FCC Wants To Kill Burner Phones By Forcing Telecoms To Get All Customers' IDs (404media.co) 166
An anonymous reader quotes a report from 404 Media: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants to make it effectively impossible for people to buy what many call burner phones -- a phone not explicitly linked to your identity at the point of purchase -- which would impact privacy-conscious people, to domestic abuse survivors, to journalists, and many more. The FCC plans to do this by legally forcing the country's telecoms to store a wealth of personal information about essentially all phone customers, including a government issued identification number and their physical address, alarming privacy advocates and civil rights activists who compare the measures to those from authoritarian countries where it can be difficult to buy a mobile phone plan without giving up your identity.
The proposed change would drastically shake up how people obtain phone plans in the U.S., and have all sorts of privacy and cybersecurity knock-on effects. The FCC is proposing the data collection partly as a way to combat scammers, with telecoms being required to collect other information on business and foreign customers like the intended use case of their bulk phone plan purchase and their IP address. But the changes would mean telecoms collect data on all new and renewing customers, and the FCC provides a long list of other things that the collected data could help authorities with.
In a synopsis of the proposed changes, the FCC writes, "Specifically, we seek comment on requiring originating providers to, at a minimum, obtain and retain the name, physical address, government issued identification number, and an alternate telephone number of any new and renewing customer before granting access to its services." The goal of collecting this data, the FCC writes, is to deter some scammers from getting onto a telecom network in the first place, and so "enforcers will be better able to identify the scammers when they do." The FCC compares the changes to the sort of data collected by banks to prevent money laundering.
One section stresses that the newly collected data would help "law enforcement to more easily identify callers that use the network to perpetuate crimes by ensuring that voice providers have accurate and complete customer information." It goes on to ask if the data would help identify people buying and selling illicit goods; the investigation of "fraud, espionage, or influence operations that undermine national security", and "address abuse in text messaging networks." "Criminals continue to leverage the anonymity provided by phone calls and texts to defraud Americans and exploit communications networks to further other crimes," one section reads. "For decades, civil libertarians have looked overseas at authoritarian countries where the government requires people to register to get a mobile phone to ensure they can be tracked. We never thought that would happen here," Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project told 404 Media in an email. "But make no mistake: with this rulemaking, the government is contemplating taking away people's ability to get a burner phone, which will hurt low-income people, domestic violence victims, and anyone else who cares about their privacy."
The proposed change would drastically shake up how people obtain phone plans in the U.S., and have all sorts of privacy and cybersecurity knock-on effects. The FCC is proposing the data collection partly as a way to combat scammers, with telecoms being required to collect other information on business and foreign customers like the intended use case of their bulk phone plan purchase and their IP address. But the changes would mean telecoms collect data on all new and renewing customers, and the FCC provides a long list of other things that the collected data could help authorities with.
In a synopsis of the proposed changes, the FCC writes, "Specifically, we seek comment on requiring originating providers to, at a minimum, obtain and retain the name, physical address, government issued identification number, and an alternate telephone number of any new and renewing customer before granting access to its services." The goal of collecting this data, the FCC writes, is to deter some scammers from getting onto a telecom network in the first place, and so "enforcers will be better able to identify the scammers when they do." The FCC compares the changes to the sort of data collected by banks to prevent money laundering.
One section stresses that the newly collected data would help "law enforcement to more easily identify callers that use the network to perpetuate crimes by ensuring that voice providers have accurate and complete customer information." It goes on to ask if the data would help identify people buying and selling illicit goods; the investigation of "fraud, espionage, or influence operations that undermine national security", and "address abuse in text messaging networks." "Criminals continue to leverage the anonymity provided by phone calls and texts to defraud Americans and exploit communications networks to further other crimes," one section reads. "For decades, civil libertarians have looked overseas at authoritarian countries where the government requires people to register to get a mobile phone to ensure they can be tracked. We never thought that would happen here," Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst at the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project told 404 Media in an email. "But make no mistake: with this rulemaking, the government is contemplating taking away people's ability to get a burner phone, which will hurt low-income people, domestic violence victims, and anyone else who cares about their privacy."
Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:3, Insightful)
You have a button that can be pushed and they have unlimited money to push it and you're not willing to take away that money. Or if you are you are in the extreme minority.
Re:Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have a cell phone, every single movement you make is already tracked.
Realistically, this will affect very few people, because the overwhelming majority of people who have phones, which is nearly everyone, is already providing that personal data to the phone company. Most people simply don't care because they feel no need to hide anything.
Where it makes a difference is the very small number of people who do feel they have to hide something. Some for good reasons, some for bad reasons, and in many cases, which depends on who you ask.
Re:Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't understand your point. You can say that about any minority group when comparing it to a majority for any situation.
Are you saying that people who want privacy should just give it up because others who are in the majority don't care? You do understand that it's not about the people who don't care, right?
This legislation will solely affect the people who do care. Why do you have a right to dictate if someone else should have privacy or not?
Re:Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people simply don't care because they feel no need to hide anything.
I'd rephrase that as: Most people don't understand how much they have to hide, and -- because it's daunting for them to create an alternate tech ecosystem for themselves -- they psychologically push aside whatever nagging worries they have about what they might indeed want to hide.
Put another way: people are addicted to the current status quo, and trapped by their lack of tech expertise. Which is not the same as objectively self-assessing that they have nothing to hide.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
This will affect a small number of people who use burner phones for privacy. The rest are drug dealers.
I did some consulting for a major phone company. One of the network techs showed me a device that plugged into the phone network and could make truly untraceable phone calls. It was under lock and key at all times.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have a cell phone, every single movement you make is already tracked.
That's literally what this story is about.
Realistically, this will affect very few people
Realistically, this will accomplish nothing significant in the positive direction, while it will hurt a few people. In the process it will cost a lot of money. Therefore it's a shit plan.
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever I set up a new account with them, I go buy a sim, plug it in , do the verification and then days later that sim runs out, etc....
Re: (Score:2)
That is crazy overkill. There are services that just provide one off phone numbers. For example cloaked.com.
I did this recently when buying a car. Each dealer got their own email address and phone for me. When I bought my car all those points of contact ceased to exist.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, 2013 called, it wants its navel-gazing back.
Re:Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people simply don't care because they feel no need to hide anything.
Where it makes a difference is the very small number of people who do feel they have to hide something.
Most people don't need free speech because they have nothing to say.
Most people don't need guns because they have nothing to shoot.
Most people don't need to worry about housing soldiers because military personnel have taxpayer funded housing.
Most people don't need to worry about their stuff being unlawfully searched because they have nothing to hide.
Most people don't need to worry about incriminating themselves because they don't commit crimes.
Most people don't need their trials to be public because they don't get put on trial.
Most people don't need the guaranteed ability to sue someone because most people don't file lawsuits.
Most people don't need to worry about excessive bail being imposed because most people don't get arrested.
Most people don't need to worry about any of those rights being used against other rights.
Most people don't care whether a right is granted by the state or federal government.
Fortunately for those who DO find themselves in a place where the government would cause issues in these matters, a bunch of old guys a few hundred years ago had the presence of mind to realize that the point of rights isn't because "most people" need to exercise them regularly, it's to create limits so that "most people" *don't" need to exercise them regularly.
Re: (Score:3)
a bunch of old guys a few hundred years ago had the presence of mind
Most of them weren't old guys. In 1776 Jefferson was 33, Hamilton was 21, Madison was 25, Adams was 40, and Washington was 44. Only Franklin, at 70, was old.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Where it makes a difference is the very small number of people who do feel they have to hide something.
Or better restated as "people who don't want to (be forced to) share their information."
Re:Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:4, Insightful)
"If you have nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" [wikipedia.org] has long been established as a failed argument.
I accept that if the government wants to know something about me, they have the resources to discover it. I do not accept that I should surrender my rights and freedoms to make that easier.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Still living in your head rent free, time to mod him up again just for you.
Re: (Score:2)
You know you can just turn off your gps? I got in the habit of doing it because it saves a lot of battery life. Same with Wi-Fi ....
