Latest
FCC robocall crackdown could change phone privacy
Robocalls are the phone version of stepping on a Lego barefoot. You know the pain. Your phone buzzes during dinner, during a meeting or right when you finally sit down. Then a fake bank alert, Medicare scam or “urgent” car warranty pitch tries to hijack your day.
So when the Federal Communications Commission says it wants to crack down on illegal robocalls, most people will probably say, “Finally.”
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said in a recent press release, “We must bring meaningful robocall relief to consumers.” A few days later, the FCC said stopping illegal calls remains its top consumer protection priority.
The agency has reason to be aggressive. Late last year, a report from the consumer advocacy group U.S. PIRG Education Fund found that Americans had received 2.14 billion robocalls per month in 2024. That works out to only a handful per person on average, but robocalls do not hit everyone evenly. Some Americans can get hit with dozens of spam calls in a single day.
Still, the FCC’s proposed fix raises a new question. Could the fight against robocalls also make it harder to get a phone without having to hand over more personal information?
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
FBI WARNS OF DANGEROUS NEW ‘SMISHING’ SCAM TARGETING YOUR PHONE
Last month, the FCC voted to seek public comment on stronger “Know Your Customer” rules for voice service providers. These rules are not final yet. The FCC is still gathering feedback, including privacy concerns. Under the proposal, phone providers may have to collect more information from new and renewing customers before giving them access to service. That could include a full legal name, physical address, government ID and an existing phone number.
For higher-volume customers, the FCC is also looking at additional checks. Providers may need to review how the customer plans to use the service and whether other details look suspicious. The goal is to stop bad actors before they can flood phone networks with illegal calls.
That sounds reasonable when you picture a scam call center blasting thousands of fake alerts. However, the privacy concern starts when you think about everyday people who rely on prepaid phones, temporary numbers or more private ways to communicate.
Burner phones have a shady reputation because TV shows love to put them in the hands of criminals. In real life, though, prepaid phones can serve people who need flexibility or safety. Someone leaving an abusive relationship may need a phone that isn’t connected to a shared family account. A person without stable housing may not have a traditional physical address. A journalist source, whistleblower or privacy-conscious consumer may also prefer a phone number that isn’t tied to every part of their identity.
Civil liberties advocates warn that the FCC proposal could create a broader identity-verification system around one of the last semi-anonymous communication tools available to ordinary Americans.
That does not mean the FCC is trying to ban burner phones outright. Still, if phone providers must collect more identity details before activating or renewing service, anonymous or semi-anonymous phone access could become much harder to get.
INSIDE A SCAMMER’S DAY AND HOW THEY TARGET YOU
The FCC proposal also discusses risk-based checks. That means certain customer details or behaviors could trigger a deeper review.
Possible red flags may reportedly include using a virtual office, using certain commercial addresses, operating a suspicious website or using an email address that raises concerns.
Other red flags could include not being traceable to the state listed in the customer’s address or paying for phone service with cryptocurrency.
That may help carriers spot scam operations. But it also raises a tricky question. What happens when a legitimate person gets flagged because their life does not fit neatly into a standard form?
A person using a shelter address, mail service or privacy-focused payment method could face more questions. The rules may be aimed at robocallers, yet the burden could land on people who already have a hard time proving who they are.
The proposed enforcement system could put serious pressure on telecom providers. The FCC proposal reportedly includes a possible $2,500 per-call base forfeiture for Know Your Customer violations.
That is a big incentive for providers to be careful. It may also make them overcorrect. If a provider thinks a customer looks risky, it may decide that denying service is safer than getting blamed later. For consumers, that could mean more ID checks, more account reviews and more hoops to jump through when signing up for phone service.
The FCC argues that, as the gateway to the phone network, carriers are in the best position to stop scammers before calls go out. The concern is whether that gate becomes too hard for ordinary people to pass through.
For now, nothing changes overnight. These rules are still proposed. The FCC is asking for public comment, and any final rules would come later.
Still, this proposal points to where phone service may be heading. Carriers may collect more identity information. Prepaid service may become less private. Some customers may face more questions when they open or renew an account.
That could bring fewer scam calls. It could also mean less anonymity for people who have legitimate reasons to keep a phone number separate from the rest of their life.
ANDROID SECURITY UPGRADES OUTSMART SCAMS AND PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY
You do not need to wait for regulators to act. You can lower your risk right now.
If you do not recognize the number, let it ring. Scammers often rely on panic. A real caller can leave a message.
