Phone Hack?

December 2, 2005 8:57 PM

If I want to alter what people see on their caller ID when I call, is that possible (without ordering a new line from the phone company)?

For example, if I wish to use a calling card that I bought from Costco, is there anything I can do that will make my business name show up on the receiver's caller ID, rather than Unknown Caller?

posted by zephyrbill to technology (6 comments total)

Well, one thing you *should* know is that if the called has a digital line, or an 800 number they will receive ANI rather than Caller ID. ANI information is not only (AFAIK) unchaneable, but it cannot be hidden from the called (I'm pretty sure this even includes police mandated harassment blocks for privacy). Which is why I find America's Most Wanted "anonymous tips" 800 number quite the larf. ANI typically will only contain your phone number, time called, and line type.

That being said, this company could probably do what you want (Caveat emptor! I've never tried them!) Or you could probably just call up your phone company and get them to change your Caller ID. They aren't likely to care as long as they get to squeeze some more cash from your wallet.

As from before, any solution for Caller ID that does *not* involve bouncing your call through their system and redialing it from one of their lines cannot block ANI.
posted by shepd at 9:24 PM on December 2, 2005

But - if you're using a calling card, it won't matter what the phone company has on-file for your caller ID name, since you're effectively bouncing your call out of wherever the calling-card company is based.

Well, they could forward your information, but obviously they aren't doing that right now.
posted by odinsdream at 9:27 PM on December 2, 2005

I'm going out on a limb to say that it is possible, and here's why: I keep getting phone calls that show up on my caller ID as PRISON. There are no prisons in the listed area code, and businesses with that number listed.
posted by MrZero at 10:03 PM on December 2, 2005

orangeboxing
posted by dhartung at 10:05 PM on December 2, 2005

If you own your own PRI (a 23-simultaneous-call circuit common in mid- to large companies), you have an excellent opportunity to muck about with your outgoing caller ID -- as long as your carrier will allow it. A small number of carriers I've worked with will only allow you to show numbers (DIDs) you actually own, and about half of all providers I've worked with (US, west coast) still can't do user-specified text caller ID.

That said, unless you're the telecom manager of a descent sized company (24+ phone lines) you're probably out of luck. Outgoing caller ID on an analog line (like your house) is set at the phone company. Outgoing caller ID on "centrex" lines (like a small CPA firm might have) can be re-configured at the user's request, but only by your local Bell, and in my experience with a 24-hr turn around.

Per shepd's comments, there is a good deal of ISDN signaling that is not user modifiable, and to my knowledge that includes some true source information (so if you called America's Most Wanted and yelled "I did it" then hung up, you can bet the 5-0 would be at your door before you could say "prank call"), but you have a lot of flexibility in changing what appears to the casual user.

When you bounce through a redialer (like Vonage or a calling card service) there's only a 50/50 chance they have the technical ability to change the outgoing caller ID (one type of popular high-capacity phone line sacrifices signaling information for higher call densities). In the future I expect this to become a big customer feature of VoIP providers. (per-call caller ID, make your Vonage phone look like your cell phone's caller ID, text caller ID that has a caller-specified call topic in it)

Per dhartung, that device assumes you're connected to the same wire ("the call's coming from inside your house!" as the urban legend has it) as the target phone.
posted by jwadhams at 11:00 PM on December 2, 2005

We had an FPP on this a while back.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 11:52 PM on December 2, 2005