<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007</title>
	<atom:link href="http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/</link>
	<description>Collective thoughts and musings on the state of VoIP security today.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:11:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Vishing Scams Taking Advantage of Innocent People &#124; Credit Cards Blog &#124; CreditCardAssist.com</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-62784</link>
		<dc:creator>Vishing Scams Taking Advantage of Innocent People &#124; Credit Cards Blog &#124; CreditCardAssist.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-62784</guid>
		<description>[...] there is a bill currently in the House of Representatives, which has been named The Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007.Â  This bill will prohibit manipulating caller ID information.Â Â  This is good news â€“ but truly [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] there is a bill currently in the House of Representatives, which has been named The Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007.Â  This bill will prohibit manipulating caller ID information.Â Â  This is good news â€“ but truly [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ID Spoofing</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-61498</link>
		<dc:creator>ID Spoofing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-61498</guid>
		<description>then how are these sites still operating?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>then how are these sites still operating?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dustin D. Trammell</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22682</link>
		<dc:creator>Dustin D. Trammell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 18:39:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22682</guid>
		<description>Disclaimer: I am not an attorney.

Due to the fact that legislation is being drafted in the United States to make the &lt;i&gt;act&lt;/i&gt; of spoofing Caller-ID illegal (with the intent to defraud or harm), that would lead one to believe that it is currently NOT illegal.  However, note that this is simply the &lt;i&gt;act itself&lt;/i&gt;.

Also keep in mind that in many states, including Texas where I personally reside, it is a crime to access a computer system without authorization.  Take into consideration someone who uses falsified Caller-ID information to authenticate to another person's account on a voice-mail system.  While the act of spoofing the Caller-ID information may not currently be illegal, using it to access the voice-mail system in question likely is.  While in that case you may or may not be liable for what your customers use the spoofed Caller-ID to accomplish, at the very least you will want to consider such scenarios and watch this legislation closely as it moves through Congress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disclaimer: I am not an attorney.</p>
<p>Due to the fact that legislation is being drafted in the United States to make the <i>act</i> of spoofing Caller-ID illegal (with the intent to defraud or harm), that would lead one to believe that it is currently NOT illegal.  However, note that this is simply the <i>act itself</i>.</p>
<p>Also keep in mind that in many states, including Texas where I personally reside, it is a crime to access a computer system without authorization.  Take into consideration someone who uses falsified Caller-ID information to authenticate to another person&#8217;s account on a voice-mail system.  While the act of spoofing the Caller-ID information may not currently be illegal, using it to access the voice-mail system in question likely is.  While in that case you may or may not be liable for what your customers use the spoofed Caller-ID to accomplish, at the very least you will want to consider such scenarios and watch this legislation closely as it moves through Congress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan York</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22504</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan York</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:47:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22504</guid>
		<description>Ioan,

Our (VOIPSA) position has really been not to take sides on the legality/illegality of caller ID spoofing but more to point out that it's rather trivial to do within VoIP and so anyone basing their trust on CID should rethink that.   This is a change, though, because I know that certainly here within the US, people have become accustomed to trusting the CID on the PSTN in screening calls or at least having a sense of who they are talking to.  VoIP removes the ability to trust CID because it is so easy to spoof.  I'm not sure as a society we yet understand that change in the trust model to which we've become accustomed.

Now, it's pretty clear that some members of the US Congress think that it should be illegal (at least "with the intent to defraud or cause harm") but I don't know what is happening in other parts of the world.

Regards,
Dan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ioan,</p>
<p>Our (VOIPSA) position has really been not to take sides on the legality/illegality of caller ID spoofing but more to point out that it&#8217;s rather trivial to do within VoIP and so anyone basing their trust on CID should rethink that.   This is a change, though, because I know that certainly here within the US, people have become accustomed to trusting the CID on the PSTN in screening calls or at least having a sense of who they are talking to.  VoIP removes the ability to trust CID because it is so easy to spoof.  I&#8217;m not sure as a society we yet understand that change in the trust model to which we&#8217;ve become accustomed.</p>
<p>Now, it&#8217;s pretty clear that some members of the US Congress think that it should be illegal (at least &#8220;with the intent to defraud or cause harm&#8221;) but I don&#8217;t know what is happening in other parts of the world.</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Dan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ioan</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22403</link>
		<dc:creator>Ioan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2007 07:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-22403</guid>
		<description>Hi ,

 we are thinking about making called id spoofing available to all our customers. Do you think that we are doing something illegal ?

regards,
Ioan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi ,</p>
<p> we are thinking about making called id spoofing available to all our customers. Do you think that we are doing something illegal ?</p>
<p>regards,<br />
Ioan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dustin D. Trammell</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-20027</link>
		<dc:creator>Dustin D. Trammell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 10:09:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-20027</guid>
		<description>The short answer: No.

However, I WILL head to DC and attend ShmooCon.  Close enough? (:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The short answer: No.</p>
<p>However, I WILL head to DC and attend ShmooCon.  Close enough? (:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan York</title>
		<link>http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-19888</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan York</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:07:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voipsa.org/blog/2007/01/29/truth-in-caller-id-act-of-2007/#comment-19888</guid>
		<description>(laughing)  Are you volunteering to head to DC and teach Congress about the OSI model and the different layers of networking?  If it survives intact as you show it, I'm sure we *will* see a day when a government lawyer is arguing that "TCP/IP" denotes the entire protocol suite and the defense lawyer will be arguing that none of their signaling used TCP.  Fun, fun, fun....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(laughing)  Are you volunteering to head to DC and teach Congress about the OSI model and the different layers of networking?  If it survives intact as you show it, I&#8217;m sure we *will* see a day when a government lawyer is arguing that &#8220;TCP/IP&#8221; denotes the entire protocol suite and the defense lawyer will be arguing that none of their signaling used TCP.  Fun, fun, fun&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