On iPhone, go to Settings > Apps > Phone. Look for Screen Unknown Callers and choose Ask Reason for Calling. This screens calls from unsaved numbers before your phone rings, so you can decide whether to answer.
If spam calls are overwhelming, you can choose Silence instead. Just be aware that calls from people not in your contacts may go straight to voicemail. That could include a doctor’s office, school, delivery driver or other legitimate caller.
You can also check Call Filtering and turn on available carrier spam-filtering options. For example, AT&T may show a Spam toggle that says calls identified as spam or fraud will be silenced, sent to voicemail and moved to the spam list. Other carriers may use different wording or place this option in a carrier app.
On a Samsung phone, open the Phone app > tap the three dots in the upper-right corner > Settings > Caller ID and spam protection > turn on Caller ID and spam protection. Then tap Block spam and scam calls and choose the blocking level that works best for you, such as blocking all spam and scam calls or only high-risk scam calls. Menu wording may vary by carrier, region and whether your phone uses Samsung Phone or Phone by Google.
AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and other carriers offer spam call blocking features. Some are free, while others require a paid plan. Check your carrier app for call protection settings.
Scammers can pull your phone number, address and other personal details from data broker and people-search sites. That information can make robocalls sound more believable. A data removal service can help remove your personal information from many of these sites, and keep checking if it shows up again. Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan at CyberGuy.com/FreeScan
A robocall may tell you to press a number to stop future calls. That can confirm your number is active. Hang up instead.
A scammer may pretend to be your bank, carrier or a government agency. Do not share one-time passcodes, Social Security numbers or payment details over an unexpected call.
Register your number for free with the National Do Not Call Registry at donotcall.gov. The registry will not stop criminals, but it can reduce legitimate telemarketing calls. That makes scam calls easier to spot.
You can report unwanted calls at donotcall.gov/report.html or file a complaint with the FCC at consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us. Reports help regulators track patterns and target bad actors.
Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?
Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: CyberGuy.com
Robocalls are more than annoying. They waste time, steal money and make people think twice before answering their own phones. So yes, stronger action is needed. But privacy has to be part of the conversation. The FCC’s proposal is aimed at scam call operations, but the final rules should not make it harder for everyday people to get a private or low-cost phone when they need one. That’s the balance regulators have to get right. They need to make life harder for robocallers without turning every phone customer into a suspect. Phone service connects people to jobs, doctors, family, schools and emergency help. Any crackdown should protect that access while still going after the bad actors abusing the system.
Would you be willing to show more ID to get phone service if it meant fewer robocalls, or does that feel like too much privacy to give up? Let us know by writing to us at CyberGuy.com
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
Culture
Cracker Barrel Fans Outraged Again After NEW Major Change
Cracker Barrel built its reputation on comfort food, Southern tradition, and a menu customers could count on for decades.
That’s exactly why loyal diners are still fuming as the restaurant chain continues removing many of the classic dishes that helped make it a household name.
For years, customers have pleaded with the Tennessee-based chain to restore fan favorites that quietly disappeared from the menu, including black-eyed peas, fried haddock, red-eye gravy, fried chicken livers, and perhaps the most mourned item of all—the Sunrise Sampler.
For many longtime patrons, the Sunrise Sampler wasn’t just another breakfast. It was the breakfast.
The hearty platter came loaded with eggs, grits, fried apples, hash brown casserole, sausage, bacon, country ham, and biscuits with gravy—giving diners a taste of nearly everything Cracker Barrel had to offer without having to piece together a meal item by item.
“I noticed a while back that Cracker Barrel removed the GOAT of all breakfasts, the Sunrise Sampler, from the menu,” Josh Cooper, owner of Cooper’s Next Level BBQ in Tallahassee, Florida, told Fox News Digital. “You used to get a little bit of everything without breaking the bank.”
The meal hasn’t completely disappeared—but recreating it now comes with a catch.
Customers must order every component separately, turning what was once an affordable breakfast favorite into a considerably more expensive order.
“Now, in order to get that same teaser touch from the Sunrise Sampler, you have to order it all à la carte, which costs around $25 for the same great meal,” he said. “Blasphemy!”
Fox News Digital reached out to Cracker Barrel for comment.
The growing frustration over disappearing menu items comes after the company already faced a wave of backlash for attempting to modernize its image.
Last year, Cracker Barrel sparked outrage among longtime customers after unveiling a redesigned logo and updated restaurant interiors that many believed stripped away the rustic charm that had long defined the brand.
The changes were part of a sweeping $700 million overhaul across more than 660 locations, including menu revisions and a cleaner, less cluttered dining room design.
