The FCC’s proposed plan to fight spam calls puts consumer privacy in jeopardy

Tired of having your day disrupted by robocalls? You’re not alone, and the FCC is taking notice. In last month’s press release, the FCC said it “has become its mission” to stop illegal spam calls.Consumer protection top priority,” while FCC Chairman Brendan Carr swore “Provide meaningful robocall relief to consumers”

Unfortunately, their approach may be so broad, so badly focused, that it will create new privacy concerns, decimate so-called “burner” phones and place additional burdens on consumers. Or in the words of Gizmodo’s Mike Pearl, “The cure for FCC may be worse than the disease“

One proposed change, known as the “Know Your Customer” rules, would require businesses to collect a government ID, a physical address and a customer’s full legal name, rather than just their phone number, to initiate phone contact. This proposed change may work to prevent robocalls, but it would also effectively eliminate the concept of consumer privacy. Reclaim the Net In the words of civil liberties advocates: “The result would be an identity-verification system that would cover one of the last semi-anonymous communication tools available to ordinary Americans.”

mashable light speed

Worse, the FCC’s proposed “red flags” that would increase scrutiny are broad enough to cover the legitimate behavior of millions of Americans. Proposed red flags include using a virtual office, making payments in cryptocurrency, using a “suspicious” email address, or operating from a phone number that is not associated with a residential address.

While all these activities Are Robocalls, a potential indicator of spammer behavior, are also common practice among law-abiding citizens, who often work from virtual offices or use so-called “burner” or pre-paid phones. What’s worse, people who rely on prepaid phones often do so Because Think about the anonymity they are risking – think refugees fleeing conflict zones or victims of domestic abuse attempting to keep a low profile.

Finally, the FCC is considering shifting the burden of enforcement to telecommunications providers, threatening fines of up to $2,500 per call rather than to individual spam callers. While this approach is undoubtedly easier than searching for each individual robocall operator, and certainly motivates companies to take enforcement seriously, it also creates a bad incentive in which telecom operators have to investigate each individual customer and their behavior at the expense of consumer privacy.

Ultimately, spam calls may prove to be the price we pay for enjoying a little privacy in the digital age.