4 December 2024

Crackdown on SMS scams is placing greater onus on telcos

| Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
26
Person holding phone

The Federal Government is elevating its fight against SMS scams. Photo: File.

An identification register the Federal Government hopes will help stop SMS scams by making telcos check where messages carried on their services are coming from is on its way.

SMS Sender ID Register, as it is known, will be an enforceable industry standard, requiring telecommunications providers to check whether messages being sent under a brand name correspond with the legitimate registered sender.

A pilot is already underway, and Communications Minister Michelle Rowland has directed the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to develop the register to be fully operational by late 2025.

During the first half of next year, ACMA will consult on the industry standard, establish the systems and processes required to operate the register and provide a transition period for entities to submit and register their sender IDs.

The pilot register, which involved a number of network operators and major brands – including National Australia Bank, Commonwealth Bank and the Australian Taxation Office – registering their sender IDs, will continue while the consultation and development continues.

“The SMS Sender ID Register is an important tool to protect hard-working Australians from increasingly sophisticated and organised scammers,” Ms Rowland said.

“We’ve all received scam messages on our phones purporting to be from reputable sources – and it’s costing Australians millions of dollars every year.

“This mandatory register will enable these messages to be blocked or flagged as a scam – better-protecting consumers from being cheated.

“In this way, the register will also help restore trust in communications received from legitimate organisations and make Australia an even harder place for scammers to operate.”

READ ALSO Both major parties pat themselves on the back over controversial social media ban

If the Sender ID is not on the register, ACMA will either block the SMS or include a warning.

Under the new rules, telcos must also publish information to assist their customers in proactively managing and reporting scam calls, sharing information about scam calls with other telcos, and reporting identified scam calls to authorities.

The aim is that the register will help stop scammers from using the names of trusted brands, including banking institutions, service providers or government entities – like ANZ, Linkt or myGov – and deceiving Australians into thinking the scam messages are from reputable sources.

Assistant Treasurer Stephen Jones said the establishment of the mandatory register follows the passage of laws earlier this year and is informed by the voluntary pilot phase that tested the effectiveness of the register.

He said it forms part of a suite of measures to make Australia the toughest target in the world for scammers and bring losses down.

“Our coordinated approach to keeping Australians safe from scammers is among the most comprehensive in the world and the register will help to bolster our defences against the criminal scammers,” Mr Jones said.

“Scam text messages bombard Australians 24/7. The register will help to shut this down by disrupting the scammers’ business model.

“The government’s crackdown on scams is already showing signs of success, but it is not job done.

“We continue to work to ensure Australians have the best protections against these predatory and criminal scams.”

With SMS the most commonly reported scam delivery method, the register’s purpose is to provide greater protection to more consumers, as well as to legitimate brands and organisations impacted by scam activity. The 2023-24 Federal Budget provided $10 million through ACMA over four years to launch and maintain the register.

READ ALSO New legislation makes it easier for Commonwealth frontline workers to get protection orders

ACMA registered new rules on Monday (1 December) that require telcos to detect, trace and block scam calls.

A Reducing Scam Calls Code was developed by the telco industry on ACMA’s recommendation.

Chair of the ACMA’s Scam Telecommunications Action Taskforce, Fiona Cameron, said the code is a significant step towards providing better protections for consumers and making Australia a ‘hard target’ for scammers.

“The code is a unique and ground-breaking contribution to global regulatory efforts to prevent the harms caused by scammers. It is a holistic, end-to-end framework for effective scam reduction activity,” Ms Cameron said.

“There is no silver bullet to reduce scams, but these new rules place clear obligations on industry to do more to protect their customers and build confidence that it’s safe to answer a ringing phone.

“Scams have a devastating impact on their victims and scammers are unscrupulous in taking advantage of people. They quickly adapt to changing circumstances, as we have seen, for example, in scam activity targeting Australians during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Industry’s initial efforts to block scams are an encouraging step towards the substantial and sustained work required before consumers will see a real reduction in scam calls.

“The end game is to stop scammers in their tracks wherever possible, and the ACMA will enforce this code to ensure that telcos meet their obligations to their customers.”