Noting that your cell phone is otherwise tracked by the cell service itself via the towers it's connected to and near. As you pointed out, though, third parties obtaining that information usually requires a warrant - or perhaps a data-sharing (business) contract.
Re: (Score:3)
We have had rules like this in the UK for a long time. People buy SIMs, activate them in their own name, and sell them on eBay.
Re: (Score:2)
We have had rules like this in the UK for a long time. People buy SIMs, activate them in their own name, and sell them on eBay.
Is there some sort of weasel-out for people who do that and then someone buys one and uses it do hoard CSAM or threaten MPs or something?
I hate this proposed ruling and everything the Epstein-class cunts who want it passed stand for, but it just seems really dangerous to circumvent it in that way.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know. They probably register the SIM to a company or something, so that when the police get the details back it's obvious that it's not an individual. Or maybe they just wing it and by now the police know their name and not to bother interviewing them again.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh. USA will probably learn from that if they get it passed, and make it a felony to sell one or something.
At the very least it'll get both buyer and seller on one of the numerous Lists whose existence herald a vibrant, healthy, free society.
Re: (Score:2)
So is an American I am very close to becoming a fascist nation. We are One More term of trump away from that. JD Vance would do it too but I think he would probably lose unless the Democrats fuck up again and run another unlikable woman because they insist on it in which case even JD Vance could be president...
So I'm at the point where I am seriously
Re: Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:2)
Re: Every single movement you make will be tracked (Score:3, Funny)
This move will absolutely DESTROY the laziest plot-device in modern crime shows on TV today!
Crime dramas can burn a good five minute of airtime 'researching' the model phone the suspect used and then canvassing the area stores and reviewing shipping records to identify who bought the burner phone used in the crime...
This will kill television!
Re: (Score:3)
The California High-Speed Rail project is plagued by inflation due to being a multi-decade project, land acquisition issues related to eminent domain, abuse of CEQA, obstruction by railroads against sharing or even crossing their right of way, utility relocation delays, and project's early reliance on consultants instead of growing their own in-house expertise from the beginning.
Not much can be done about inflation except completing the project more quickly. Land acquisition and environmental clearances are
Re: (Score:2)
No, the Prop 1A voter guide gave an estimate of $45 billion in 2006 dollars, which is $71.9 billion in 2025 dollars.
The $126.2 billion is in year of expenditure dollars, most of which is still in the future, so let's call it $100 billion in 2025 dollars.
So in constant year dollars, the price went up from $71.9 billion to $100 billion. So there's a little room for improvement.
Re: (Score:2)
Go away, troll. This is a list of structures that have been built so far. [buildhsr.com]
Privacy is long since gone (Score:4, Interesting)
Every web site needs your phone number, every online order... Businesses don't take cash any more. Every web site tracks you and sells data to the brokers. Only Linux installs without an email address and phone number for 2FA and password recovery. Video games, every chat app (maybe not mumble?), every birdhouse camera, even the freaking doorbells want an account! Eye glasses are doing face recognition! [wired.com]
This fight was lost decades ago, and now we have to live with it.
Re:Privacy is long since gone (Score:4, Informative)
Only Linux installs without an email address and phone number for 2FA and password recovery.
That isn't actually true. The only one, perhaps (and I doubt that, but I haven't played with, for instance, BSD, in quite a while) that does so by default, but even Windows can be installed without providing any identifying information if you know how. (Using it, of course, is another matter.)
Re: (Score:2)
" even Windows can be installed without providing any identifying information if you know how"
for now
Re: (Score:2)
Same could be said of Linux.
And has been.
Especially in light of recent laws requiring exactly that for all operating systems in quite a few jurisdictions.
There was a time when telephones did not exist (Score:2)
If this proposal moves forward, I will be looking to see what can be done without a telephone in my life.
Re: (Score:3)
There was a time when telephones were rare but society functioned anyway. More slowly.
