On 10/16/2011 8:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 19:40:21 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Was an article on that one in at least two recent 2600 magazines. Seems,
>> there are two numbers that can come up, one is the "local exchange"
>> number, which can be spoofed, and the other is a number identification
>> thing, which can't. But, do to how the bloody system is set up, the one
>> your caller ID box gets is the "local" spoofable one. Spoofing, if I
>> remember, involves triggering an ID failure on the calling end, such
>> that the system can't properly figure out where the call is from, then
>> substituting data into the system, which it takes as a "local exchange"
>> ID, or.. something like that. I really don't remember.
>>
>> Basically, there *is* a way to figure out who really called you, but
>> doing it requires more understanding of the system than like 99.9% of
>> the people using it, including most of the people at the phone company
>> you might contact about it, especially certain operators, which have to
>> rely on the same ID data that just got mis-reported to your own phone.
>> The only reason this *is* possible, ironically, is because they decided
>> to design the system with such a flaw, instead of using something less
>> prone to error, and redirection.
>
> I'd be interested in knowing more about this, because those damned credit
> card interest rate scams spoof the entire number, it seems.  800-300-0000
> doesn't seem like a legitimate number at all, but IIRC that's the last
> one that hit our phone.
>
> Jim
Was in 2600 magazine, but not sure which issue.

Post a reply to this message