Join the conversation

26
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
Heywood Smith1:17 pm 06 Dec 24

Will be interesting to see if it works.. There are already scammers who are able to spoof the numbers of corporations, making it look legit i.e. a recent article where the scammers caller ID number matched the NAB customer contact number on the back of the victims credit card, so she thought it was legit.

I don’t understand how these people are able to put any phone number on their messages and phone calls. Surely the telcos can make sure that only the actual number, or an ‘unknown’ title, can be displayed.

intrinsic technical limitations in how Caller ID protocols were designed over 30 years ago

About time this happened, it should have occurred years ago.

I’ve had the FBI SMS, I’m under investigation, also the MyGov act now or your old age pension will be cancelled, also toll e-mails, etc, etc. If the number is not in my contacts or in my dialled number list, it’s deleted

I’ll wager that this will do very little, if anything at all, to stop or reduce the amount lost to scams. The issue is education, and there have been vast attempts at educating people on this for over a decade now. If people are still so stupid that they click on links in text messages and emails, they obviously can’t be educated.

“I’ll wager that this will do very little, if anything at all, to stop or reduce the amount lost to scams.”

I’ll wager you didn’t read the article (again).

“If the Sender ID is not on the register, ACMA will either block the SMS or include a warning.”.

If they can’t be educated, then the issue isn’t education is it? Besides, the stories are great clickbait for the tabloid news sites. What would they do if they didn’t have these stories?

Ahh, seano, as clueless as ever.

This will not stop people clicking on links from random numbers claiming to be the ATO or oyher entities. It will prevent senders being able to send messages as the ATO.

You can just say you are technologically illiterate in fewer words.

It will stop most people from getting the links in the first place Ken. You’d know that if you’d read the article.

How you accuse anyone of being technologically illiterate when you haven’t read the article and clearly don’t understand the proposal would be amazing if I didn’t already know you were a Russian apologist who lives in an alternate universe from the rest of us.

It won’t stop people from getting the links.

Again, you are technologically illiterate. What you are suggesting would require a telco to examine every single text message sent to an Australian mobile number. That isn’t what they are doing, whether the article says it or not.

“SMS Sender ID Register, as it is known, will be an enforceable industry standard, requiring telecommunications providers to check whether messages being sent under a brand name correspond with the legitimate registered sender.”

Well that’s embarrassing Ken.

🤣
Again, you very clearly don’t understand how an SMS is sent under a brand name. You continue doubling down on being technologically illiterate. Examining every text message sent to an Australian mobile number would violate numerous privacy and surveillance laws, for a start.

It’s like trying to explain calculus to my dog, but I reckon he would understand quicker.

Ken, I know you’re covering your embarrassment because you don’t understand this or any technology seemingly, but I’ll explain it to you.

Every SMS will be checked, if it contains a brand name (or anything resembling one) and if the message is not being sent by the company registered to that brand it will either be blocked or have a warning attached.

This will be done with code (which are the instructions that computers run on) and will vastly reduce the number of scam messages that get through, and place a warning on most of the rest.

You can pretend that this won’t work because you hate the government but that’s not a rational position.

You can read the consultation paper here:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/sms-sender-id-registry-fighting-sms-impersonation-scams

I won’t expect an apology, just the usual disappearing act following a loss, I know the moral courage and/or commonsense to admit when you’re wrong is challenging for some.

LOL
Again, wrong.
What they are attempring to do is prevent exploiting the mobile network, which allows messages to be sent as a brand name, rather than from a phone number. This isn’t hard to understand. They aren’t, and legally can’t, examine every text message sent to an Australian number and block anything with a brand name in it.

Again, my dog would understand this before you will.

Ken it’s literally in the documentation I liked, stop embarrassing yourself.

Where in the document does it say that every single text message sent to an Australian number will be analysed for brand names? Just the page number will do.

You’re telling lies, yet again.

Ken you look even more foolish than usual when you deny reality.

“SMS Sender ID Register, as it is known, will be an enforceable industry standard, requiring telecommunications providers to check whether messages being sent under a brand name correspond with the legitimate registered sender.”

