Caller ID vs caller trust: The gap we ignore

In A Scandal in Bohemia, a short story by Arthur Conan Doyle, detective Sherlock Holmes asks his friend Dr. Watson if he has seen the steps that lead up to the famous 221B Baker Street residence. "Frequently," Watson replies. At which Holmes asks him "How many are there?" A surprised Watson admits he does not know. At which Holmes says, "Quite so. You have not observed. And yet you have seen."That essentially sums up the difference between Calling Name Presentation (CNAP) and the app-based caller ID solutions. The former lets you see something, the latter could help you and observe much more. Is adding a name to a number enough?CNAP, which has recently been rolled out in India, is the reason why we see names with incoming calls from even those numbers that are not in our contact list.

On the surface, this seems like a wonderful solution. We get to see who is calling, without having to download any app for this purpose.Well, more information, for a start. What CNAP shows us is a name. And that really is all. You see words on a screen, but still know nothing about the person. A name is better than no name, but actually not much else. Even if we see a name with a number on an incoming call, there is no way of knowing whether the person is authentic, credible or believable. This is because the name you see through a CNAP service is that of the person who registered the SIM card (the phone connection). Getting a phone connection generally involves giving KYC (know your customer) information to the operator, along with supporting documentation. While it appears secure on paper, the reality can be more complex. Given how often SIM cards are registered by one person and used by another (family or friends), and the prevalence of a prepaid mobile ecosystem where numbers frequently change hands, the name displayed may not always reliably indicate who is actually making the callCNAP: A name, a number, and its limitsConsider this scenario: you get a call and you see a name. The person claims to be a representative of your bank, the police or a government official.

There is no way in which seeing the name of the person will help you know whether they are telling the truth. There is no spam filter or security alert, absolutely nothing. You are still as vulnerable to a scam or fraud as you were even if you had only seen the number, and not the name.

In fact, seeing a name might make you more vulnerable as many feel reassured at the sight of a name.Systems similar to CNAP exist in countries such as the United States and Canada, but they have not significantly reduced spam calls or scam attempts¹. Knowing who is calling does help, but what is really important is knowing whether they can be trusted, and this is where systems like CNAP are limited.It is not about names. It’s about trust Let’s talk about popular solutions like EyeCon, Truecaller, GetContact, Hiya, Whoscall and CallApp. While they show names on numbers that are not in your contact lists, they also add additional context.Many also have a strong community-driven system to identify scams, spam and fraud, as well as a blue tick system for verified and trusted callers. There is a clear process to report spam or suspected fraud calls, without getting embodied in legalese or bureaucratic processes.What's more, as the subscriber base of such services is international (Truecaller², for instance, has a base of more than half a billion active users spread across many nations and 1.5 Billion downloads while GetContact³ has 950M downloads across the world), they can actually help even identify potential spam and scam calls from other nations, something that CNAP is incapable of doing, as it is restricted to a single nation.Given the number of scams that originate from other nations, this is of vital importance. Also, while CNAP does add a name to calls made on a telecom operator's network, it is not effective on calls made through messaging apps, or over the Internet.It would be unfair to suggest that CNAP is useless. It definitely does make a difference and at least gives the consumer an idea, however vague, of the identity of the person in whose name the SIM card is registered.

But beyond that, well, one knows nothing. To go back to our Holmes-ian simile, CNAP shows us the steps, but does not tell us how many are there. Or where they go. Incidentally, there were seventeen steps that were leading up to 221B Baker Street. That was the difference between Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson. And between Caller ID apps and CNAP. They both have their roles, but they are different. You will likely always need both.References:

Disclaimer: The above content is non-editorial, and TIL hereby disclaims any and all warranties, expressed or implied, relating to it, and does not guarantee, vouch for or necessarily endorse any of the content.