If this proposal moves forward, I will be looking to see what can be done without a telephone in my life.
there was a time when society functioned without birth certificates, passports, bank accounts, etc.
i suppose that's still possible if you decide to live like the Unabomber
Re: (Score:2)
100% of drivers have government issued photo ID while significantly less than 100% of non-drivers do. Make it 100% for both groups as they do in other countries with voter ID laws and then there wouldn't be a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Because many people do in fact lack state-issued photo ID. Ignoring this fact won't make it go away.
burner phone elsewhere will always exist ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe I'm confused, but I think that FCC rules will not impact the verification of burner phone elsewhere in the world.
Which, I suspect is where much of the spam/fraud/etc originates.
Voice over IP from elsewhere will always exist, thus this isn't the protection that the FCC wishes to create.
Or am I confused (I am 80 years old, and long retired from tech)?
Re:burner phone elsewhere will always exist ... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:burner phone elsewhere will always exist ... (Score:5, Insightful)
They also won't impact their use by scammers:
Percentage of scammers affected by the proposed rule: 0%
Percentage of domestic abuse victims affected by the proposed rule: 100%
Not saying that this is deliberate, but that this is one of those simple, obvious solutions that's completely wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First understand, I'm a certifiable idiot, so my question is purely from not experiencing anything like this.
How are burner phones a vital tool to be called out in the bill? I mean, I sympathize with victims. I just don't get the crucial part where "Their lives are ruined without burner phones!"
Anyone can explain it to this idiot?
Re:burner phone elsewhere will always exist ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Surprisingly similar to gun control.
Percentage of criminals affected by the proposed rule: 0%
Percentage of honest citizens affected by the proposed rule: 100%
The other thing I noticed is the Alternate phone number they want. So they want me to have two phones now?
Re: (Score:2)
You're not confused. That's spot on.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe I'm confused, but I think that FCC rules will not impact the verification of burner phone elsewhere in the world.
I've never had a burner phone from outside the USA work in the USA and I've never had a burner phone from within the USA work outside the USA. Hope that clears things up for you.
Re: burner phone elsewhere will always exist ... (Score:2)
Probably would work in Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying [eff.org]
Even if it's a burner phone in India or someplace, if they call the US, it all gets routed through NSA facilities.
Re: (Score:2)
time to power up the walkie-talkies!
Is this actually a thing? (Score:4)
It's not like bad prepaid phones are expensive; but, especially if you are actually burning them with any frequency, they aren't really cheap unless you are doing some sort of scamming rather more lucrative than spamming people about nonexistent aftermarket warranties with sub 1% response rates. Are actual SIMs, or even actual phones, remotely competitive with the VOIP equivalent of bulletproof hosting if you want an in to the phone network?
In a similar vein; what's the breakdown of phone-using criminals between people who actually go to the counter and pay cash, where the FCC now wants them carded, vs. the various PO box companies that tend to show up on weird phone charges? It's not a surprise that they are running with the excuse; but the idea that telcom enabled crime is actually substantially the domain of something as clunky as burner phones/SIMs, rather than more efficient services that nobody cares enough to chase down, seems very implausible.
This is how dumb government agencies are (Score:5, Insightful)
Dumb, or planning. (Score:2)
Phones are illegal in prisons yet anyone with cash can get one.
And you wonder why they want to make anonymous phone registrations, illegal. Would/Should be rather hard for a registered inmate to get one after that.
You dont even need a phone if you can access the internet and no ID is required for that.
No ID is required..yet. Way to go all spoiler alert on their plan..
Re: Dumb, or planning. (Score:2)
An ID'd phone would just result in getting a guy who buys and resells prepaid phones. And because he's not a retailer, he wouldn't be covered by this law.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
they are simply creating a market(sound familiar?) whereby associates or tech savy groups will funnel or create new devices.
It isn't the phone that is the "burner" part of the system, it is the authentication to the network by the SIM/eSIM. It is the IMSI that authenticates you on a cell network, not an IMEI, however IMEIs can be blocked. To imagine the implementation, think of Verizon/T-Mobile having a massive database with 10s or 100s of millions of entries indicating which SIMs/eSIMs are allowed on their network. If you come along with a new phone called a KillyPhone and try to connect to a base station, unless you can authen
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Criminals is the excuse, an AI Surveillance Police State is the point.
