Why is it so hard to trace an anonymous bomb threat? [telecom]

Why is it so hard to trace an anonymous bomb threat?

by Russell Brandom

For months, Jewish Community Centers have been targeted by near-daily bomb threats, with over 100 reports since the beginning of 2017. Last Friday seemed to offer some respite, with the arrest of an individual responsible for some of the threats, and a new order from the FCC stripping anonymity protections from anyone dialing into a JCC. But the days after the order was issued saw even more threats, which led to evacuations at a Florida day school, a Delaware community center, a Brooklyn Children's Museum, and the Anti-Defamation League head- quarters in Manhattan. This weekend, as many centers prepared for Purim, six more threats hit Jewish centers in Milwaukee, Indianapolis, and other cities.

formatting link

Reply to
Monty Solomon
Loading thread data ...

The article refers to many "poorly defined IP PBX's" that allow hackers to take over their system.

It seems to me that such a PBX is a clearly a threat to the integrity to the telephone network, as well as to the business it serves. (A hack could be very costly to the host business). As such, it should be mandated that any PBX connected to the network be required to be secure. Historically, this was policy since customer owned equipment was permitted to be connected--it couldn't impact the network.

Yes, that would cost such PBX customers more money, but the article says they get badly burned, so it probably would be worth it to them. Further, obviously allow hacking onto the telephone network could be very harmful.

Reply to

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.