TexasCHLforum.com

For those interested, here's the article that "inspired" the response to events that happened in my family - http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/02/13/call ... -911-call/

For those that didn't read the article, or didn't understand, here's a very "basic" of how this works:

A distruntled computer gaming geek sends a text message to the PD, using a "spoofed" phone number - (note, this is much easier to do than you would think). The text message is treated as if it's a 911 call, and the police are sent.

This practice is called "swatting" by the gamers - the intent is obvious, and those doing it strive to make the situation sounds as (believably) dire as possible. The bigger the response, the "more successful" the swatting. I fear some day one is going to be "very successful", tragically so.

So, in our family situation, here's what happened:

I got a call shortly after 2 am from my stepson who lives in a city close to where the above incident took place (I'm not going to name the city). He was extremely upset, and told me several police had entered his house (the front door was unlocked, so no damage), and forced him to lie on the ground with a gun inches from his head. His wife was detained on the couch, one son (12) stayed in his room (wide-awake) while this was going on, and the other son (8) slept through the entire ordeal. After a brief walk through through the house, the police informed my stepson and DIL that they had received a 911 call listing this address that an armed black intruder was holding two women hostage. Police apologized and left. My SS was shaken, and worried that possibly one of my daughters (I have four) might have called, or his wife's sister. He wanted me to confirm with my daughters that there were no issues going on. I did so, there weren't, I called him back and told him to go get some sleep, all was well for now.

Then I remembered I had read that above listed article a couple days prior. I knew my grandsones were both very avid gamers, so much so that they have a "game room" dedicated to playing computer games, complete with big screen tv, headsets, and a dedicated internet connection. I sent him and my DIL a link to the article, and told them I suspected this might be what was done to them.

Long story short, I guessed right. They're still waiting on some FOIA requests to get all of the details, but it was confirmed by my grandson that he was threatened by one of his playing buddies (13) out of Illinois, and then confirmed with the playing buddy that he did this.

Through the process, I've been thinking a lot about the whole situation. I'm no legal expert (though I would be considered an IT expert), but here are some of my thoughts.

• Parents, teach your children well. My step son didn't grow up with me (he was an adult when I married my wife), but his sister and stepsisters all heard the same refrain from me. Be careful how much personal information you give out on the internet. Be as polite online as you would "in real life" (because it really is still real life). It's worth noting that my grandson had learned how to hack opponent's machines to slow down their game play, thus giving him an edge, and this kid was upset over that.
• Parents you also need to monitor your kid's online activities. They shouldn't have a "private room", or if they do, it should be required that the door be open, and you should walk through the room regularly, preferably unannounced. My daughters all knew that I had software that monitored their online activity, and I used it regularly. The down side to that was that they felt "imposed upon", the upside is I never got a late night visit from the police, or a internet stalker (and they all four grew up into fine young ladies :))
• I suspect that with the regularity of this happening, and ease of kids doing it, PDs are going to have to modify their response to text message 911 calls. As I read about things like the Costco incident in LV, combined with the practice of swatting, I see a major tragedy just waiting to happen (I shudder to think what would have happened had they busted into my house, which has guns in it, instead of my stepson's which does not - now days if I'm awake I'm armed, if I'm asleep, the gun is nearby)

I'd really like to hear some comments and thoughts about this from LEOs on the forum about this, and how their department is handling it (or anticipating handling it).

Wow. I don't have any helpful comments for this. Just wow.

It's incredibly easy to spoof a phone number and call the police as well in fact I have one such program on my phone where I can spoof any phone number I want. How much worse could it have been if the person called and was "freaking out" about the person that "broke into their house and locked them somewhere and OMG my son/daughter is in the house too." Kids these days don't understand when they do this to other people what the consequences can be and they think it is hilarious.

I know how this is done with a PBX, but a cell phone? WOW.

The phone company has been allowing telemarketers to spoof the called id number for years. When they intentionally undermined the reliability of caller id, it was only a matter of time before script kiddies started using that for malicious pranks.

Bart wrote:The phone company has been allowing telemarketers to spoof the called id number for years. When they intentionally undermined the reliability of caller id, it was only a matter of time before script kiddies started using that for malicious pranks.

I have been out of the game for 4 years, but it is with a FCC violation or may have been a Texas tariff violation, but it was not "allowed" by the telecom industry.

I never saw it enforced either.

texasag93 wrote:I know how this is done with a PBX, but a cell phone? WOW.

