Call spoofing not working, as of April 17 p.m.?

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:57 pm

I've tried on a couple different mJs this evening, using a bunch of different proxies, and everything shows my mJ number now, not my spoofed number...

Anyone else? I would be SUPREMELY disappointed if they've thwarted our efforts to have call spoofing.

snowigloo · Post by **snowigloo** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:09 pm

mine works i put all these in my host file

127.0.0.1 proxy1.miami.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.atlanta.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.austin.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.baltimore.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.boston.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.chicago.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.cleveland.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.columbus.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.dallas.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.denver.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.detroit.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.houston.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.lasvegas.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.losangeles.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.memphis.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.minneapolis.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.nashville.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.newyork.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.newark.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.philadelphia.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.phoenix.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.pittsburgh.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.portland.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.sacramento.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.saltlakecity.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.sandiego.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.sanfrancisco.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.seattle.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.stlouis.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.tampa.talk4free.com
127.0.0.1 proxy1.washington.talk4free.com

Woebringer · Post by **Woebringer** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:17 pm

No Issues here, working as expected.

4.17.08
1817 Hours, GMT -6

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:32 pm

Weird. I have all of those in my hosts file, and the spoofer has been working for me for weeks. Now, on two different mJs on two different computers, and two different ISP, and 2 different area codes, no go.

I haven't had any trouble until this evening...

Boohoo!

Maybe I'll reboot my computer and see if that helps. Dunno why that'd affect the other computer, though.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:43 pm

It would appear that indeed my mJ calls are going through the Call Spoofer Proxy, because if I stop the CIDSpoofer, then the mJ can't make any calls. But no matter what IP address of a proxy I use, or phone number I put in my actual mJ number shows up.

Don't know what's changed.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 11:10 am

Well, I don't know what's happened. Can someone please share the proxy they're using to still get their Caller ID Spoofing? I am attempting to use 67.90.152.70, and still, this morning, my actual mJ numbers come through.

If this is going to continue, anyone know a way to just block caller ID completely? (No, that option in CallerIDSpoofer doesn't work, either.)

ardfarkle · Post by **ardfarkle** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:43 pm

Mine still works using Nashville as follows: If I call a number within my area code without including the area code when dialing, my real number is displayed. If I include the area code, the spoofed number is displayed. When calling outside my area code to two cell phone numbers I have, it displays the spoofed number (1 Cingular, 1 T-Mobile - Both LA area 818 area code). I'll keep an eye on this since I'm hoping that some form of spoofing will be supported across the MJ network.

I would be happy to provide say 3-6 numbers to be assigned to my account when signing up for MJ/YMax service. This would tie these numbers to me when used in conjunction with my account and would make me accountable for any shenanigans associated with the use of them. I would also be willing to pay a 'one time' fee to process such numbers. Perhaps the first one for free (GC, etc) and 2.00-3.00 apiece for number after that, or as a fee to change the number. Perhaps a minimum of 5.00 per occurrence plus add-ons would be a good approach.

Please YMax, support a way to allow a 'legitimate' use of spoofing.

root · Post by **root** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:46 pm

Still works perfectly using the "unofficial" Linux version!

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:43 pm

Well, I still can't make mine work, using 10 digit dialing, or not... Was working great until last evening. Does not seem to matter if I dial a landline or AT&T or Sprint mobile phones. The two mJ numbers are in the 323 and 818 area codes.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 3:49 pm

Perhaps it has something to do with a Microsoft udpate to .NET... I vaguely recall something to that effect coming across on the Microsoft Updates thing the other day, but don't see a separate line for it in Add or Remove Programs.

SpamBox · Post by **SpamBox** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 4:54 pm

Just checked mine - it's still working.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 5:22 pm

I think it must just be me, and my mJ's... Doesn't matter what computer I put them on, or anything, the caller ID always comes through as real.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Fri Apr 18, 2008 6:46 pm

Is anybody willing to help me out on this? I can post the INVITE request from Wireshark and such on a PM if somebody would be willing to help me troubleshoot...