Everything in the rule is sensible for a dictator.
so now 7-11 needs your SSN to buy an phone card? (Score:4, Interesting)
so now 7-11 needs your SSN to buy an phone card?
Re: (Score:2)
and when the sub contracted phone store loses your (Score:2)
and when the sub contracted phone store loses your identity?
Welcome! (Score:3)
This is mandatory in most of Europe since ... ever!
Anyway, remember that they can know where you are and who you call to/get called by anyway. This is not a plot theory, this is a fact deriving from the underlying technology.
Re: Welcome! (Score:2)
Not "ever", but 2010-ish.
Re:Welcome! (Score:5, Informative)
What are you talking about? Buying a phone without leaving personal details is possible at any electronics/computer/phone store in the Netherlands (country in Europe I live in). And pre-paid sim cards you can buy with cash in the supermarket.
Re: (Score:3)
"Most of" allows exceptions. More than two thirds of EU residents live in countries which mandate SIM registration, and of the larger non-EU European countries Russia and Turkey do; the UK and Ukraine don't; without doing a full calculation, I suspect that the two thirds threshold is met for the whole of geographic Europe too.
wasn't about tracking (Score:2)
True for smartphones, though not per se, they have to be on for tracking. The original reason was to be able to prevent harassment.
USA chooses authoritarianism, again (Score:5, Insightful)
What does this mean? Why would a child have 2 phones? Why would a single adult have 2 phones?
What about arresting scammers: I think that would deter them greatly? Not collecting their fake name and fake second number for police to remember.
If the US government wanted less crime, they would protect the privacy of phone users, not become another data broker. If they really cared, they would not allow every law enforcement employee to demand the details of any phone without a warrant (CALEA, 1994).
The US government is demanding the power to spy on more people. That's a cruel move in any country. In the USA, such authoritarianism always ends badly.
Re: (Score:2)
What does this mean? Why would a child have 2 phones? Why would a single adult have 2 phones?
Quite a few kids "need" two phones these days: a crappy one, which gets proudly and visibly locked away before the exam, and the second one for the actual cheating during the exam. There are similar situations for adults, where a second phone can come in handy.
A second phone number may also be helpful for content producers for social media, or any other public facing and potentially controversial person. And yes, in this case you don't want both phone numbers to be associated with the same name.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Modifying emergency powers to include accountability would also include restrictions on surveillance activities, whi
Scope creep (Score:3)
The section of law they are referring to says:
"Take affirmative, effective measures to prevent new and renewing customers from using its network to originate illegal calls, including knowing its customers and exercising due diligence in ensuring that its services are not used to originate illegal traffic. "
The KYC requirement is explicitly for preventing use of network to originate illegal traffic yet they are asking:
"We seek comment on whether enhanced KYC requirements can prevent or deter criminal use of communication networks that do not involve illegal calls."
The law does not say KYC is for purposes other than illegal traffic yet they are apparently contemplating exactly that nonetheless. Apparently FCC believes it also has the power to make laws.
OK - I will go non-WOKE about this one (Score:2)
Almost all telephone spam comes from two sources, India and Real Estate "agents" who often have strong Hindu accents. How in (heavily censored profanity) does the FCC think IT'S rules about burner phones will affect this?
At the worst it will kill one of my most effective telephone spam filters by removing a key signature.
{^_^}
Other respectable countries collect user IDs (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe you have working caller ID in Germany? We don't here in the USA, in that it can be spoofed easily. The telcos can stop it but choose not to.
Re: Other respectable countries collect user IDs (Score:2)
10% of the difference comes from your laws. The other 90% of the difference comes from Americans being a significantly more desirable victim pool than Germans.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe Germany is run by tyrants and yet collects basic identity data
I'd put this more strongly. AFAICT, and I've been involved in various privacy-sensitive international standards processes, Germany is the most privacy-protective jurisdiction in the world. In general, if you have a problem that creates a tension between privacy and enforcement, one of the best things you can do is go find out how Germany handles it. Their solutions aren't always good, but if you don't like their approach you're far more likely to walk away shaking your head at their excessive focus on pr
Spam (Score:2)
I doubt this has much to do with mass surveillance and more to do with spammers and scammers using US based mobile phone farms with burner sims to run their business now, instead of the bulk connections they used to use.
