- VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

ANIs flagged as telemarketer/spammer/scammer
by abalashov＠evaristesys.com Nov. 14, 2021

Nov. 14, 2021

Hi, So, of course, it is a known problem in the legitimate side of the lead engagement call centre, survey, etc. business that ANIs get flagged as "telemarketer" pretty quickly and start showing up that way on people's phones. Your normative viewpoint on that may vary depending on what you think of lead gen calls, but regardless, a reasonable person would differentiate between: (1) Legitimate outbound dialing operations that are following up with leads who provided their phone number and agreed to be called (at least, as a matter of clicking "accept" on _something_), or for some other legitimate mass-dialing purpose, and who actually own the DID inventory from which they present local-market ANIs and can in fact be reached on those numbers; (2) Illegal spammers who use fake ANIs and call people who did not in any way consent to being called by them. I am trying to learn a bit more about how this is done and what a legitimate, above-board business can do about it. Ignoring the factor of third-party call-screening apps (which most people with a mobile don't use), where is this generally implemented? As I understand it, T-Mobile do it on the network level. I have T-Mobile myself, and probably 2/3rds of unfamiliar numbers, including quite legitimate ones, show up as "Scam Likely" ? I know that's come up on the list before. AT&T displays "Telemarketer"; do they do it that way too, or do they use a Google Android feature for that which they enable as part of their carrier defaults for carrier-issued phones? What about other carriers and Android? As far as I know, Apple don't do anything like this. Do people with iPhones just not receive this "service"? How does that work? Asking where the central, or the most influential authority lies and who provides it goes to the heart of the real question, which is: what can a legitimate business do if their number has been blacklisted this way? As I understand it, the maintainers of these lists, along with the criteria for getting on them, are elusive and inscrutable, and there's really no recourse and no appeals process. I furthermore understand that this has led to the widespread approach of rotating ANIs, but that's a losing battle; they get flagged too. I imagine it won't be long before the criteria for "Scam Likely" are just "number appears to call lots of numbers in this rate centre and otherwise hasn't been around very long". But this is all just conjecture on my part; I really don't know much about how my carrier, anyone's carrier, or some BigCo that's behind my mobile OS decides that a call is a "telemarketer" or "scam" call. If anyone can shed some light on how this really works and what, if anything can be done about it, I would be most appreciative. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

8 14

Can't Figure This Scam Out
by voiceops＠lict.com Nov. 11, 2021

Nov. 11, 2021

One of our clients is a small private school. For the past month, the school has been getting calls meant for other schools in the general area (within 20 miles or so) We have been able to get limited information from the caller like what number did they dial. They are definitely not dialing our client's DIDs. It seems that they are dialing a number that they found on an internet search, and the call is then forwarded to one of the DIDs at the school. We are seeing matching CDR records for our PBX and our carrier's CDR billing reports, so it does not look like a SIP hack. It seems that the number is forwarded for just a few minutes to our school, then goes dead, or rings busy, no longer forwarded to our client. The pattern here is that the caller obtained the number from an internet search of a school in the area. These are real people calling, as we have been able to call them back and verify. The callers who reached our client are as bewildered as we are. I am sure this is some sort of scam -- but I can't figure out what it is. Are the scammers recording the lines and seeing if they hear financial information? Seems like a longshot, but that is the only thing I can think of. I know there is little that can be done to prevent a call being forwarded to you upstream of the carrier, but would love to hear anyone's thoughts about this.

7 9

Verizon says they have "no relationship" to port from thinQ/Commio
by caalvarez＠gmail.com Nov. 11, 2021

Nov. 11, 2021

A customer is porting a number to VZW, and they can't figure it out. They called me to ask if I had "more info" to help them port out from Commio. My return call went to VM, so I don't have more info, but thought I'd ask here on the list. Any ideas on how this can be, or what to recommend? I know Verizon is a small carrier, and may not be wise to the ways of telecom.

4 8

Getting a specific number from Verizon
by neimanpinchas＠gmail.com Nov. 10, 2021

Nov. 10, 2021

Yes, I agree. I would expect such a law, but the problem is they are declining and they do not even have the ability to select numbers. As a side question, what's the assumed ethic in voiceops, to continue a private discussion? or to continue with VoiceOps at voiceops.org email address On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 1:33 PM Jeff Shultz <jeffshultz at sctcweb.com> wrote: > Isn't there a regulation about how long a number has to remain out of > service before it can be reused? > > I know we do this as a normal practice. > > Perhaps that is why they cannot provide you with that number. > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 10:29 AM Pinchas Neiman <neimanpinchas at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> A client of mine wants to get a specific landline number matching his >> company name. >> >> Currently when i call the number it says - ti tu tee, the number you >> dialed is not in service! >> >> When I called Verizon they said they couldn't select a number at all, i >> know they have such a service because people have it, so how can I get the >> number? >> >> >> -- >> *Pinchas S. Neiman* >> Software Engineer At ESEQ Technology Corp. >> 845.213.1229 #2 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> VoiceOps mailing list >> VoiceOps at voiceops.org >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops >> > > > -- > Jeff Shultz > Central Office Technician > SCTC > (503) 769-2125 > Go Big Ask for Gig > > Like us on Social Media for News, Promotions, and other information!! > > <https://www.facebook.com/SCTCWEB/> [image: > https://www.instagram.com/sctc_sctc/] > <https://www.instagram.com/sctc_sctc/> > <https://www.yelp.com/biz/sctc-stayton-3> > <https://www.youtube.com/c/sctcvideos> > > > > > > > > **** This message contains confidential information and is intended only > for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not > disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender > immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and > delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be > guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, > corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. > The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions > in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail > transmission. **** > -- *Pinchas S. Neiman* Software Engineer At ESEQ Technology Corp. 845.213.1229 #2

