On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
*WRONG*. Suicide lines, AIDS support call centers, teen sex information
lines, Planned Parenthood, drug clinics, government whistle-blowing
agencies, dating services, and other services where the anonymity of the
caller is important for their own protection all seem to relish the idea
once you explain its details to them.
Be as anonymous as you like. That isn't what gets peoples panties in a
wad. Caller-ID blocking is so popular in California that _more than 50%_
of household lines are blocked. Nobody but PacBell cares (they care
because it is hard to sell caller-id as value added itme when most phone
lines block sending it).
But emphatically *DON'T LIE* about who you are.
That is a whole different ball of wax.
It still presents a security issue for
the Caller-ID mangling service itself, but it's potentially quite useful
itself. It's especially useful to be able to forge the calling ID to the
number of some organization that accepts the responsibility, such as a
dating service or the suicide hotline itself.
Any decent PBX can handle call 'redirection' with the same effect. And it
keeps _responsibility_ for said redirection.
Forging a third party's ID is not the same thing.
I agree that it's certainly abusable, but given that it's so easily forged,
I hate to see people think they can rely on it or to be frightened from
making a vital call because they don't trust the person they're calling not
to use the Caller-ID to backtrack the call.
Caller-ID blocking is available from your local phone company for
*absolutely free*. On either a complete or per call basis.
That is a _very_ poor argument for permitting forging Caller-ID.
And (as anyone who has looked into this) knows it would do nothing for
ANI - which is available for any "800" number. Such as those used by
crisis hotlines.
Use of forgery is from the realm of theft by deception.
--
Benjamin Franz