Background
As reported instances of spam text messages, scam text messages, and “robotexting” have increased over the past several years, many news outlets have treated robotexting and robocalling as similar, interchangeable scams coming from the same criminals. In fact, robocall and robotext scams are completely different. They use different technologies to deliver messages, they are done by different people, they originate from different locations, and they use different methods to extract money from victims. This report will summarize the differences between robocall and robotext scams and the implications for policy makers seeking to combat them.
Comparative Analysis
| ROBOCALLS | ROBOTEXTS | |
| CALLER ID SPOOFING | • Caller ID spoofing is easy to do when sending voice calls because Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) does not use the caller ID to deliver a call. The caller ID can be overwritten with any value.
• It is difficult for phone companies to detect and block caller ID spoofing because an incoming, out-of-network call may have passed through 5-7 different phone companies before it arrives. Phone companies receiving the call may have no way of knowing where a call came from. Phone companies receiving a call usually only know which phone company sent them the call. |
• Spoofing text message caller IDs is possible, but technically difficult and, in the US at least, rare.
• This is because robotexts are typically delivered directly to terminating networks, so phone companies have been able to block most technical opportunities that allow text message caller ID spoofing. |
| ROBOCALLS | ROBOTEXTS | |
| ORIGINS | • Telemaketing scams that are semi-criminal, abusive, or involve deceptive business practices (e.g. car warranties, health insurance enrollment, credit repair, student loan forgiveness, etc.) usually originate from inside the US. Even when calls themselves are made from overseas, they are usually paid for by, and “warm transferred” to, US call centers.
• Most prima facie criminal robocalling scams (e.g. government impersonation, corporate impersonation, tech support fraud, etc.) originate from overseas—usually from India. |
• Robotexts are usually delivered directly to terminating networks, so they are usually sent from inside the US.
• Phishing/SMishing messages designed to steal credit card information can originate from outside the US—but they are a small portion of the overall volume of robotexts (see below). • Criminals creating messages and making money off of them may be outside the US, but they pay SPam-as-a-Service (SPaaS) providers inside the US to actually deliver robotexts. This represents the majority of robotexts sent. |
| ROBOCALLS | ROBOTEXTS | |
| DELIVERY METHODS / TECHNOLOGY | • Voice robocalls are primarily delivered using Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology.
• Calls may pass through 4-7 different phone companies between the point of origin and the point of termination. • A call may start as VoIP, but may move between VoIP and non-VoIP networks along the path to its destination. |
• While international text message may pass through multiple phone companies, most robotexts are delivered directly to the terminating phone network.
• Roughly 10% of robotexts are delivered using Application-to-Person bulk messaging platforms (A2P). This is usually done by setting up fake, temporary accounts with A2P service providers. • Roughly 40% of robotexts are delivered using bulk-activated freemail accounts (Gmail, Outlook, etc.). Messages are delivered through e-mail-to-text message gateways. • Roughly 40% of robotexts are delivered using disposable prepaid SIM cards. Messages are usually delivered using SIM gateway and SIM server devices in what are known as SIM farms. • All major US wireless providers deploy advanced, sophisticated spam blocking, monitoring, and filtering systems, so the distribution of different spam message delivery methods changes from month to month. • Messages can be delivered via SMS or MMS, but are usually delivered via MMS because it is easier to conceal content. Multiparty messaging (up to 25 recipients) is used to maximize volume. |
| ROBOCALLS | ROBOTEXTS | |
| SCAMS | Criminal • Law enforcement impersonation; • Social Security impersonation; • IRS impersonation; • Tech support impersonation (Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Norton, Best Buy, etc.); • Electric utility impersonation; • Lottery scams; • Payday loan scams; • “Grandparent” scams (fake bail bonds). Telemarketing/TCPA Violations • Debit reduction; |
• Spam advertising (CBD sales, Viagra, supplements, gambling, celebrity gossip sites, mass tort enrollment, weight loss, pornography, etc.).
• Traditional bank phishing/SMishing. • Deceptive/fraudulent reoccurring charges. These are “free gift” bait-and-switch offers where “free” gifts come with agreements for reoccurring credit card charges (usually for bogus cell phone apps). Charges are kept under $30 so chargebacks are not reported to Visa. By message volume, this is the most common robotexting scheme. • In some cases, gift or survey offers have also concealed “consent farms” where TCPA consent is resold to voice telemarketers. |
| ROBOCALLS | ROBOTEXTS | |
| MONETIZATION METHODS | • Gift cards; • Cash shipments; • Cryptocurrency ATM deposits; • Hawala wire transfers; • Money mule wire transfers. |
• Direct payment via credit/debit card. |
Further Discussion
For analysis and recommendations about how to stop robotexting, please see the FVRO White Paper, “How to Stop Robotexting.”
Implications for Policy Makers
The most efficient method of reducing robotexting is to identify, arrest, and prosecute SPaaS provides. Information from such investigations can then be used to pursue major robotexting and SMishing rings.