
Nexus phones now identify suspected spam callers - bishnu
https://plus.google.com/+Nexus/posts/PLsxmDRUd4K
======
ohazi
Every time I get a call from a number I don't recognize I do this ridiculous
dance where I try to _Google the number_ (usually on my phone) before the
ringing stops. If it shows up on enough spam caller sites (whocallsme, etc), I
don't answer and add the number to my "SPAM" contact that currently contains
about a billion phone numbers.

It's ridiculous that it took Google so long to implement such a basic feature
on their phones.

~~~
deathanatos
I find Googling phone numbers to return nothing but junk sites trying to leach
ad revenue off of those queries, with little in the way of actual information.

I just don't answer the call. If I don't know who you are, and you can't be
bothered to leave a message … why should I care?

Empirically, half of upstate New York seems to think my number is the one
they're looking for. Back before I stopped answering calls, I had to
_repeatedly_ tell one unknown number over SMS that this wasn't the number they
were looking for. _Over SMS._ I hope that that number didn't have a
smartphone, as my reply of "This isn't the number you're looking for." would
quite probably have been right there on the screen as he typed in the next
message, again to the wrong number.

I actually have a few of the more common wrong numbers in my contacts list,
and some of them still call regularly. (Never leaving a message.)

~~~
derefr
Frequently, I'll be told after an appointment (doctor, accountant, etc.) to
expect a call from someone, but won't be told what number they'll be calling
from. Since whatever information they want to tell me is Confidential™, they
won't bother to leave me a voicemail with a single distinguishing detail,
either, instead just saying "Please call us back at [number], we have
important information to discuss." Which is... exactly the same message the
telemarketers leave.

~~~
johnm1019
This is important for some people in vulnerable situations who don't want
someone else to know they're going to a doctor. "Significant others" screening
calls and googling the numbers (even w/o answering the phone) could lead to a
bad situation.

~~~
cmiles74
There must be a better solution, this can't be working well for most of their
customers and sounds more the sort of nonfunctional process a lawyer would
come up with.

I understand that there are people in vulnerable situations, but that is not
the norm. Perhaps a check-box on the HIPAA form that indicates they need
"confidential voicemail and SMS messages" would be a better solution.

~~~
FungalRaincloud
Agreed upon code words in the message. I had a friend who was told that if she
received a call regarding a particular sensitive matter, the person on the
phone would start the call (whether she answered or not) with "Hey, it's
Jenny" If someone was listening in to the call/message, it'd be easy to just
say "Sorry, I think you have the wrong number."

Trouble is, sometimes people feel uncomfortable bringing up the subject, so it
takes the professional who is calling bringing it up to see any benefit.

I do not think that a checkbox is appropriate - at any point, you might become
concerned with the privacy of a matter, or you might not realize that privacy
is a concern for you. For instance, consider someone who accidentally listens
to a message stating that they are now pregnant, at work. Their employer now
has advanced notice of a pregnancy, but no knowledge of the employee's
intentions with regard to work. That is going to change the dynamic of the
workplace, even if the employer does not intend anything nefarious. I really
think the only graceful solution to this is agreed code words.

~~~
cmiles74
We can only expect so much from the people who work at these offices. It's
probably a bad idea to listen to voicemail messages at work via speakerphone;
if someone does do this I think it's on them to deal with the repercussions...
It doesn't strike me as reasonable to put the onus on the person leaving the
message. Voicemail is tied to a phone or requires a PIN number and this seems
to meet the bare minimum security requirements.

I agree that code words may be more effective than simply checking a box, but
I maintain my position that it should be opt-in. I don't want to have to
remember which code words mean what, or which office use code words, etc. I
use my phone and email in a secure and responsible manner; explanatory text is
my preference.

~~~
FungalRaincloud
It certainly would seem like it's your fault if someone overhears a sensitive
message, if you know it's a sensitive message. But what if you don't know it's
sensitive? What if you thought your last message was something you wanted to
share? Or, what if your doctor transposes your number, and calls and leaves
the message on someone else's phone? Even if you've opted in to have
information exposed on your voicemail, you'd still have a case for a HIPAA
violation, in that case.

You're right, of course, that it's your information, and if you want to have
it treated less sensitively, that's your decision. But your doctor will likely
want no part in that, and will probably prefer wholeheartedly that you do what
you want with that information once it is in your possession.

What would be interesting is establishing a secure communication channel for
medical information like this. For instance, some sort of encrypted email,
where HIPAA violations were not so much of a concern, because you could
reasonably assume that no one could easily accidentally send the information
to the wrong client, and that the client had sole access to the information.
Such things come with their own concerns, though.

There is probably a better way of doing things, but I don't think it's all
that hard to remember a code word. Especially since you can leave a callback
number, preventing the client from needing to know who the code word was from.

