
>for reception"
After a few comments from others, I'm coming around to thinking
maybe something like:
"Enter 9or Mary, 2 for Joe, and 9 for Pete"...
Where Mary and Joe do not exist....
Repeat callers would know to press 9 and there's only one digit
to press - i.e. minimal hassle...
Actually, since I've gotten all spun up over this, robo calls to
my cell phone have diminished from 2-3 per day (each leaving a
voicemail if not answered) to maybe 2 per week.
Dunno if something's up enforcement-wise or I'm just getting
lucky.... -)
--
PeteCresswell
Challenge/Response? 
Linear Mode
