Topic 'Re: TrueCNAM introduction' in forum 'VOIP Tech Chat' - dslreports.com

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Sat, 06 Jun 2015 10:57:17 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

Reposted from a while back, here is a still-interesting 2004 discussion.
»www.ainslie.org.uk/calle ··· _faq.htm

Thanks PX. Talk about nostalgia... I haven't thought about or used many of the terms, protocols and ideas that are listed on that page in a long time.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Sat, 06 Jun 2015 10:53:40 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by josephf:

Any idea how other countries handle CNAM? I presume callers from Mexico, Europe and other overseas locations calling North American (NANP) DIDs effectively never display a meaningful name (something other than country name or town) to American and Canadian users receiving the call.

Thanks for your questions, and I agree with responses Trev gave you above.

Its very rare for CNAM to pass on an international call, other than in some cases as mentioned by Trev on a NANP (North American Numbering Plan - IE US/Canada and other country code "1" countries). That's part of what we're trying to do with TrueCNAM.

Today its frequently just as cheap to place calls internationally between two countries as it is across the street, CNAM really should be something that works internationally (and works better than it does today). I'm not aware of any other CNAM database that supports essentially any telephone number worldwide, and passing of CNAM within the call setup message on an international call isn't something that works, at least not on a very high percentage of calls, and may also change from call-to-call even between the same two parties.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 17:37:14 EDT

PX Eliezer1 posted :

said by josephf:

Any idea how other countries handle CNAM?

Reposted from a while back, here is a still-interesting 2004 discussion.
»www.ainslie.org.uk/calle ··· _faq.htm

And for a discussion of what Canadian Stentor is about in the preceding reference, this from the late Mark Cuccia:
»massis.lcs.mit.edu/archi ··· l-canada

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:37:12 EDT

josephf posted : Any idea how other countries handle CNAM? I presume callers from Mexico, Europe and other overseas locations calling North American (NANP) DIDs effectively never display a meaningful name (something other than country name or town) to American and Canadian users receiving the call.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:33:31 EDT

Trev posted :

said by josephf:

Do you display Canadian callers CNAM to American users receiving a transborder call?

In most cases there is no mechanism to make this work since the name information is lost by the time the call hits the US DID carrier.
--
I represent AcroVoice, a full service Canadian VoIP Provider.
Buy your Obihai ATA or IP Phone shipped from within Canada.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:32:02 EDT

josephf posted :

said by Trev:

However, with many Canadian VoIP services, we'll check the US system when a call comes in, so we can show names from all of Canada and US to our customers.

But that only helps Canadian users see American CNAM not vice versa, correct? Do you display Canadian callers CNAM to American users receiving a transborder call?

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:22:50 EDT

Trev posted :

said by josephf:

Do calls coming from Canada to the US display CNAM (other than generic town) on the US customers phone? If so, it must be getting it from the CNAM data the Canadian provider is transmitting, if the Canadian provider does not have a CNAM database. Do Canadians see American caller's CNAM?

Typically no, once a call crosses the border the name is lost.

However, with many Canadian VoIP services, we'll check the US system when a call comes in, so we can show names from all of Canada and US to our customers.

Even within Canada, some places (BC and AB), the telco is old-skool and requires a database lookup for a lot of their lines so we really have a hybrid of the two ways of transmitting names.
--
I represent AcroVoice, a full service Canadian VoIP Provider.
Buy your Obihai ATA or IP Phone shipped from within Canada.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 13:37:32 EDT

josephf posted : Do calls coming from Canada to the US display CNAM (other than generic town) on the US customers phone? If so, it must be getting it from the CNAM data the Canadian provider is transmitting, if the Canadian provider does not have a CNAM database. Do Canadians see American caller's CNAM?

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 13:18:07 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by josephf:

How does the Canadian CNAM system (where the CNAM is transmitted with the call) address this CNAM name spoofing vulnerability?

To my knowledge, I don't really believe they do. If you have a typical landline from Bell or Telus, or a cell phone from Rogers as examples, then you're not able to set whatever you want on a per-call basis for either the number or the name. You'd set the CNAM once with them and that's what it would stay as until you changed it (which wouldn't be on a per-call basis).