If you have an droid search for "bluff my call" if you have an iphone you have to jailbreak it first and then search for that program.

texasag93 wrote:

Bart wrote:The phone company has been allowing telemarketers to spoof the called id number for years. When they intentionally undermined the reliability of caller id, it was only a matter of time before script kiddies started using that for malicious pranks.

I have been out of the game for 4 years, but it is with a FCC violation or may have been a Texas tariff violation, but it was not "allowed" by the telecom industry.

I never saw it enforced either.

Actually it is not illegal unless there is intent to defraud. Here is the info from the Truth in Caller ID Act that was signed into law in Dec. 2010 http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/callerid.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Telemarketers are not allowed to spoof their Caller ID.

You could most likely prove intent to defraud in the case of the fake 911 calls. 2 options... first is that the caller intended to defraud the PD of the resources it expended in responding to the call. Alternatively, you could contend that the caller intended to defraud the citizens of the community the use of the PD resources that were tied up with the call, and therefore not available to respond to other needs in the community.

You also have false police report/official statements violations, and depending on local statutes, I'm sure that you could add more to the list.

If this is in fact happening, there are multiple ways to prosecute it.

Whatever else you call it, it is a despicable act.

Sangiovese wrote:You could most likely prove intent to defraud in the case of the fake 911 calls. 2 options... first is that the caller intended to defraud the PD of the resources it expended in responding to the call. Alternatively, you could contend that the caller intended to defraud the citizens of the community the use of the PD resources that were tied up with the call, and therefore not available to respond to other needs in the community.

You also have false police report/official statements violations, and depending on local statutes, I'm sure that you could add more to the list.

If this is in fact happening, there are multiple ways to prosecute it.

911 doesn't use Caller ID; it uses a totally different system. That's all I will say about that.

Keith B wrote:

Sangiovese wrote:You could most likely prove intent to defraud in the case of the fake 911 calls. 2 options... first is that the caller intended to defraud the PD of the resources it expended in responding to the call. Alternatively, you could contend that the caller intended to defraud the citizens of the community the use of the PD resources that were tied up with the call, and therefore not available to respond to other needs in the community.

You also have false police report/official statements violations, and depending on local statutes, I'm sure that you could add more to the list.

If this is in fact happening, there are multiple ways to prosecute it.

911 doesn't use Caller ID; it uses a totally different system. That's all I will say about that.

Yeah the call of this nature is illegal for sure...the perps will most likely be identified and prosecuted.

Sangiovese wrote:You could most likely prove intent to defraud in the case of the fake 911 calls. 2 options... first is that the caller intended to defraud the PD of the resources it expended in responding to the call. Alternatively, you could contend that the caller intended to defraud the citizens of the community the use of the PD resources that were tied up with the call, and therefore not available to respond to other needs in the community.

You also have false police report/official statements violations, and depending on local statutes, I'm sure that you could add more to the list.

If this is in fact happening, there are multiple ways to prosecute it.

When I was researching this for my stepson and daughter in law, I found one site that spoke of charges against an individual doing this. He was charged with (among other things) assualt with a deadly weapon (that weapon being the PD's weapons). I couldn't find that link just now, so it's possible I'm remembering wrong. That said, this person - http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/28/local/me-swat28 - plead gulity to (among other charges) "false imprisonment by violence".

In short, it sounds like some authorities aren't playing around with this anymore.

Keith B wrote: 911 doesn't use Caller ID; it uses a totally different system. That's all I will say about that.

I don't think I said it does. I don't have a clue how it works, and I (usually) refrain from jumping into areas where I'm clueless :) (My wife may have a different opinion on that subject!)

I was just responding to the "not illegal unless there is intent to defraud" comment... and suggesting some of the many ways that it could be prosecuted.

Sangiovese wrote:

Keith B wrote: 911 doesn't use Caller ID; it uses a totally different system. That's all I will say about that.

I don't think I said it does. I don't have a clue how it works, and I (usually) refrain from jumping into areas where I'm clueless :) (My wife may have a different opinion on that subject!)

I was just responding to the "not illegal unless there is intent to defraud" comment... and suggesting some of the many ways that it could be prosecuted.

I was just responding to your comment

Sangiovese wrote: You could most likely prove intent to defraud in the case of the fake 911 calls.

In the case of 911, you would not be able to provide false information to the 911 system by spoofing yoru CallerID. Calls are identified by a totally seprate method. You additionally cannot block your information by doing a *67 or other means of blocking CallerID.