~~~
cmiles74
I think I agree with you to some point. There have been a couple of
suggestions and it's unfair of me to attribute them to you.

My concern is with a physician's office (or a bank, etc.) calling from a phone
that does not provide Caller ID information and leaving a message that goes
something like: "This is a message for you, please call us back at your
earliest convenience." This would result in a call that I would ignore,
followed by a voicemail that I would also ignore. Effectively it would mean
that there would be no phone communication between myself and this office,
bank, etc.

In my opinion, when you provide a bank or physician's office with your cell
phone number and authorize them to contact you via that method, you are
agreeing to let them leave the minimum required information. In my opinion, I
need to know (1) who is leaving the message and (2) is it important. In a
pinch, I will settle for (1). Without either, it may as well be static on the
phone for all of the information it conveys. I disagree that I am allowing
these offices to treat my information "less sensitively". On the contrary,
it's my responsibility to treat my end of the communication channel
sensitively.

A code word is an interesting idea, but people are pretty poor at remembering
arbitrary information (on the whole). It's common for many people to use the
same password for every website, since they have trouble memorizing more than
a couple at a time. Code words, I fear, would have the same issue. People who
don't need a code workd would forget it and they'd just be confused with the
message; I think it would need to be opt-in for those who cannot secure their
own side of the communication channel (voicemail, email, etc.)

Some of the electronic medical record (EMR) systems that have a public facing
web interface do provide a more secure method of communicating with clinician
or their office. In my experience these often mimic email and are secured via
SSL, they require the typical username and password (or PIN) combination.
These will probably become more popular, but I expect clinicians will still
fall back to phone calls if the information is time sensitive.

For those who insist on listening to voicemail via speakerphone, it seems like
the smart move is to ask the physician to contact them only through a secure
website or email and never via cell phone.

------
cmurf
I think it's ridiculous you have to have a Nexus phone to get this capability.
Anyone with a Google account and Android should be able to get this
functionality.

Right now with Google Voice I get a dozen hang up calls per day, it's always
from a different number. When I don't answer, Ive got a dozen 2 second long
voice mails. I used to spend a lot of time setting these to spam or being
blocked, but between Google Voice and Hangouts simply asinine and beyond
incompetent integration where some calls show up in Google Voice but not
Hangouts and vice versa, I'm losing interest.

So recently I just decided to make the default behavior for the Google Voice
number not ring any of my phones or Hangouts, but set up contact groups where
friends and family should ring through. Well that's not working, I'm still
getting spam and hangup calls, and some friends ring through, others don't,
and client calls don't.

It's really craptastic.

~~~
codeka
It's because other manufacturers replace the Nexus dialer with their own app.

But you can download the Nexus dialer from the Play Store now:
[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.dialer&hl=en)

~~~
AdmiralAsshat
The app is only available to Nexus devices. If you try to load that page on a
non-Nexus phone, the page will show an error indicating that it is "not
compatible" with your device.

~~~
Lammy
It shows as compatible with my Note 4 and installed fine.

~~~
nickonline
Not compatible with my S6

------
saghul
Honest question: are spam calls common in the US? I don't remember when / if I
got any in Spain, Netherlands or UK (places I've lived and had cellphones for
a prolonged time), I do remember, however, that when I managed to score a US
number with Google Voice I'd regularly get weird spammy voicemails.

If that is the case, I wonder why that is!

~~~
gadders
I get PPI and ambulance chasing car insurance calls all the time in the UK.

~~~
Symbiote
I've had the same UK mobile number for... 16 years, and I get perhaps one spam
call per year.