That's not any different than you not being able to modify your Caller ID Number on a per-call basis with a landline or cell from AT&T / Verizon or other large carriers in the US, or telling either of those carriers you want your CNAM set to X on your number.

If you're using a service provider that DOES let you set your own Caller ID Number and Name on a per-call basis in Canada, then unless they're checking it on a per-call basis, they have no way of filtering out whatever incorrect, or fraudulent information you may be sending, and most of the providers that allow that don't have policies (or regulations covering them) in place like "Know your customer" rules that banks have as an example.

said by josephf:

And do any US providers accept and display the CNAM transmitted by the originating outgoing call? If so, do they only accept them from Canadian numbers or will they accept it from a US number as well if it transmits the CNAM with the call data?

I won't say none, because I'm sure there must be some exceptions somewhere, but in the vast majority of cases, no, they don't. The few exceptions I've seen to this are in rare cases where you might have a PRI line or a VoIP interconnect as "business" or "carrier" customer - and in those cases there are a few carriers that on-network (IE to another one of their customers) might transmit your name, but not to anywhere else on the PSTN.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:46:33 EDT

josephf posted :

said by TrueCNAM:

said by LandL :

The real and best fix to the CNAM problems you outlined, is to adopt the Canadian model where the CNAM data is sent by the call's originating carrier with each outgoing call.

Well I'd agree with you in general, except for 1 major issue... There's plenty of service providers in the US, Canada, and elsewhere in the world that will allow anyone to spoof any caller id NUMBER.

How does the Canadian CNAM system (where the CNAM is transmitted with the call) address this CNAM name spoofing vulnerability?

And do any US providers accept and display the CNAM transmitted by the originating outgoing call? If so, do they only accept them from Canadian numbers or will they accept it from a US number as well if it transmits the CNAM with the call data?

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:24:45 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by lmartin12:

Agreed. Not only would it be more accurate but there would also be no need to pay someone for lookup.

I responded to LandL with what I believe is a problem in doing it that way.

To add to that, there's no reason CNAM lookups should be anywhere near as expensive (relatively) as they are today. That's not related to what we're doing, it just doesn't need to be that expensive anymore. The pricing model of how CNAM works is entrenched in legacy technologies, ideas and industry players - introduced mostly in the early 1990's, and with few changes since then.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:17:53 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by LandL :

The real and best fix to the CNAM problems you outlined, is to adopt the Canadian model where the CNAM data is sent by the call's originating carrier with each outgoing call.

Well I'd agree with you in general, except for 1 major issue... There's plenty of service providers in the US, Canada, and elsewhere in the world that will allow anyone to spoof any caller id NUMBER.

That's useful to many, and the vast majority of end users don't abuse it, but there are plenty of nefarious people that do abuse it to place LOTS of telemarketing and scam/fraud/phishing phone calls already. It's bad enough when a call is received from a random number you don't recognize and the Caller ID Name is either blank or something innocuous like the City/State, its another thing when the CNAM shows up as "Google Support", "Microsoft Help", "Chase Bank", or "RBC Royal Bank".

Plenty of people are already fooled by these scams without CNAM showing up as things like that, I'd wager the percentage would increase if scammers could easily send whatever CNAM they wanted on every outbound call and it would be trusted by any network on the PSTN.

Its also very hard to filter nefarious names at the originating side in real-time if you allow anything to be sent, and essentially impossible on the terminating side of the call, since how is the carrier receiving the call supposed to differentiate between a CNAM of "Chase Bank" when its actually Chase calling you, versus just some random person attempting to defraud you...

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 10:04:48 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by Arne Bolen:

I have no doubt TrueCNAM Inc. will be a success with you behind it and I wish you the best luck. To show my support I will soon sign up for a paid plan (Pro or Business), I just need to decide how many of my phone numbers I will add.

