Telco Financial Incentives

Argument that telcos profit from every delivered message including spam, creating a disincentive to filter. The billing system as a potential tool for tracing spam origins, and the lack of market forces compelling action.

← Back to The Australian Government to Require SMS/MMS Sender ID Registraion

Telecommunications companies face a perverse financial incentive to permit spam because they profit from every message delivered, creating a natural disincentive to implement effective filtering. While existing billing systems already possess the technical capability to trace illicit traffic back to its source for enforcement, commenters argue that a lack of market pressure and slow-moving regulation has allowed these profitable yet harmful practices to persist. This inertia is further compounded by the industrial scale of low-cost spam, which remains lucrative for providers who are reluctant to invest in security unless they can pass those costs on to consumers. Ultimately, the industry is seen as prioritizing profit over protection, with meaningful change only occurring when regulators finally catch up to entrenched business models.

4 comments tagged with this topic

View on HN · Topics
> You want outbound calls from your Philippines based staff to show as if they were calling from a local number. The company that has offshored it's support to the Philippines might want that, but I doubt any consumers want that. That shouldn't have happened, but regulation comes (20+ years?) after harmful business profit decisions have been made and implemented. But, thank you for the explanation. I have heard similar explanations before, and it has always sounded to me like a situation where the telcos are able to offer a service for a profit for the customers to hide the origin of their offshore call centres (that mostly nobody wants to speak to anyway). I think I just ranted twice, sorry. Thank you!
View on HN · Topics
Just whitelist the caller ID and have the originating network guarantor The second part is the hard part and requires coordination It wouldn’t be expensive or especially hard to do but there is no payoff for the network. Remember they make money off scam calls too Since as long as I can remember these organisations have been optimised for profit, not for GAF and that’s why they’re being savaged by regulation and OTT competitors now There has been no market forces compelling them to do this and until recently when it got really bad, no political or regulatory forces tl;dr na bro
View on HN · Topics
> I've yet to read a good explanation of why the telcos permit ... They (the telcos) are paid for every message they deliver. So absent regulation forcing them to do otherwise, it is in their best interest (additional profit) to pass through every message with no filtering of any form. And, if the regulators had any technical knowledge at all, they would recognize that the billing system is the key to stopping the robo texts. Every text can be traced back to its origin through the billing system (because that's how the telco's collect their fees, so of course they know who to collect from for which messages they forwarded). So the regulators just need to force open the billing systems and trace the money back to the illicit senders, and then they know who to cut off (or to fine out of existence).
View on HN · Topics
Cost. Cost to spam and scam tends to 0 at industrial scale. Meanwhile amount of time and resources telco want to spend on fighting it is Bounded by how much regulators are going to allow them to pass on to customers.