Blacklisting is USELESS!

[lbmofo]

Telo_BK, I have no issues with your request to enhance Ooma features. I do have a problem with the way you're going about it though. Being unreasonable does no good to you and the folks wanting the enhancements you all want. Blacklist is not useless. On the contrary, Ooma blacklist is best in class. Ooma is not years behind. Just the opposite...Ooma is years ahead of others.

In compelling others to do stuff you want, it would help if you don't claim superiority over the same folks you want help from.

Case in point:

see viewtopic.php?f=10&t=14955
Fix detection of digits pressed during a call when HD2 handset key clicks are enabled [15547]

Generating the actual tones would feed into the mic and interfere with detection on the remote side.

As someone who has designed a good deal of telephone equipment from handsets to switches, analog and digital- I can tell you authoritatively that if "Generating the actual tones would feed into the mic and interfere with detection on the remote side" is a true statement- somebody messed up the design. I submit that even el-cheapo wired and wireless home telephones can do that trick with no problem at all.

In the meantime, leverage the tools you already have to improve your situation. You get more junk calls than others? Do something about it with wonderful features that Ooma already provides. Example, you can block some of the invalid numbers yourself via wildcard blacklist entry. Example: 0* and 1* Use wildcard to block area codes you don't usually get calls from. Use expanded blacklist. Send them to VM in case legit calls are trying to reach you.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14774&start=20#p108473
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14774&start=30#p109127

[Telo_BK]

This isn't about personalities. Let's discuss the subject of this thread. And, like it or not, my training and experience qualifies me to make technical judgements about what's possible and how. You are right, Ooma's blacklisting is more feature-laden than the useless blacklisting of all the other carriers. But that doesn't make it useful. The sacmmers know this, and so should you.

e.g. I found some broken compasses while hiking. One of them had quartz glass, and a jeweled pivot. I did some research when I returned from the trip and it was a rare one, best in its class. But still useless, until I fixed it. (Maybe I'm dating myself by not using GPS as an example.)

As I have pointed out, different people have been requesting these features and bringing up their reasons for so doing for SIX+ YEARS. Are you seriously suggesting that Ooma hasn't implemented this because of a post about handsets I made a little more than a year ago? That was another case of my irritation with what I perceive to be Ooma's excuse-making. To their credit, and moreover- to their (later) customers' benefit, Ooma has since updated their handset.

Ooma prepends a "1" to the blacklist of many numbers. You probably know that. If you don't believe me, do the research. So it isn't possible to blacklist the numbers I care about. Those numbers are invalid anyway, and should not be routed. Maybe Ooma should fix that.

[Telo_BK]

Though I knew it wouldn't work, I blacklisted "11*". So far today, I've had three calls from "1-nnn-nnn-nnnn" numbers, invalid numbers, of course. The day's far less than half-over. They could've all been blocked with two entries if Ooma supported blacklisting by name with wildcards/regex. Or Ooma could stop routing invalid numbers. Those are the only junk calls I've gotten so far.

Scratch that- as I was typing I got a fourth call from a "1-nnn-nnn-nnnn" number. Will today set a record? I hope not!

Anyone know how many entries Ooma would have to support to blacklist all invalid numbers? How many lifetimes would it take to enter them?

So, as I've been saying- blacklisting is useless.

[oomamaniacal]

While you are waiting for your suggestions to be implemented, may I suggest moving your Ooma number over to Google Voice and then using GV forwarding to ring your new Ooma number?

If you turn on call screening, your phone will not ring unless the caller records their voice. In my experience, the invalid callers never announce their name. You can then live in peace. (Hallelujah!)

Porting to GV from Ooma is a two-step process, but is not that hard. You can get a disposable Tracfone for $10.

[Telo_BK]

While you are waiting for your suggestions to be implemented, may I suggest moving your Ooma number over to Google Voice and then using GV forwarding to ring your new Ooma number?

If you turn on call screening, your phone will not ring unless the caller records their voice. In my experience, the invalid callers never announce their name. You can then live in peace. (Hallelujah!)

Porting to GV from Ooma is a two-step process, but is not that hard. You can get a disposable Tracfone for $10.

