dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1688
share rss forum feed

hockeynomad

join:2007-06-19
Mississauga, ON

[Voip.ms] CallerID filter not working

voip,ms one of the providers offering caller block, but I find it is not always doing the job. I've posted this before, not sure what the outcome was; probably similar to the phone service, "you're paying peanuts, what you complaining about...".

Been getting that fake 800 call purpurtedly from RBC

fparker

join:2008-04-28
Scarborough, ON
what are you entering for your callerid filter?

Radar73

join:2008-01-20
Ajax, ON
reply to hockeynomad
I've never had any problems with the caller id filtering. I've used it to block calls and more recently to whitelist callers after implementing an IVR.

hockeynomad

join:2007-06-19
Mississauga, ON
reply to hockeynomad
[System] Message No Service

fparker

join:2008-04-28
Scarborough, ON
How are you filtering out the undesired caller? What are you entering for the DID filter?


HSYS

@opera-mini.net
reply to hockeynomad
I use enter 800* and 1800* to filter all 800 calls and it works fine for me.

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4
reply to hockeynomad
We have no such things as features that are supposed to half work because they are free.

More details would be appreciated, like how the filter rule was configured and the exact callerid that passed through it without being blocked.

Thanks
--
Martin - VoiP.ms

rudeboy24

join:2002-10-14
Welland, ON
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·Start Communicat..
reply to hockeynomad
maybe try filters like this to block just 1800 #'s
1800XXXXXXX
800XXXXXXX

or to block all 8XX numbers

800XXXXXXX
855XXXXXXX
866XXXXXXX
877XXXXXXX
888XXXXXXX

1800XXXXXXX
1855XXXXXXX
1866XXXXXXX
1877XXXXXXX
1888XXXXXXX


Plodder

@31.31.74.x
Skip the '1' at the start. Replace it with '*'. It will cover cases where the '1' is sent with the caller id or not.

MichelR

join:2011-07-03
Ottawa, ON
reply to hockeynomad
I've had this happen with one number - I think it wasn't a toll-free number. I opened a ticket and they suggested I switch to the toronto server. At the time I was on montreal, and that was shortly after the software upgrade. I tried a couple of things with no luck, then switched to toronto. Hasn't happened since. Weird.
--
Start Communications Forum

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4
said by MichelR:

I opened a ticket and they suggested I switch to the toronto server. At the time I was on montreal, and that was shortly after the software upgrade. I tried a couple of things with no luck, then switched to toronto. Hasn't happened since. Weird.

Indeed, there's no need to switch server this feature takes the CallerID number and compares with what is in the database.

-
To Hockeynomad

There was no ticket and there's no problems we're aware of at the moment, I asked someone to open a ticket for you. Thanks
--
Martin - VoiP.ms

hockeynomad

join:2007-06-19
Mississauga, ON

1 edit
not prepared to block all 8** at this time, some are legit, but its a thought.

Martin, am following up on ticket.


Shire Reeve

@optonline.net
said by hockeynomad:

not prepared to block all 8** at this time, some are legit, but its a thought.

Well, no one should block all 8** because 807 is Ontario, 819 is Quebec, and so forth.

But even in terms of blocking [800, 855, 866, 877, 888] numbers, one CAN make a case for this....

....If not blocking, at least sending them to voicemail.

Because as this fellow says:

When a toll free number shows up on your caller id, it’s not there because the caller is calling you on a toll free number. Toll Free Numbers CAN’T make outbound calls....

When a toll free number shows up on your caller ID, it means that the caller is calling from a larger phone system that allows the caller to program the caller ID information. So do NOT take this as proof that the caller is actually connected with that number or that this number will reach the same people. It is against the regulations to program someone else’s number into the caller ID information, but that obviously doesn’t phase the people that are involved with any type of scam.

Just because they have a toll free number on their caller ID certainly doesn’t prove they’re doing anything nefarious, but it does tell you that they are probably in some type of call center and are often telemarketers....

»www.tollfreenumbers.com/blogs/to···-id.html

JeanInNepean

join:2012-09-19
Nepean, ON
reply to Plodder
said by Plodder :

Skip the '1' at the start. Replace it with '*'. It will cover cases where the '1' is sent with the caller id or not.

Unfortunately, this will also filter out numbers like 6132888510.

fparker

join:2008-04-28
Scarborough, ON
why would that be?


nunya
LXI 483
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:12
Reviews:
·Charter
·voip.ms
reply to hockeynomad
I've encountered a problem with VoIP.ms filtering. The problem is with filter ordering.
To make a long story short:
All calls from 636XXXXXXX get pushed through to my main account (I use a whitelist / blacklist method).
However, if I blacklist 636555XXXX or 6365551111, the calls are allowed through anyway.
Rather than processing the filter rules from most specific to least (think like iptables, firewalls, or logic), it is doing the opposite.

I never did hear back from voip.ms on this issue.

Is it possible you have a less specific rule that is being processed before this one?
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't.

Dan_voip

join:2007-01-03
Saint-Hubert, QC
kudos:4
reply to fparker
said by fparker:

why would that be?