As far as I know, numbers aren't recycled, so maybe the number is in such an
old range that spammers don't bother calling it. I'm careful about who I give
the number to, but I do share it.

~~~
gadders
I've had mine 20 years.I probably get 1-2 calls a month, some of which I dodge
using True Caller.

------
douche
Turning the ringer off also works.

I don't get talking on the phone. It's the lowest quality form of
communication - it's ephemeral, and unlike actual face-to-face communications,
all nuance and body language goes out the window. Not to mention the all-too-
often piss-poor audio quality, mics that don't work half the time, and the
"Can you hear me now? What was the last thing you heard?" and "Sorry, I was on
mute" dances.

~~~
necessity
Some things are too long to type.

~~~
douche
I've yet to see anything that can't be more clearly, unambiguously, and
quickly expressed in text or perhaps with a picture.

If it's taking too long to type, my suggestion would be to get better at
typing, or distill out the wheat from the chaff of what you're trying to say.
That's what really drives me up the wall with speech - the information density
is typically incredibly low, and too often people let noises tumble out of
their face-holes without trying to piece together a coherent thought. I
realize that's harsh, but I've lost patience for rambling, stream-of-
conscience external monologues. Which promptly dissolve back into the hot air
from whence they came, since there is not a readily reviewable, indexed,
searchable record created automatically in the process of such bloviation.

~~~
res0nat0r
I'm sure speaking that response vs. typing that would have taken a lot less
time. ;)

~~~
grawlinson
A few minutes of "um, uh, ... _rustling papers_ yes, I need uh, 20 of uhhhhh"
vs a simple written message that's short, sweet and straight to the point?

Most phone conversations seem to be more of the former.

------
uptown
I get 'em all. Almost never answer, and block every number. I've tracked the
origin of a few of them down. Found the personal cell phone of the CEO of one
of the companies that was behind one daily call that changed numbers everyday.
That was a fu conversation, and it did stop the call, but hopefully if both
Google and Apple implement this (as is planned in iOS10) it'll end this avenue
of abuse.

~~~
bglazer
Can you explain how you got the CEO's cell phone number? That sounds pretty
amusing, honestly.

------
dredmorbius
Phone spam has all but killed phones. Pervasive surveillance has done the
rest.

Maybe not for everyone. Yet.

But where a phone was for a time a liberating device, it's become what many of
its early (and I'm talking about late 19c and early 20c critics said, not late
20/early 21) critics claimed: an insistant, rude, inconsiderate, and noxious
nuisance.

A phone can ring at any time, from a call initiated anywhere in the world. Low
(or zero) costs mean the caller has very little reason _not_ to call, and even
a very slight probability of a positive financial return can support all
measure of spam.

The fact that carrying a phone subjects you to sub-minute location tracking,
puts an always-on microphone in your pocket, and leaks your identity,
location, habits, and interests to the highest bidder (or marginally competent
hacker) makes _that_ a non-starter.

For the past several years, I've simply _not_ carried a phone when I could
possibly manage to, and the liberation is tremendous. (The trauma of having
been on-call for years may or may not have contributed to my intense distaste
for the devices.)

There are other options -- virtually _any_ modern electronic kit has multiple
messaging capabilities, from email to IRC to various messaging applications to
full VOIP and voice/video messaging. Carrying a non-phone Android tablet
affords some utility without the tremendous disutilities of a phone.

But, and this speaks to recent pain, the device (a Samsung Tab A 9.7" WiFi-
only) is itself locked down -- not rootable, bootloader locked, and so far as
I can tell, no CyanogenMod images available for it. I'd bought it whilst
travelling under some duress, as an affordable and, so far as I could tell,
least-bad option.

But without the ability to actually control the system, I'm still subject to
spam, crud, poor management tools (simply being able to allocate and manage
storage rationally appears beyonds its meagre capabilities), etc.

What Google are offering is very little, very late. And the fact that other
telcos are failing to step up and address the massive disutilities of their
projects is another immense failing of the market. Realising these are the
same unspeakable idiots who'll be shoving Internet of Shit devices down our
every orifice makes me cry for the future.

