Post #1191817

2026-03-09 19:41 UTC

@gettie @kkarhan there's an obvious problem worldwide for using a telephone number as an identifier for any comms the national govt might not approve of. Telephone numbers are *not* property owned by the enduser or even the telephone company - they are considered public resources administered by the Communications Ministry of each nation, which does make sense as there's a limited amount of them for each country! So the govt will *always* feel entitled to investigate what they are used for, the same way there are speed limits, road signs and CCTV on the public street and often more restrictions on what you can do in public places as opposed to a private gathering...

Replies (1)

@kkarhan@infosec.space 2026-03-09 19:49

@vfrmedia @gettie Point is that #Telco regulations stems from #Telegraphy and #Postal operations, and whilst there are legitimate reasons for #regulators to disconnect phone lines (otherwise #robocalling and #SMS-#Spam would be even more rampant than #eMail-#Spamming!) Which OFC also intertwines with "#LawfulInterception" and the means of Governments to exercise control.So anything claiming #security must inherently acknowledge the unfixable #insecurity of the #PSTN and completely cease using it and it's per-design compromised Infrastructure as a matter of principle. That's why any "#secure communications" treats it as a hostile network and not to be trusted! And that's not even scratching the surface that countries try to outlaw #anonymity - starting with #Prepaid - #SIM - Cards. Because those traditionally had no reason for "#KYC" as there was no means for a customer to incur #debt or commit #fraud against the telco that provided said services, so there was [and IMHO still is] no "legitimate interest" in demanding any #ID for those, as any crime committed would be investigated with the existing #Govware inside the networks and thus found out.

Open ##1240824