1 0

Getting a specific number from Verizon
by neimanpinchas＠gmail.com Nov. 10, 2021

Nov. 10, 2021

A client of mine wants to get a specific landline number matching his company name. Currently when i call the number it says - ti tu tee, the number you dialed is not in service! When I called Verizon they said they couldn't select a number at all, i know they have such a service because people have it, so how can I get the number? -- *Pinchas S. Neiman* Software Engineer At ESEQ Technology Corp. 845.213.1229 #2

1 0

Ringback issues when calling T-Mobile?
by hf0002+nanog＠uah.edu Nov. 2, 2021

Nov. 2, 2021

Is anyone else getting an eerie lack of ringback when originating toward T-Mobile? We get a 183 Session Progress with media, then a 180 Ringing a third of a second later. So the result is a 1/3 second long burst of ringback and then silence. We are seeing if we might be able to start locally generating ringback when we see the 180, but to be honest, that's just a weird sequence of messages and I would never expect to receive them in that order. So we didn't exactly plan for it. The relevant trunk is from Comcast, but I highly suspect they are just passing through what they got from T-Mobile (or whoever they route T-Mobile calls through). We are in the north Alabama area and we have heard of other customers with various carriers having similar issues. Just wondering if anyone had a technical reason/explanation or any more information. -- Hunter Fuller (they) Router Jockey VBH M-1A +1 256 824 5331 Office of Information Technology The University of Alabama in Huntsville Network Engineering

2 1

Calls Not Reaching Us
by voiceops＠ics-il.net Oct. 28, 2021

Oct. 28, 2021

I have a customer saying that they are getting reports from their customers that they're getting "number is no longer in service" errors when calling them. I checked Metaswitch SAS for a number that experienced this issue and we don't see any inbound attempts from that number. The call would have come in via a traditional TDM connection to a tandem. I reached out to the Primary contacts in NPAC for the originating caller (Comcast). They told me to bugger off and to have the end user call support. Did I make the wrong move? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

8 11

old Neustar data
by robverk＠hotmail.com Oct. 27, 2021

Oct. 27, 2021

I am looking to see if someone in the group might have kept some old files. I am looking for the daily files Neustar generated. Numbers ported from wireline to mobile and mobile number ported to wireline. I believe Neustar generated the files daily when they were the administer for mobile porting before iconectiv

1 0

Carriers Keeping Acquired Defunct Company Names
by beckman＠angryox.com Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

I'm curious why companies like T-Mobile and Inteliquent/Onvoy/Voyant continue to retain company names and corporate entities long after their brands have been retired, acquired, and generally shell entities holding phone numbers. Some examples: T-Mobile -> Omnipoint, Aerial Communications, Suncom, Powertel, Sprint, Eliska Wireless Ventures Subsidiary I Sprint -> O1 Communications, US Telepacific AT&T -> New Cingular Wireless, Southwestern Bell, Pacific Bell, Bell South, Southern Bell, Ameritech Verizon -> Cellco Partnership, Bell Atlantic Nynex Mobile Inteliquent -> Radiant IQ, Onvoy, Voyant, Broadvox, Layered, Neutral Tandem CenturyLink -> United Telephone, Qwest Spectrum -> Charter Fiberlink So many of these brands are dead and acquired, yet these companies live on and own phone numbers. Cingular died in 2006. Radiant IQ acquired in 2015. Bell Atlantic went away in 2000 with Verizon acquiring Bell Atlantic and GTE. Why? What benefit does this provide the owning/operating companies? Legal insulation? Beckman PS -- This all started when I saw Inteliquent request VoIP Numbering for Radiant IQ in June 2020, a company they acquired in 2015, and generally does not exist in any meaningful way to customers or consumers, residential or business. This industry in the US is weird. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com https://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

12 12

Government Debit Cards used for Fraud?
by beckman＠angryox.com Oct. 21, 2021

Oct. 21, 2021

I've got an interesting situation popping up tonight. A new account was created, invalid email, no valid contact phone number. The name and address on the card tie back to a 62-year-old individual. The BIN for the credit card is linked to "Prepaid Debit Government" making me wonder if it was a debit card sent to individuals during the pandemic or Economic Impact Payments sent in May 2020. However, all I can find is that they were issued by Visa and not MasterCard, and this was a MasterCard. I did find that the GoDirect program for Social Security, VA, or other federal benefits issues a MasterCard debit card for regular payments rather than checks, so it could be that. Overall it seems unlikely for a 62-year-old to need phone services on the Internet, and highly likely that they might be receiving Social Security benefits. It's possible that someone got their hands on the debit card without authorization. Has anyone else seen strange new accounts paid for with Government Issued MasterCard Debit Cards? Beckman --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman at angryox.com https://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0