It will probably boil down to "credit card or fuck off". You want central repositories of trust to do identity checks, because cross checking and possibly physically checking documents and history on location is not trivial, in a non anglo country that will be government with a government is
I hope they DO know (Score:3)
..that 196 countries sell simcards that work in the US, even if death threats and hostage calls cost a bit more?
Re: (Score:2)
You thing an SMS ransom demand for 5 million would ruin the kidnapper?
If they are smart, they just use it ONCE, not keep it for 1000 minutes to talk with their mom.
Should rather be based on SIM cards or numbers (Score:2)
People will happily sell their old phones for as low as $10. You can probably buy old, usable phones by weight.
Any system based on tracing guilty people by phone purchaser in any scale and with automated means, would identify countless innocent people.
In my country there's no registration for buying phones, but strict ID requirements for SIM cards. This means spam calls are mostly from visibly foreign numbers. Numbers must be kept up to date with a subscription, numbers won't be thrown away.
constitution should be a "living document" (Score:2)
That phrase gets tossed around from time to time and this is why. The only reason we don't have warrantless searches and other intensely invasive government surveillance right now is it's specifically banned in the US Constitution. But of course the founding fathers knew nothing of cell phones, so this one is fair game.
Unfortunately for us, the Constitution, which the founding fathers envisioned as a "living document", one that was periodically updated to address new developments, only very rarely gets up
Re: constitution should be a "living document" (Score:2)
Oh look the dipshits who get mod points haven't heard of Snowden either
How about... (Score:2)
Blocking and ending all spoofing that hides the number a call is coming from first
Won’t do what they are claiming. (Score:2)
FREEDOM! (Score:2)
They'll scream about various things the BIG EVIL GOVERNMENT is taking away your rights and privacy. At the same time they do stuff like this that strips it away without a whisper.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Washington State they scream ONLY THE GOVERNMENT CAN SAVE YOU while taking away your rights and privacy while ignoring the State constitution.
The quest for power is a constant. The difference between theocracy and socialism is less than you think.
Wait, "hurt low-income people"? (Score:2)
Alternate phone number?? (Score:2)
Wait, they require you to provide a phone number to get a phone number? So people who don't already have one can't ever get one? :P
fail (Score:2)
Big Trump supporter that I am
Never forget that... (Score:2)
Brendan Carr is a dummy. He's such a dummy!
Doesn't work (Score:3)
I don't support this - but it's interesting... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bring back phone booths! lol
There was a guy walking down the sidewalk the other day in a Superman T-shirt. I wonder if he ever found a place to change.
I guess you could just pay a homeless person... (Score:2)
There seem to be plenty (and getting more) of these in the US today. There is no way the utterly greedy telcos would stop selling phones to them.
Good move (Score:2)
Gee, and here I thought... (Score:3)
Doesn't affect the rich, so why not. Right? (Score:2)
What exactly is so terrible about that? (Score:2)
Registering your ID with your number is totally unacceptable - why?
Re: (Score:2)
You're right, we should give them our bank's routing number and our bank account number as well. X(
What does this prevent? (Score:2)
"We never thought it would happen here." (Score:2)
Famous last words of ineffective protectors since the dawn of time.
No Telecom will keep your personal identity secret (Score:2)
How many customers have had their personally identifiable information lost or stolen from AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, or other telecom carriers? Pretty much all of us by now. The government morons who push laws like these should face daily personal insults from their constituents.
Re: (Score:2)
And how many phone scammers (especially those phone centers in India) who prey on the elderly are forced to accurately identify themselves when calling my parents? I can't tell you how many times I've fielded these calls for my parents from fake Microsoft Support, Diabetes Equipment Center, Medicare verification department, and today, from the Veterans Administration Service. The FCC should be protecting citizens, not assisting billionaire-owned corporations like Oracle and Palantir.
Re:FCC rescinds order- (Score:4, Insightful)
those "friends" will always be exempt. the rules are for thee & me