1. TITLE: Baseline Display Guidelines SOURCE*: Hala Mowafy (Ericsson)
IPNNI
October 23-25, 2018
Tampa, Florida
TITLE: Baseline Display Guidelines
SOURCE*: Hala Mowafy (Ericsson)
_______________________________
Abstract
In addition to the guidelines published in ATIS , there is a need to consider baseline criteria that would be interpreted for the protection and empowerment of the end user. This contribution presents some of those key criteria and solicits input for additional criteria.
NOTICE
This contribution has been prepared to assist the ATIS & SIP Forum IPNNI Task Force. This document is offered to the Committee as a basis for discussion and is not a binding agreement on Ericsson or any other company. The requirements are subject to change in form and numerical value after more study. Ericsson specifically reserves the right to add to, or withdraw, the statements contained
CONTACT: Hala Mowafy

2. Interpretation of Available Data
With or without SHAKEN
In addition to the guidelines in ATIS , there is a need for a more basic treatment of available industry data.
This presentation launches a discussion on the following:
What are some basic “indicators” that should be relayed to the consumer to maximize information and empowerment?
What should the display verbalize to the end user?

3. The Display
Content will vary based on each Service Provider (SP), and the analytics provider’s algorithms
Each SP along with its contracted analytics provider will determine the number and types of criteria used in assessing incoming calls and assign different weights to each.
Different levels of sophistication and differentiation among analytics providers benefits consumers.
However there should be a baseline set of criteria that are required to empower the consumer

4. Per recommendations of ATIS-1000081
In General…
Available Data
Call Assessment
Human Factors
SHAKEN results
DNO lists
Bad actor reports (e.g. FTC and FCC lists, black and white lists, etc.)
Call Patterns and duration
TN format validity
Honey pot data
Higher Analytics
Per recommendations of ATIS
Baseline criteria
Different levels of analytics will yield more results for the consumer.
Some algorithms are more complex and employ more inputs, each treated at a different weight.
But what are the baseline criteria?
TN: telephone number

5. Proposed Baseline Criteria
TN is on a DNO list
TN is on the FTC/FCC and known scam lists
TN format is not valid
TN is disconnected/inactive (per carrier records and/or honeypot reports)
REMEMBER the goals from the Strikeforce:
- Protect and Empower the consumer

6. What to Display – in the absence of SHAKEN?
Input
Recommended Display
TN is on a DNO list
“Scam”
TN is on the FTC/FCC and known scam lists
“Possible Scam”
TN format is not valid
“Fake Number”
TN is disconnected/inactive (per carrier records and/or honeypot reports, etc.)

7. What to Display – with SHAKEN attest A?
Input
Comment
Display
TN is on a DNO list
Not likely; authentication would detect unauthorized use of TN
“Unknown”
TN is on the FTC/FCC and known scam lists
It is possible for an authorized customer to carry out scams from a valid TN/station (i.e., pass attestation). However, given the high rate of false +ves on these lists, this input is better digested within analytics than standalone.
“Possible Scam”
TN format is not valid
Not likely to be invalid and pass with attestation A, therefore a stronger warning would be helpful.
“Scam”
TN is disconnected/inactive (per carrier records and/or honeypot reports, etc.)
Should not pass authentication
N/A

8. What to Display – with SHAKEN attest B?
Input
Comment
Display
TN is on a DNO list
Authentication may not detect unauthorized use of TN
“Possible Scam”
TN is on the FTC/FCC and known scam lists
It is possible for an authorized customer to carry out scams from a valid TN/station. However, given the high rate of false +ves on these lists, this input is better digested within analytics than standalone.
TN format is not valid
With no direct relation to the caller, a stronger warning would be helpful.
“Scam”
TN is disconnected/inactive (per carrier records and/or honeypot reports, etc.)

9. What to Display – with SHAKEN attest C?
Input
Comment
Display
TN is on a DNO list
Authentication may have failed to detect it since there is no direct relation to caller
“Possible Scam”
TN is on the FTC/FCC and known scam lists
This input is better digested within analytics than standalone. And with that, a stronger warning
TN format is not valid
Lower attestation and invalid TN format warrants a stronger warning to consumer.
“Scam”
TN is disconnected/inactive (per carrier records and/or honeypot reports, etc.)
Lower attestation and inactive status of the TN warrants a stronger warning to consumer.

10. Baseline Criteria
What more baseline criteria should be considered?