I would like to see ooma increase the block list maximum to 2048.
I have now reach 1024 on my block list. The list is 45 pages long.
And I get a warning my block is full, you must delete some to add any new numbers.
It took just over 5 years to get there(started ooma May 9 2016).
I had posted a reply to Allow blacklisting via Called ID .
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=23768&p=148073&sid= ... 80#p148073
i suggest reading that post first, for background.
Having read the forums on call blocking, ooma is suppose to update nomorobo once a week, on Mondays.
It has been my experience, if I get a spam call on Tues, and don't block it immediately, they will many times call again, later that week.
Yes, I'm aware many of the spammers change the spoofed number constantly. if not every call.
If you call me and hang up, I'm going to block you. Period.
I'm going to make it as difficult as possible, driving the spammers cost up.
To do nothing is unacceptable.
If just 10 percent of ooma users were to aggressively block spam numbers.
we would all benefit from it.
I'm uploading just few pages of my black list, started from my Verizon days of twisted pair copper, Nov 4, 2014.
If ooma or nomorobo wants the full lis of 45 pages, you have my number.
Ooma known spammer call blocking already leverages blocking rules from its user community. Nomorobo relies on multiple strategies for managing its lists, and while it does accept user reported numbers, it's up to the users themselves to report them. For some forms of spoofing, (such as "neighbor spoofing"), spammers use different numbers for different areas, so sharing blocking rules for those numbers doesn't necessarily help other users.
Spammers often spoof with legitimate numbers, belonging to otherwise innocent people or organizations. Aggressively blocking these numbers just creates a lot of false positives, which doesn't benefit anybody. Recent legislation is supposed to reduce this type of spoofing, by requiring some form of caller-id authentication and robocall mitigation at the source. In the meantime, Ooma and Nomorobo can try to filter out false positives, but users may still have to temporarily disable Nomorobo when expecting a call from a new number, until they can whitelist the number.
Thank you for taking the time to make an intelligent argument for not aggressively blocking spammers.
And no, I'm not being sarcastic.
I see your point about false positives not being helpful.
And increasing the block list totals probably won't work, either.
Prior to blocking a number, I do search for a name or business associated with that number.
There are several websites (like nomorobo) that post recent complaints about hangups, spammers, etc.
If I see the number on one of those sites, it means others are getting the same call, so it gets blocked.
I will will take your advise and wait for the second spam call, if it does not show up on web search.
I have tried using "block by name", to no avail. I use the parameter of "contains".
The calls with a city name and state still get through.
With my lists, I have found it not uncommon for a specific number to show up with different CID names.
Again, thank you for taking the time to consider my issue.
I have noticed in the last few weeks, spam calls are down as a whole, both with my ooma home number, my cell phone carrier, and android(google) spam detection.
I'm hoping it's because "we" are getting better at detecting spam calls, and not just a temporary reprieve of covid-19 shutting down call centers.
One person even bragged about calling the credit card company back, refusing to answer any questions to verify his identity, and then blowing a whistle into the phone before hanging up. He may have meant well, but that's why I have to clutter up my Contacts list, and route blocked calls to voicemail.
The sending carrier provides the Caller ID number, but the receiving carrier is responsible for using the number to look up the Caller ID name. Different carriers can use different databases. Some databases may provide old/inaccurate names, and some carriers may cache names they've looked up before, rather than pay a fee to look them up again. And some carriers may skip the lookup altogether, and just provide a generic "City, State", based on the area code and number.normw2 wrote:With my lists, I have found it not uncommon for a specific number to show up with different CID names.
One common pitfall when matching Caller ID names is that multiple spaces between words are significant. Browsers don't preserve spacing, so use the "view page source" command (usually <ctrl>-u or <cmd>-u), or else export the call logs to a file, to see them all. Ooma describes how to handle "City, State" names, but they could also take further steps to normalize any spacing/punctuation in the names, to make matching easier.normw2 wrote:I have tried using "block by name", to no avail.
Thank you for your information on everyone's spam problem.
Attached is my ooma call log for the last 2 weeks. The spam calls are typical for any 2 week period.
I will try the name blocking of city only, using "contains".
Note: I have blacked out personal calls on my call log.
You can see the average behavior of spam calls, names not withstanding, which is why I was so aggressive in blocking.
Thank you again for taking an interest in the ongoing spam problem.
- ooma call log update sept 15.pdf
- (97.5KiB)Downloaded 45 times