The screenshot below is of the header of the INVITE packet in WireShark. This is what was captured USING the call spoofer.

Any thoughts? Does that look normal? My understanding is that the CallerIDSpoofer just modifies these headers on the way out of the computer, to replace your actual number with your spoofer number. But, it doesn't appear to be working on mine, on multiple computers. Also, is that "E" at the beginning of many of the lines normal?

Stewart · Post by **Stewart** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:34 am

GuyOnTheAir wrote:The screenshot below is of the header of the INVITE packet in WireShark. This is what was captured USING the call spoofer.

Sorry, I can't see the image. I'm not sure why you need an image to post plain text (in Wireshark, right-click packet, Copy->Bytes (printable text only)), but if you want to post an image, try imageshack.us.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:38 pm

Every time I try to post the stuff in plain text, and hit submit in this forum, it won't let me post, and gives me error 500.

There it is on Imageshack. [edited to display correctly -- Stewart]

Or, if you want me to send logs on email, I could do that...

Stewart · Post by **Stewart** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:22 pm

OK, the spoofer is adding a Privacy: header, so it thinks it's trying to block, not spoof. (Why the blocking is not working is another issue; perhaps MJ has a new carrier that does not support it.) Are you running my old perl script, or MagicHack's GUI version? If the former, make sure you have $cidblock = 0. If it still fails, I'm very puzzled. You might try adding some print statements to see why it's taking the 'block' path. If you're running MagicJack's version, make sure that Block CallerID is not checked. If no luck, try my old script. Does that fail, too?

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:32 pm

I'm using MagicHack's GUI version, CallerIDSpoofer1.1. I do not have the "Block CallerID" option checked...

I'll have to install PERL and play around to try to run your original script...

So, for MagicHack and others, is there a way to clear "preferences" or anything from the CallerIDSpoofer1.1?

As I'm doing more testing here, i'm noticing that my name, as listed in the CallerID name in the GUI does not change when I changed it. And although I do not see that privacy line anymore, still the real CID goes through.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Installed the MSI package of PERL that Stewart linked, saved my file of the script, got it running.

Still no go.

I still see the real CID. In fact, I don't see mention of my spoofed info anywhere in Wireshark.

But, I do notice that the first INVITE packet that goes out is rejected, it appears. I've posted the obligatory screenshot.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:41 pm

So, from the main CID Spoofer thread, I found this test number: 712-580-9999 that Stewart posted.

It works, using the perl script! (And, now I've discovered the same results using the MagicHack's GUI version)

I wonder if mJ has changed its service provider in this area or something strange. For me, calls to my work number, and a variety of mobile phones on various services (I'm a Tracfone and prepaid geek, too) used to all work flawlessly.

Now, however, calls to AT&T business lines, Verizon, GrandCentral, and T-Mobile do not show the spoofed CID. Calls to Sprint mobile phones DO seem to work. Calls mJ to another mJ do NOT show the spoofed ID (or name).

Until the time noted in this thread title, it ALL seemed to work, on any service I could test.

Stewart · Post by **Stewart** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:10 pm

It is normal for there to be two INVITEs for each outgoing call. The first one, without an Authorization: header, gets a 401 response that contains a challenge. The client then computes a hashed response and includes it in an Authorization: header when the INVITE is resent. I don't know how MagicHack's program behaves, but my script only adds the P-Asserted-Identity: header on the second INVITE. (For no good reason -- the code was taken from another program that did a database lookup to decide what to spoof; it bypassed the useless lookup for speed.) So, you need to observe the second INVITE to see if the program is behaving correctly.

If it is, it's likely that some of your calls are being sent via a carrier that does not support the header, or intentionally rejects it based on some checking. I've seen credible posts that 7- versus 10-digit dialing sometimes affects carrier selection; that may provide a workaround for destinations in your area code. You might also try adding a Remote-Party-ID: header.

