<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<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>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:11:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<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-page-1/#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-page-1/#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-page-1/#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&#039;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-page-1/#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&#039;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&#039;m not sure as a society we yet understand that change in the trust model to which we&#039;ve become accustomed.

Now, it&#039;s pretty clear that some members of the US Congress think that it should be illegal (at least &quot;with the intent to defraud or cause harm&quot;) but I don&#039;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-page-1/#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-page-1/#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-page-1/#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&#039;m sure we *will* see a day when a government lawyer is arguing that &quot;TCP/IP&quot; 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>