That really would work. And I appreciate your suggestion. I thought about this before we switched to Ooma, and what stopped my was the fact that Google mines all the metadata, and uses voice recognition at will, something users agree to without realizing it I am sure. And Google stipulates that they can change their terms anytime (and have) to snoop even more.

I have nothing to hide, but my business isn't Google's business, even if they do offer some great services (which they reserve the right to cancel anytime). I even hate that all my friends who use Gmail, because it's convenient, (unwittingly) share all of my Email communications between us with Google. But I tolerate that as a fact of life. And I take some lame countermeasures in hopes of making anything they mine more or less useless.

But again- I would happily adopt your suggestion if not for my selfish desire to control my and my loved ones' property. But, thank you again, Oomaniacal, for taking time to give this useful advice. I hope others will see it and get the benefit. Maybe another Ooma feature request is that non-whitelisted callers have to record their voice. I guess that's two feature suggestions: whitelist (many years in the waiting, and the recording feature).

I wonder whether Ooma will ever implement any of that. Some people have defended Ooma, but none have responded to my query in the original post to list 5 features that Ooma has implemented in response to anything posted here. So this thread might be more of a warning to potential subscribers that their junk call volume might well increase dramatically after signing up as mine did. To be fair, Ooma's pros outweigh the cons, but not by that much, especially if time is valuable. I never saw the need to post in any of my previous carriers' forums, for example.

[Tom]

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=18574&start=90 See p6 in this thread. Adding 11* is for blocking e.g. 1-1nn-nnn-nnnn (invalid per NANPA as 1xx are invalid area codes). Same for 10* (to block calls starting with 00 but without leading 1 enter +00*, bug has been entered to allow +0*). The calls you received had cnam starting with V6, but the numbers themselves follow NANPA format.

[Telo_BK]

Thank you, Tom. Some of them were "Dir Assist*". Blocking by name would solve the problem.

[Iraisok]

Not really a reply but close to this thread.

A crap caller got through my Blacklist wall. The Caller I.D. and number was "3918". I did not pickup. No message was left. I check area code 391 and it heads to Germany and other http://www.happyzebra.com/dialing-codes ... .php?q=391 and Mexico http://telcode.info/mexico/areacode/391 and I think a Verizon exchange.

Just would like Tom or Bobby or someone else in the know to confirm that by my entering 391* in my Personal Blacklist, I should NOT receive ANY CALLS from 391 ANYTHING ANYWHERE. An honest person or company will NEVER I.D. their number with 4 digits nor will their phone number be 4 digits. If they're spoofing some other valid number, the eventually assignee will need to clear it up with their phone company. This is my logic and how I deal with this.

Again, just looking for confirmation on my wildcard entry.

Tnx,
Ira

[lbmofo]

Again, just looking for confirmation on my wildcard entry.

Inline with the question.

How to block

29*
37*
39*
49*
59*
69*
79*
89*
99*

Above "to block" list made after looking at
http://www.computerhope.com/areacode.htm

[Telo_BK]

There are currently about 390 valid area codes of the 1000 numerically possible in the NANP (North American Numbering Plan). 800 of those possible could be assigned (no area code may start with a 0 or a 1). So, blocking those listed above will get 90 of them, but that leaves a whole bunch of invalid area codes unblocked. 520 is the only valid code of the 10 possible that begin with 52*,as one example. Then there are invaild CO (Exchange) codes within each area code. So it gets much bigger than 256.

And that ignores the fact that scammers are spoofing VALID phone numbers that belong to legitimate subscribers (one post in this thread points out that an Ooma user didn't get his appointment reminder call from the VA because it was blocked by NoMoRobo because spoofers used their number). That's not an isolated problem, it's widespread and getting worse by the day. I have called some of the numbers that come up, and many are owned by actual people and businesses.

So blacklisting by number just doesn't work anymore. It might cut the number of phony calls but nowhere near enough to be useful. And worse, it blocks wanted (even urgent) calls! Blacklisting by name will help a great deal. But Ooma should not rely on users to use up all of their 256 entries to blacklist a small portion of the invalid numbers. Ooma should do that by default.

And blacklisting by name will allow valid calls to get through while blocking many (at least for now and the past SIX+ years that people have been requesting blacklisting by name) spoofed calls. In my case it would block just about all of them with just two entries.

However, thanks for putting in the work, Ibmofo.