Because *888* rule will filter 6132888510; * is replacing 1 or more digits. Instead is better to have 2 rules for each 8xx number how was already posted, in this case for 888 will be:
888XXXXXXX
1888XXXXXXX

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4
reply to hockeynomad
After investigation, it seem the filter worked properly. The call is in the CDR because you configured the system to answer/playback "Message No Service". The call was not sent to you, but it's normal it shows up in the CDR. If you do not want the system to pick the call, select "busy"

--
Martin - VoiP.ms

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4
reply to nunya
said by nunya:

I've encountered a problem with VoIP.ms filtering. The problem is with filter ordering.
To make a long story short:
All calls from 636XXXXXXX get pushed through to my main account (I use a whitelist / blacklist method).
However, if I blacklist 636555XXXX or 6365551111, the calls are allowed through anyway.
Rather than processing the filter rules from most specific to least (think like iptables, firewalls, or logic), it is doing the opposite.

I never did hear back from voip.ms on this issue.

Is it possible you have a less specific rule that is being processed before this one?

We're open to suggestion on the way we sort the result match. Iptables doesn't sort on "most specific" to "least specific". It's just a set of rules.

What do you suggest we sort the order, by length/numerical? It could be done easily.
--
Martin - VoiP.ms

adatech

join:2010-04-23
reply to hockeynomad
Martin -- tangentially related, would it be possible to implement some sort of phone book group system?

I'm thinking of Callcentric's filtering. I can create a group of numbers in my phone book, and then filter the group. Instead of having individual filters for each spam number I want to send to no service, there could be a single rule.

Just a thought.


nunya
LXI 483
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:12
Reviews:
·Charter
·voip.ms
reply to MartinM
said by MartinM:

We're open to suggestion on the way we sort the result match. Iptables doesn't sort on "most specific" to "least specific". It's just a set of rules.

What do you suggest we sort the order, by length/numerical? It could be done easily.

By processing the match from most specific to least, or allow the user to select (and change) the order in a list.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't.


Plodder

@gsdn.me
reply to Dan_voip
said by Dan_voip:

said by fparker:

why would that be?

Because *888* rule will filter 6132888510; * is replacing 1 or more digits. Instead is better to have 2 rules for each 8xx number how was already posted, in this case for 888 will be:
888XXXXXXX
1888XXXXXXX

If you use *888xxxxxxx, it covers the two examples you gave. I have used this setup for years and it works perfectly.

fparker

join:2008-04-28
Scarborough, ON
reply to MartinM
when I choose System: Hangup, it gives the filtered caller a 'busy' signal, not a hangup.

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4
said by fparker:

when I choose System: Hangup, it gives the filtered caller a 'busy' signal, not a hangup.

Because you can't hang up a call that has not been answered, we had to change simply hanging up the call to sending a proper code to the carrier. Simply hanging up caused some carriers to keep on ringing. Hang up is deprecated and all users who have that option selected will eventually see it change to a more appropriate description. In the end, it does fulfil the objective of not receiving the call.

--
Martin - VoiP.ms

fparker

join:2008-04-28
Scarborough, ON
is there any way of seeing a report with all the 'blocked' calls (since currently they never show up on the call report if they have been blocked with 'hangup')

MartinM
VoIP.ms
Premium,VIP
join:2008-07-21
kudos:4

1 edit
They do show up, in your CDR.

Edit: I'll investigate first, to make sure they do. Perhaps we don't log 0 seconds call. Will get back to you.
--
Martin - VoiP.ms

hockeynomad

join:2007-06-19
Mississauga, ON
reply to MartinM
said by MartinM:

After investigation, it seem the filter worked properly. The call is in the CDR because you configured the system to answer/playback "Message No Service". The call was not sent to you, but it's normal it shows up in the CDR. If you do not want the system to pick the call, select "busy"

Yes, will make the changes.

JeanInNepean

join:2012-09-19
Nepean, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy TekTalk
·voip.ms
·Primus Talkbroad..

1 recommendation

reply to MartinM
said by MartinM:

What do you suggest we sort the order, by length/numerical? It could be done easily.

Perhaps patterns should be sorted numerically with * being higher than X which is also higher than 0-9. This way the following patterns would be ordered as expected:
800-123-4567
800-1X3-*
800-X23-*
800-*

Dan_voip

join:2007-01-03
Saint-Hubert, QC
kudos:4
reply to Plodder
said by Plodder :

said by Dan_voip:

said by fparker:

why would that be?

Because *888* rule will filter 6132888510; * is replacing 1 or more digits. Instead is better to have 2 rules for each 8xx number how was already posted, in this case for 888 will be:
888XXXXXXX
1888XXXXXXX

If you use *888xxxxxxx, it covers the two examples you gave. I have used this setup for years and it works perfectly.

The question is will filter also other numbers like 6132888510 which is not desired?

conwaytwt
Premium
join:2004-04-09
Conway, AR
Reviews:
·Conway Corp.
said by Dan_voip:

The question is will filter also other numbers like 6132888510 which is not desired?

Don't the XXXX's signify a specific number of digits? If so, *888xxxxxxx can only match 888 when it's followed by seven digits.