This is not as off topic as the subject suggests.
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 10:18:17PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
There is no privacy need to fake a caller ID number.
Yes, there is. There's an interesting balance for locations that block
unidentified calls, such as lots of corporate and business lines and people
who are harassed, and people who need to not use their own Caller-ID
information for privacy reasons.
"Location": We will not answer your call, unless we know who you are
"People": I want to call you up, I know you don't want to talk to
me unless you think you know who I am so I will forge my
identity and not only remain anonymous but also pretend
to be someone else
Seriously, I wonder why I would want to accept this forgery at all
and for whatever reason.
If people want to remain anonymous, go to a payphone. Do not claim
to be someone else.
If you are afraid "Location" will use caller-id to return the call
or even to harras, using a spoofed caller-id is anti-social (to use
an understatement).
Forging the caller-id of my neighbour when making a bomb threat is
worse than using his phone to do it. The neighbour can make reasonably
sure I won't be using his phone. Maybe not the first time, but he'll
be very alert not to let me use his phone again. Spoofing caller-id
is something he cannot prevent. There is NO EXCUSE to allow spoofed
caller-id. I think it should be a criminal act to do it, to allow
others to do it, to help others to do it and to let people get away
with it.
Alex
--
I ask you to respect any "Reply-To" and "Mail-Follow-Up" headers. If
you reply to me off-list, you'd better tell me you're doing so. If
you don't, and if I reply to the list, that's your problem, not mine.