Arne, great. Thank you for the support.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 09:59:19 EDT

Arne Bolen posted :

said by Ryan Tilton:

I encourage other service providers to check out this service and get on board

Callcentric is already onboard. Both my NY numbers are listed in TrueCNAM and Callcentric have even listed both my iNum phone numbers. :)

[att=1]
--
myvoipnews@secure.mailbox.org - Peerio:myvoipnews

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 07:04:31 EDT

lmartin12 posted :

said by LandL :

The real and best fix to the CNAM problems you outlined, is to adopt the Canadian model where the CNAM data is sent by the call's originating carrier with each outgoing call.

Agreed. Not only would it be more accurate but there would also be no need to pay someone for lookup.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Fri, 05 Jun 2015 01:10:55 EDT

anon posted : The real and best fix to the CNAM problems you outlined, is to adopt the Canadian model where the CNAM data is sent by the call's originating carrier with each outgoing call.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 21:09:06 EDT

Trimline posted : See this post and those trailed. Lots of action and a script for the install; soon to be updated this weekend.

»www.pbxinaflash.com/comm ··· t-111054

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 20:55:42 EDT

Arne Bolen posted :

said by WhyADuck:

Open an ssh session to your FreePBX server and do this:

cd /var/www/html/admin/modules/superfecta/sources
wget (address you copied when you right clicked the RAW button)

Thank you. I recently started to play with FreePBX so I'm still a newbie. :)
--
myvoipnews@secure.mailbox.org - Peerio:myvoipnews

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 20:20:43 EDT

Arne Bolen posted :

said by TrueCNAM:

-Greg Blumstein
TrueCNAM Inc.

Thank you Greg for posting your name. Knowing that it's you who are behind TrueCNAM Inc. makes the service really trustworthy.

I have no doubt TrueCNAM Inc. will be a success with you behind it and I wish you the best luck. To show my support I will soon sign up for a paid plan (Pro or Business), I just need to decide how many of my phone numbers I will add. :)
--
myvoipnews@secure.mailbox.org - Peerio:myvoipnews

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:51:13 EDT

TrueCNAM posted : Thanks geek3point0 for working on it!

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:50:02 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by TelcoDaniboy :

Don't mean to be overly harsh, but the problem with this is the long ramp up it's going to take to get enough data to be actually useful for users.

I agree with what you're saying in general, and yes what we're trying to do is "hard", we knew that going into this, and think about it every day.

I'll add that SOME people may find benefit in our TrueSpam scores by themselves, without even considering the CNAM data that will be returned. The FCC is even likely to introduce new rules soon that specifically relate to telemarketing / robocalling and carrier level blocking.

said by TelcoDaniboy :

Until they reach a critical mass and mask the holes with city/state, nobody will want to use them, let alone pay for the service.

Just to be clear, we have no intention of returning "New York NY" just to fill the "holes". There are plenty of other CNAM databases that will do this and either bill you for it (on a per-query basis), and/or consider it an added feature.

said by TelcoDaniboy :

You have a noble plan to innovate a messed up space, but I think it's going to be a long and very difficult path.

Thanks for stating that. I haven't talked to anyone in the industry yet in my history, or recently that thinks the way CNAM works is "great", so we're hoping that will help. If you like what we're doing you can help by signing up for the service (even a free account) as well as asking your service providers to speak with us.

Thanks!

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:45:34 EDT

WhyADuck posted :

said by Arne Bolen:

How do you add it to Superfecta in FreePBX?

Go to the link provided at »gist.github.com/jfinstro ··· e6f8c2e9

Right click the RAW button in the gray bar just above the code and copy the link address.

Open an ssh session to your FreePBX server and do this:

cd /var/www/html/admin/modules/superfecta/sources
wget (address you copied when you right clicked the RAW button)

This should copy the source-TrueCNAM.module file to to that directory. Now all you have to do is change the ownership and permissions to match the other modules in the directory (ownership is asterisk:asterisk and permissions are 775). I always use Midnight Commander's "Advanced chown" to do that sort of thing so can't recall offhand the exact syntax of the Linux commands to do it, I know the commands to use are chown and (I think) chmod but you'd have to look up the syntax.
--
I refuse to believe that corporations are people until Texas executes one.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:42:02 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by drivel:

As an additional optional feature of your service could you also add the SIP address associated with the DID to your database? The SIP address would be enormously useful. Perhaps more useful than the CNAM.