------
ghouse
Tipping point for me last week: I now receive more spam phone calls than I do
spam email.

~~~
nickysielicki
Same here, does anyone know what the heck is going on? Why has there been such
a surge in the past year or two?

My uncle was an early supporter of Ooma and my parents have a box that
provides their landline number that they've had for 25+ years, and they don't
pay anything in terms of a monthly fee.

In spite of how great of a deal it is, the spam calls have gotten to be so bad
that my parents are considering getting rid of it. It's not worth the hassle,
even when it's essentially free. At least half the calls that come in are
spam.

(Quick aside: Ooma deserves praise for their product. I hope they succeed and
can pivot properly to other products as telephones naturally die. They
contribute back to the FOSS Asterisk project and their products are reliable.

Here's a cool blog post I've come across where someone hooks their Ooma box
into a local server running Asterisk. You could probably do some really cool
home-automation with this:
[http://www.adrianandgenese.com/blogger/2010/04/23/how-to-
set...](http://www.adrianandgenese.com/blogger/2010/04/23/how-to-setup-
asterisk-with-ooma-voip-and-a-linksys-spa-3102/) )

~~~
enjo
The Do Not Call list at some point simply stopped working. I file several
complaints a week, and haven't even gotten a response in months.

~~~
profmonocle
The DNC list is only effective against legitimate organizations because the
only weapon it has are fines. Most of the spam calls I get are credit card
scams, free cruise scams, etc. These people are already committing fraud, so
DNC fines aren't going to deter them.

------
est
The function existed in Chinese phone/ROMs for quite some time now. Some of
the intercepters will display which type of spam, place it originates and the
exact business entity name of the caller.

~~~
Johnny555
That doesn't work (well, not reliably) in the USA because the name/number
presented in the caller ID can have little relation to the actual name/number
of the caller.

I wonder if Google is doing anything beyond simply crowdsourcing spam reports
based on CallerID, at least for Google Voice numbers since they own that
network so may have access to some data (ANI?) that's not normally available
on regular phone lines?

------
pavel_lishin
What's the procedure for removing yourself from the suspected spam caller
database if you're incorrectly placed on it?

~~~
cmdrfred
I'd take a 1 in 10 false postive ratio over a questionable 'pay for removal'
system.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Would you take a 1/100 if you were guaranteed to be initially marked as a
spammer?

~~~
unprepare
yes. I dont make outgoing calls to people i dont know.

------
givinguflac
[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.truecaller...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.truecaller&hl=en)

------
blackoil
Isn't Truecaller doing this and more on all Android/WP phones for years?

~~~
Johnny555
But that means giving yet another company access to all of your phone call and
SMS data. Since Google already has that information, I'd rather that they
provide this service rather than letting a 3rd party scan my calls and SMS's.

~~~
cronjobber
> Since Google already has that information

Sure?

~~~
Johnny555
Yes, quite sure since I use Google Voice so all of my calls and SMS's go
through their infrastructure. And even if I didn't use GV, I use their dialer,
SMS, and contacts app, so they already can already see all of my calls, SMS's,
and contacts.

------
ersii
Does anyone know more on how this works? The original post references that
"Caller ID must be enabled".

Is this feature going to send all my incoming phone call numbers to Google -
to compare it against a list of "known/suspected spammers"?

Will this only work in the United States or will it work internationally?

~~~
asher_
Called ID looks up phone numbers and replaces them with the names of
businesses. It does send the phone number to Google to look it up, and it does
work internationally. I've lived in both Australia and Vietnam with great
results.

The feature has been available for a long time and is fantastic in my opinion.
When an unknown number dials it gets replaced on the screen in ~1-2 seconds
with the business name, which is really useful.

------
Animats
This means your incoming call data goes to Google. Previously, only the
carrier saw it. Now they can use that info for marketing purposes.

------
allendoerfer
Spam calling seems to be a big deal in the US. Not at all where I live. Is it
because of different features of the network or because there are cheap
English speakers in other countries?

~~~
honkhonkpants
It's because the relevant regulatory apparatus has been captured by the to-be-
regulated industry in the USA. There's no technological gap that prevents us
from dropping a smart bomb on telemarketers within minutes of their first spam
call. We just don't care.

~~~
cmurf
I got a call from someone who told me I had a virus and had to install some
software so they could fix it. I told him he should find a new job instead of
trying to steal other people's money. He repeated his script. I repeated mine.
And after the third time he went off script and asked me, "can you tell me
where I can find a better job?"