You can read page 7 here:
https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/20240218-Consultation-paper-SMS-registry.pdf

You either wont read it, won’t understand it or pretend that it’s saying something it’s not.

The honourable thing would be to admit you were wrong. You won’t do that either.

LOL
So you don’t even understand the actual problem. No wonder you don’t understand how they are attempting to solve it. Maybe read what it says again, and notice it says nothing about examining every text message sent to an Australian number. You are so confidently wrong that it’s hilarious.

The level of ignorance and lack of critical thinking you display is off the scale. What you are suggesting will happen would block text messages containing brand names. That would prevent normal conversations. Code doesn’t understand context, champ.

Thanks for proving my point Ken. It’s not about the “actual problem” it’s about the proposal you said wouldn’t work with even attempting to understand it purely out of partisanship and have then tied yourself in knots trying to make your ridiculous claim valid.

You were wrong, and you don’t have the commonsense or moral courage to admit it. That’s OK; I expected nothing less.

LOL
You appear to live in a fantasy land. You quite clearly don’t understand the problem, and have some technologically illiterate idea of what the solution being legislated is. You are completely wrong on every level.

Recognising that something won’t work has nothing to do with partisanship. Suggesting it does is just you grasping at straws to deflect from you being utterly wrong. The legislation will not stop gullible people clicking on links in text messages. It will prevent those text messages being sent under a brand name. If people have ignored a couple of decades of attempted education about clicking on links from dubious sources, this isn’t going to help.

It’s not about the “problem” it’s about the proposal to fix it which you dismissed purely on partisan grounds.

You’ve then pretended to know more about the technology whilst demonstrating no understanding of the proposal despite having the literature linked for you.

To sum up, the literature you either haven’t read or don’t understand. Whilst it will initially be voluntary, Telcos will eventually be required to check all SMSs, any featuring a brand name or an approximation of a brand name will then need to be checked to see if the sender is the registered owner of the brand. If not, the text will be blocked or amended with a warning. The trial has gone well so far.

It’s just code. I’ve written code like this myself, it’s not hard. The only issue will be whether the brand name owners register but of course, the major ones will because they don’t want their customers/clients ripped off.

You were wrong Ken, just admit it for once and do the honourable thing.

LOL
If you had written ANY code and had any understanding of how the logic worked, you would probably not be continually and absolutely wrong on this. You’re now just making up more lies.

I was a very senior software engineer for almost 2 decades, for a couple of household name tech companies, and lead entire development teams before moving into software sales. If there’s something I know, it’s how code works.

Again, nowhere in the literature does it even hint at or suggest that every text message will ever be analysed for brand names and blocked on that basis. It is moronic to believe that a text message saying something like “I’m going to Woolworths on the way home, do you need anything?” would be blocked. Your belief on this is just the pinnacle of stupidity.

It’s still hilarious how confidently wrong you are, and how you have entirely concocted a fantasy that the document you linked does not say. Absolutely cooked.

It’s literally in the documentation I linked to Ken.

You can pretend you were a software engineer but it does not save you any embarrassment Ken, it actually makes it worse because telcos already check SMSs for malicious code and scams and have done for years.

https://www.itnews.com.au/news/telcos-get-new-powers-to-block-malicious-sms-scams-at-scale-573290

This is just one more check. But it’s an effective check because it’s the brand names that convince people that the message is legit.

You can apologise any time you like (I know you won’t though because that would be honourable).

The documentation you linked does not say what you are suggesting it does, at all. You are telling a bald faced lie.

There was a trial in 2021, which has gone absolutely nowhere, because it ended up with far too many false positives.

You have to be trolling at this point. I can’t believe anybody would actually be this cooked.

Ken, it says what the proposal is that you dismissed without reason or even reading it because of partisanship.

A point you further reinforced when you claimed without evidence that they won’t be checking every SMS when they actually do already. Something you could have found out with a simple Google search.

But when your opinions are not based on evidence having things embarrassingly blow up in your face is a risk you take Ken.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.