I don't know how to tell which carrier is selected for a given call, but the 183 or 200 response contains a User-Agent: header with an RMRG field that has a unique value for a given route, so you can at least see if two calls are using the same or different carriers.

HobNob · Post by **HobNob** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 5:22 am

Stewart,

Thanks for the tip about 7 versus 10-digit dialing. I had been using 10 digits for everything, including local. The spoofer worked for everything except when calling my own MagicJack# (with area code local to me.) After about a week all local area calls stopped spoofing, although the long-distance calls continued to spoof fine. I wonder if it took a week for my MJ# to be considered local?

Anyway, I removed the area code for local calls & the spoofer now works fine once again on everything, including calls to my own MJ# when using 7 digits.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Sat Apr 26, 2008 9:02 pm

A workaround has been found, if you're having these troubles, as I am.

Look in this thread.

enotz · Post by **enotz** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:12 am

I suspect that the reason that the spoof is failing is more to do with the number that you are calling. For me, with spofer in place I get spoofed when I call MOST numbers but if I call a Cricket phone the real number shows up. I suspect that somehow Cricket uses the ANI and not the CID. I suspect that there are others that do this too.

Stewart · Post by **Stewart** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:18 am

enotz wrote:I suspect that the reason that the spoof is failing is more to do with the number that you are calling. For me, with spofer in place I get spoofed when I call MOST numbers but if I call a Cricket phone the real number shows up. I suspect that somehow Cricket uses the ANI and not the CID. I suspect that there are others that do this too.

Have you confirmed that spoofing to Cricket does not work, using any of the formats in this thread http://www.phoneservicesupport.com/cana ... t1256.html , or using 7-digit dialing, with or without a * after the first digit?

enotz · Post by **enotz** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:36 am

I have confirmed what I previously said but here is the GOOD update:

if I do *679*703081111 with the perl script running then I get "restricted" on a cricket phone
if I do *829*703081111 with the perl script running then I do get the spoof

Would really appreciate it if someone would confirm this with other carriers

boggled · Post by **boggled** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 5:31 am

Spoofing doesn't work for me either anymore. It just stopped working yesterday on the 29th. I didn't make any changes to anything.

Stewart · Post by **Stewart** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:04 am

boggled wrote:Spoofing doesn't work for me either anymore. It just stopped working yesterday on the 29th. I didn't make any changes to anything.

Test to 712-580-9999. If that spoofs correctly, please post to what areacode / exchange you cannot spoof, and which alternate dialing formats you've tried.

If the test number fails to spoof, verify e.g. with Wireshark that the spoofer is in the path and inserting the header. If not, your proxy may have changed and you'll need to fix the hosts file.

boggled · Post by **boggled** » Thu May 01, 2008 4:22 am

Hi Stewart,
I fixed my problem by adding more proxies.

GuyOnTheAir · Post by **GuyOnTheAir** » Mon May 05, 2008 2:41 am

I have all the proxies in my hosts file, and spoofing does not work, without the * trick after the first number.

WildmanMW · Post by **WildmanMW** » Mon May 19, 2008 6:46 pm

arrrrgh!! I'm completely brain fried. First off, the spoofing software rocks!! Unfortunately, it just stopped working on my vista computer (it still works on the other MJ on my xp). I had the old software version of spoof and that wasn't working anymore and I just tried the new version. No mater what combination I try (and I have tried with the *) the call from my MJ always shows my MJ number. Any suggestions? I would pull my hair out but unfortunately I already shave my head so that option is out.

magicJack and magicJack Plus Support, Reviews, FAQs and Tricks

Call spoofing not working, as of April 17 p.m.?

Call spoofing not working, as of April 17 p.m.?

spoof failing

Re: spoof failing

no spoof

Re: no spoof