

What the "Truth in Caller ID Act" (just passed) impacts - troydavis
http://blog.cloudvox.com/post/523641421/what-the-truth-in-caller-id-act-hr-1258-means

======
troydavis
After re-reading the PDF, I'm impressed at how well written it is, especially
for being so short.

I think it avoids snagging Google Voice and other services by requiring both
action _and_ intent. While intent is subject to interpretation, it beats a 75
page bill that's obsolete before it's passed.

~~~
jerf
Why would the combination of "being short" and "well written" surprise you?
"Long" virtually guarantees "crappy", due to the effectively 100% chance of
bad interactions.

~~~
troydavis
Yeah, long virtually guarantees crappy, but short can mean so coarse that
intent isn't clear - LEO and courts pick up the pieces.

Big item not covered here is practical enforceability. Ingress filtering to
prevent IP packet spoofing is much easier because there are many valid uses
for CID spoofing. Can't configure a session border controller to filter
"deceiving or defrauding spoofed caller ID values."

------
jrockway
What's next, the "Truth in RFC822 From: Field Act" and the "Truth in HTTP
Referer Header Act"?