So there you go. Money making good people do bad things again.

------
dilemma
My Windows Phone already does this!

~~~
simula67
From a quick Googling it seems Windows phones allow you to block calls from a
particular number : [http://www.windowscentral.com/how-to-block-calls-nokia-
lumia](http://www.windowscentral.com/how-to-block-calls-nokia-lumia)

Google's implementation also warns you about potential spam callers. Google
maintains a list of spam callers and you can report phone numbers to this
list.

~~~
dilemma
Windows Phone identifies spam callers and lets you report numbers as spam.
Like I said, my Windows Phone already does this!

------
bikamonki
If you are an Android user and you like programming you MUST install
Automagic. It is, by far, the most useful app in my phone. You can automate
pretty much any task on your droid, like say: if number from incoming call is
in whitelist send me alert, if not hang and reply with sms "Send name and
number I will call back".

------
kqr2
sonic.net uses nomorobo to filter out spam callers and it seems to be pretty
effective.

[https://www.nomorobo.com/](https://www.nomorobo.com/)

------
fapjacks
I use Extreme Call Blocker for Android. Best three dollars I ever spent in my
life. My phone doesn't make any noise or visual interruptions unless the
number is in my contacts list. Additionally, it answers the phone and
immediately hangs it up, which prevents the number from going to voicemail. I
_adore_ knowing that strange numbers are essentially calling a sinkhole when
they dial my number.

~~~
jacquesm
Until some stranger attempts to call you to tell you your kid cycled under bus
#9 and is on the way to the hospital.

~~~
fapjacks
I guess that'll teach my imaginary kid to look both ways before crossing the
street.

~~~
jacquesm
Unless you're an orphan with no known family feel free to substitute any other
relative.

------
agildehaus
Caller ID can be spoofed rather easily. This will only lead to more spoofing.

And are political calls and surveys considered spam? I certainly consider them
spam.

~~~
dexterdog
They are, but only if they are not paying the spam detection service. It's
kind of like the BBB.

------
Animats
Caller ID info ought to appear with a data quality indicator. The trust value
of the least-trusted SS7 node in the chain is the data quality.

------
jmspring
Will this include unsolicited google adwords calls?

------
beefsack
In Australia, I've signed up my numbers to the Do Not Call Register[1] and
it's actually been pretty effective. I actually couldn't tell you the last
time I had an unsolicited call like that.

[1] [https://www.donotcall.gov.au/](https://www.donotcall.gov.au/)

------
harryf
In Switzerland this has been possible for quite some time now on both iOS and
Android by installing the local.ch app - [http://tel.local.ch/en/advertising-
calls](http://tel.local.ch/en/advertising-calls)

------
AWildDHHAppears
Of course, it's not hard for them to use a different caller ID for each call
they make...

~~~
j_koreth
And this raises the question on what's happens if Google suspects you to be a
spammer.

------
x0054
I think iOS 10 does this as well. The funny thing is, a lot of the time I get
spam phone calls that are in Spanish (I don't speak Spanish much) or when I
pick up the phone, they just cut off the line. So they waste my time and
theirs.

~~~
cmurf
I think these are demographic specific scams, and you aren't the target
demographic. Scams that target women, old people, or maybe even it's a pre-
scam where it's just trying to find out if there's a human on the other end of
the call and these numbers get more money when sold.

------
criddell
Why is it so hard for the phone company to provide accurate caller id data? I
can understand the need to block outgoing caller id info and I have no problem
with that. But I also have the right to not answer anonymous calls.

------
nstj
iOS 10 brings functionality similar to this. [0]

[0]:
[https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/relea...](https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/releasenotes/General/WhatsNewIniOS/Articles/iOS10.html)

> CallKit. CallKit also introduces app extensions that enable call blocking
> and caller identification. You can create an app extension that can
> associate a phone number with a name or tell the system when a number should
> be blocked.

------
gadders
For those on a non-Nexus android phone, True Caller does this function pretty
well for me in the UK.

------
ableal
"Prank call" apps in the store do not help either.

------
lintiness
now if they could only get that camera to work ...

------
gesman
Any unknown caller that starts his conversation with "Congratulations! ..."
deserves public waterboarding.

~~~
cmurf
Well, at least your advocacy of torture offers some transparency...