I assume you're referring to something like ENUM? That's always a possibility down the road... but as I'm sure you and others here have seen there are large problems with that idea, especially when end-users are provisioning their own addresses which may or may not work today, tomorrow, or next week. So I won't say never, but we have plenty to keep us occupied right now.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction

Thu, 04 Jun 2015 18:34:19 EDT

TrueCNAM posted :

said by OZO:

Is there any chance you'll drop the requirement of sending username and password in URI query?

I guess I know where this requirement comes from - to protect service from abuse. But there is easy way to do the same thing without the requirement of registering for the service. It's based on temporary caching of IP addresses were all requests are coming from. And in case if number of requests coming from one IP exceeds established limit - the request will be denied.

Thanks for commenting. To answer your question, no, we aren't likely to remove the requirement of using API credentials. There are variety of reasons why including:
- Some of our existing features would not work if we didn't know the exact user - TrueCLID as an example, and partially our TrueSpam score algorithms. If you have a static IP then maybe we could allow that, but most end-users won't have static IP's. Even for carriers / service providers (which all should have static IP's), we still use API credentials just to keep the same codebase, even though we know their IP's and the network they use for access is isolated from the general public.
- We actually track the number of queries as part of our "billing" for the service. IE you get X number of queries per minute and Y number of queries per day. We couldn't reliably do that based just off IP addresses.
- Yes, it does partially protect from abuse, but who's to say we're not using multiple methods? I have personal experience dealing with abuse at both the username and IP address levels in a fairly large open network... and I'll leave it at that for now.

said by OZO:

For example, OpenCNAM (another similar service) does not require username and password to be sent with each query. Here is example of the query URI:
https://api.opencnam.com/v2/phone/+1NNNXXXXXXX

To my knowledge, OpenCNAM only allows that on their free service which they give away to anyone - and limit the number of requests. If you use their paid services I believe you have to send credentials. That said, what OpenCNAM is doing is a little different than what we're trying to do, and because of that their API is different. I'm not criticizing them, but the feature-sets are somewhat different. said by OZO:I'm just trying to avoid the hassle of registering and providing yet another unique email address for new service to try (and potentially use)... I can understand that, but we have no intention of sharing / selling your email address, its simply not what we're interested in doing. You can also check out our Privacy Policy, and Terms and Conditions, which I think are pretty clear. I don't want to post my last employer here (as I don't think its fair to trade on their name publicly), but its one that will be known to forum regulars and I believe it is safe to say is well respected. I was responsible for a large portion of their business, including things like maintaining customer privacy. Since I see my name has already been outed in a thread on another forum, I'll post it here and leave it to you to research / decide if my past history is a good indication of whether I've done a decent job with customer privacy (among other things) in the past. But seriously, thanks for your questions and comments, they're always appreciated. -Greg Blumstein TrueCNAM Inc.

Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:49:08 EDT geek3point0 posted : woohoo only 1 bug.... gist has been updated Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:26:36 EDT anon posted : Don't mean to be overly harsh, but the problem with this is the long ramp up it's going to take to get enough data to be actually useful for users. Until they reach a critical mass and mask the holes with city/state, nobody will want to use them, let alone pay for the service. Negotiating with carriers? Very difficult to reach any carrier with any subscriber depth. Talk to Shango (the Austin TX company) about that. They nearly crashed and burned after years of negotiating with carriers for access, ultimately taking a hard turn away from their original business plan. Again, I don't mean to be too critical. You have a noble plan to innovate a messed up space, but I think it's going to be a long and very difficult path. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:51:50 EDT crazyk4952 posted : said by Arne Bolen:The CNAM for the verification call shows "ASSADI MILSTEIN", that is probably the law firm of Assadi & Milstein, LLP. This is the CNAM entry that I saw when I verified my voip.ms DID. However, when I verified my Callcentric DID, it showed up as, "TrueCNAM Verify". Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:47:39 EDT Arne Bolen posted : said by WhyADuck:Tested it and it appears to work after making the change suggested by lgaetz in his comment How do you add it to Superfecta in FreePBX? -- myvoipnews@secure.mailbox.org - Peerio:myvoipnews Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:14:09 EDT Trimline posted : said by geek3point0:If anyone is using CallerID Superfecta I threw together a module for the service. »gist.github.com/jfinstro ··· e6f8c2e9 This may not be perfect, it was done in a few minutes before coffee so there may be a bug or 14. Comment on the gist with any issues. Worked great for me. Took all but 15 minutes to install and test. Good stuff! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:05:36 EDT drivel posted : As an additional optional feature of your service could you also add the SIP address associated with the DID to your database? The SIP address would be enormously useful. Perhaps more useful than the CNAM. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 16:04:59 EDT OZO posted : It's always good to see a new service arriving :) Is there any chance you'll drop the requirement of sending username and password in URI query? I guess I know where this requirement comes from - to protect service from abuse. But there is easy way to do the same thing without the requirement of registering for the service. It's based on temporary caching of IP addresses were all requests are coming from. And in case if number of requests coming from one IP exceeds established limit - the request will be denied. For example, OpenCNAM (another similar service) does not require username and password to be sent with each query. Here is example of the query URI: https://api.opencnam.com/v2/phone/+1NNNXXXXXXX I'm just trying to avoid the hassle of registering and providing yet another unique email address for new service to try (and potentially use)... ;) Thanks! -- Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:51:17 EDT WhyADuck posted : said by geek3point0:If anyone is using CallerID Superfecta I threw together a module for the service. »gist.github.com/jfinstro ··· e6f8c2e9 This may not be perfect, it was done in a few minutes before coffee so there may be a bug or 14. Comment on the gist with any issues. Thanks! Tested it and it appears to work after making the change suggested by lgaetz in his comment (gives a fatal error if you don't make that change). Thanks for this. By the way, prior to seeing this I was playing around with FreePBX trying to see if I could make it work as a CallerID Lookup Source (NOT using CallerID Superfecta), and at least in FreePBX 12 it's not really possible because although you can set it up as a HTTPS lookup source, the Query field isn't long enough to accept all the required parameters. You can get around that by changing the defaults under "My Account -> Account Settings -> API Preferences" on the TrueCNAM site, so you don't have to explicitly specify as many parameters in FreePBX, BUT there is still a bug in that it by default it tries to send HTTPS requests on port 80, not port 443 (watch the Asterisk CLI on an incoming call). And if you try to explicitly set the port to 443, then FreePBX doesn't appear to send the lookup request at all. I suppose someone probably should file a bug report about this on the FreePBX bug tracker, but I'm not at all motivated to do so, since the Superfecta module appears to work. For anyone wanting to prove it doesn't work, here are the settings: Source Description: TrueCNAM Host: api.truecnam.net Port: Leave blank or try 443, it isn't going to work either way Leave username and password blank, those are for a different method of authentication (like the popup box you see in browsers sometimes). Path: /api/v1 Query: username=APIKey&password=APIPassword&calling_number=[NUMBER] On the TrueCNAM site, under My Account -> Account Settings -> API Preferences, set Default response format: CSV Default response type: Simple so that it should return the name only. If there were not some bug in FreePBX that sends the HTTPS request on the wrong port, that is. -- I refuse to believe that corporations are people until Texas executes one. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:17:14 EDT RonR posted : said by geek3point0:»gist.github.com/jfinstro ··· e6f8c2e9 Free Users get 2 lookups/minute 25/hour as of this note. Free users get 25 lookups/day, not 25 lookups/hour. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 13:42:03 EDT geek3point0 posted : If anyone is using CallerID Superfecta I threw together a module for the service. »gist.github.com/jfinstro ··· e6f8c2e9 This may not be perfect, it was done in a few minutes before coffee so there may be a bug or 14. Comment on the gist with any issues. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 11:01:16 EDT TrueCNAM posted : Thanks very much for your support and interest. We're working hard behind the scenes to get as many people using TrueCNAM as possible. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 11:00:15 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by Arne Bolen:Great service, I have already signed up. Great, glad to hear it! said by Arne Bolen:Just a small detail. The CNAM for the verification call shows "ASSADI MILSTEIN", that is probably the law firm of Assadi & Milstein, LLP. Shouldn't the CNAM be "TrueCNAM"? So this is very amusing (to me) and I swear it wasn’t intentional on our part… but kind of proves the point of what we’re trying to do. We ordered the number you were verified with from the service provider we’re using for the call / text message verifications. We actually ordered a bunch of numbers and are rotating through them. The number you were verified with was actually bought / assigned to us about 7 months ago, and has been sitting mostly idle since then other than our own internal testing. It’s a Level3 number where the NPA-NXX-N has only been in service for a total of about 15 months. So we’ve had possession of that number for almost 1/2 the time its been in service, and for 7 months, yet you’re right, someone else’s name *IS* listed in some CNAM databases. We see what you saw in 1 case, and “New York NY” in another. Of course in our own database, we list “TrueCNAM Verify” for this number. The amusing part is both what I described above, and the fact that the service provider we obtained this number from (which is large) and we use to place verification calls / texts does not support updating stored CNAM information. Thanks for pointing this out, and we’ll try to resolve it. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:57:37 EDT TrueCNAM posted : Sam - thanks and we look forward to talking more with you. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 09:29:00 EDT kaila posted : Just bought in to support this. Your model is similar to truecaller- we're still waiting to get API access with them. Hope you get traction with carriers, and looking forward to seeing how you grow the service! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 08:41:12 EDT Arne Bolen posted : Great service, I have already signed up. :) Just a small detail. The CNAM for the verification call shows "ASSADI MILSTEIN", that is probably the law firm of Assadi & Milstein, LLP. Shouldn't the CNAM be "TrueCNAM"? -- myvoipnews@secure.mailbox.org - Peerio:myvoipnews Re: TrueCNAM introduction Thu, 04 Jun 2015 05:13:26 EDT sammoats posted : This looks awesome and is something that we'll be looking at in the near future! Sam CircleNet Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 22:10:01 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by josephf:Does your CNAM database only contain entries entered by your carrier customers and end-users? If so, will it be lacking entries for the millions of cellphones and landlines that use providers not subscribed to TrueCNAM? Yes, as of now that's a correct statement. I could get into a very long discussion / rant about what we're trying to do and why, but the bullet points come down to: - Traditional CNAM that most providers are using - while "widely" used, doesn't always show the same data. There's a variety of reasons for this including caching of data, not querying the LIDB, not storing in the LIDB (but with a 3rd party - even if large), bulk-data purchases from 3rd party databases (non telco related), etc. An example of this would be you can have even a large LEC like Verizon populate your CNAM, and in many cases it will take a VERY long time to appear, if ever, when calling some/many other networks. That statement is extremely simplified for the sake of brevity. - The pricing model for CNAM hasn't changed since its inception - or at least since I've been involved in the telecom industry (17 years). The major problem with the pricing model is that its per-query, so there's a financial incentive to cache at multiple layers. I believe most people on this forum are pretty sophisticated and have seen that themselves, or at least read about others experiencing problems with data not updating / stale data. We've designed our pricing model for both end-users and carriers so that there's basically zero financial incentive to cache, which is the way CNAM is technically supposed to work. You can't easily combine what we're doing with traditional CNAM which has a per-query (dip) cost of anywhere from typically around $0.002 to $0.006, nor do we expect that many / any traditional CNAM database would allow us to buy data from them after they see what our story is. We expect certainly in the near-term anyone that chooses to use us will either send requests to us and a traditional CNAM database in parallel, or sequentially. The pricing that we're offering to service providers currently takes this into account, and is very inexpensive comparatively even without it taken into account. Thanks for your question! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:50:32 EDT TrueCNAM posted : Ryan, thanks for the kind words! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:49:27 EDT josephf posted : Does your CNAM database only contain entries entered by your carrier customers and end-users? If so, will it be lacking entries for the millions of cellphones, landlines and VoIP users that use providers not subscribed to TrueCNAM? Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:47:50 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by josephf:It appears that your CNAM database is pretty much empty except for numbers entered into your system. Well its not exactly "empty", but compared to a traditional cached CNAM database, or one that actually queries the LIDB that's not an un-reasonable statement. I could argue though (as I'm sure many here have seen) that lots of data in the traditional CNAM databases is not "real" or "good" data. As mentioned above, we only reached out to carriers / service providers staring a little over 2 weeks ago, and only announced this service publicly a few hours ago, so its very early at this point (part of the reason we're offering free months as part of the coupon code originally mentioned). I'll add that the TrueSpam scores we're offering (and constantly improving the data and algorithms on) may be worth it by itself to some people. That said, to my knowledge, we are the only CNAM related database that allows any carrier or service provider to insert their data, for free and with zero commitment to ever use our paid services. We're also the only one letting any end-user submit their own number, which we hope will be attractive to some, most likely those that use a service provider like Google Voice or Skype which presently do nothing with CNAM storage, or querying. We do hope that service providers that are interested in getting their customers CNAM data as widely distributed as possible will send their data to us. We'd encourage anyone here to ask their service provider to work with us, both because its free and because I doubt many would argue that the traditional CNAM solutions are great. Thanks! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:43:34 EDT Ryan Tilton posted : We are excited about getting TrueCNAM launched on our network! I encourage other service providers to check out this service and get on board so that cnam will improve for everyone and spam phone calls will be ultimately eliminated. -- Owner at Vestalink.com & GVsip.com Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:33:46 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by Trimline:Do you offer an API for Asterisk? Could be useful indeed. We don't offer a turn-key Asterisk plug-in, though we have already reached out to some of the Asterisk distributions and discussed if they might be interested in building it into their distribution / GUI. That said, the API is just comprised of HTTPS requests, so its likely that at least some of the readers on this forum can roll their own if they're interested in doing so. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:29:36 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by josephf:Which carriers are using your CNAM data to display names to their customers? Right now not very many as we only started talking to carriers / service providers a little over 2 weeks ago. That said, we've spoken to many/most of the service providers frequently discussed in this forum, as well as many others and the vast majority have expressed positive feedback. Right now we have some that have submitted data to the database, some that are in the process of integrating, and some that we're still in discussions with. We're continuing to reach out to more carriers and service providers daily, and we're happy to further discuss the service with any that are reading this and we haven't spoken to yet. said by josephf:(i.e. If users edit their own CNAM, who will see the new name when receiving a call from that DID?)If an end user signs up on the website and adds their number, anyone else using the service will see their name when their number is queried. That includes carriers / service providers, and end users. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:23:13 EDT TrueCNAM posted : said by rizzo2dial:Are the intro prices above the price PER MONTH or the entire price for a year (i.e. $8.33/month or $8.33 TOTAL for a FULL YEAR of service)? All the prices are per *year*. If you take a look at: »www.truecnam.com/products you'll see the standard pricing is listed as " / year". The prices discounted with the coupon code are also for 1 year, with the discounted price reflecting the equivalent of the free months indicated. said by rizzo2dial:Also, do the discounted prices for the "first year" count for an entire 12 month period, or are they only offered on the remaining months after the "free portion" of the first year has been consumed? (In the case of the "Basic" plan, which offers 2 free months, does the $8.33 price count for 12 more months thereafter or only for 10 more months left in the first year)? Yes, in your example where the discounted price is $8.33 / year, that includes 12 months from when you sign up, and the $8.33 is billed as soon as you make the purchase. It won't be re-billed until 12 months from when you purchase it, and you can downgrade / cancel at anytime (you'll also receive an email reminder before it re-bills - a little before 1 year down the road). said by rizzo2dial:BTW, after the first year of service, what are the "non-discounted" prices on the plans above? Those are listed on the page I listed above, specifically: »www.truecnam.com/products Thanks for asking! Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:13:40 EDT josephf posted : It appears that your CNAM database is pretty much empty except for numbers entered into your system. Re: TrueCNAM introduction Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:02:30 EDT Trimline posted : Do you offer an API for Asterisk? Could be useful indeed.