The company ultimately reversed course following widespread criticism, but many loyal customers say the damage had already been done.
The leadership shakeup continued last week when Cracker Barrel announced that CEO Julie Masino will step down on Aug. 10.
Former Bloomin’ Brands CEO David Deno is slated to take over.
For many customers, however, the issue extends far beyond a logo or a fresh coat of paint.
They believe corporate leadership has steadily chipped away at the very traditions that made Cracker Barrel stand apart from countless other restaurant chains.
Cooper said companies often underestimate the emotional attachment customers have to longtime menu favorites.
People are “asking for comfort and nostalgia.”
“The reality is that nostalgia matters. And when you remove popular items without controlling the narrative or managing customers’ expectations, you are bound to have upset patrons,” he said.
“Whether it’s due to rising food costs, kitchen timing or any other reason, it’s important to communicate with the people who put you on the map in the first place. Communication matters.”
Rachel Love, a self-described Cracker Barrel enthusiast from Tennessee, said one discontinued favorite remains at the top of her wish list.
“I absolutely loved the black-eyed peas, and I’m so glad they’re getting some attention,” Love told Fox News Digital. “They were one of my favorite sides and always felt like such a classic part of the Cracker Barrel experience.”
Love also hopes the restaurant revives its baked apple dumpling, describing it as “the perfect comfort dessert” for a brand built on old-fashioned hospitality.
To her, the debate is about much more than a handful of discontinued recipes.
“People aren’t just asking for old menu items — they’re asking for the comfort and nostalgia that came with them,” she said.
“Sometimes bringing back one classic dish means more to loyal customers than introducing several new ones.”
That may be the lesson Cracker Barrel continues to learn the hard way.
Customers aren’t asking the chain to reinvent itself.
They’re asking it to remember what made it successful.
They want the front porch.
They want the country store.
They want the breakfasts, the classic sides, and the timeless comfort food that turned Cracker Barrel into an American institution.
For many loyal diners, nostalgia isn’t a weakness.
It’s the brand.
Latest
Mamdani Kicked Out — He’s Livid After Latest Announcement
Backlash against New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani continues to mount, with the Democratic Socialist facing another public rebuke after reportedly being denied the opportunity to speak at the funeral of a U.S. Army soldier killed during an Iranian missile attack.
According to multiple reports, Mamdani attended Friday’s funeral for Army Sgt. Angel Sarah Rampersad in Queens but remained silent throughout the service after the soldier’s family reportedly chose not to have him address mourners.
Rampersad was one of three American service members killed in Jordan during an Iranian attack on July 17.
The funeral was held at a church in Ozone Park, where elected officials, community leaders, family members and fellow mourners gathered to honor the 28-year-old soldier’s sacrifice.
According to the New York Post, Mamdani appeared to review prepared remarks on an iPad while other dignitaries spoke, but his name was never called.
A source familiar with the funeral told The Post the decision came directly from Rampersad’s family, which reportedly wanted to keep politics out of the ceremony.
The family chose not to have Mayor Zohran Mamdani speak in an effort to avoid what the source described as “political distractions.”
After the funeral concluded, the mayor’s office released the remarks Mamdani had planned to deliver.
“It is often said that our fallen ‘gave their tomorrows for our today,’” Mamdani planned to say.
“Sergeant Rampersad had tomorrows waiting for her: birthdays, ordinary mornings, evenings spent with her loved ones,” his remarks continued.
“But she gave every one of them up so that we could have ours — so that we could stand here today, safe and protected,” he was to say.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, however, did address those gathered and offered an emotional tribute to the fallen soldier.
“I feel after reading and admiring this woman from a distance, I feel like she could be one of my daughters,” Hochul said.
Other speakers included Ozone Park Residents Block Association President Sam Esposito, state Sen. Joseph Addabbo Jr., and Queens Borough President Donovan Richards.
According to the Department of War, Sgt. Angel Sarah Rampersad, 28, of Ozone Park, New York, was killed in action during an enemy attack at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.
U.S. Central Command said Rampersad and two fellow service members were killed while American and coalition forces defended against Iranian ballistic missile and drone attacks.
The other fallen Americans were identified as 1st Lt. Tyler James Feehan, 25, of Ewa Beach, Hawaii, and Pvt. Isabella Gonzales, 19, of Carrollton, Texas.
All three were deployed to Jordan in support of Operation Inherent Resolve, the international mission to combat ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
Rampersad served with the 1st Battalion, 57th Air Defense Artillery Regiment, 52d Air Defense Artillery Brigade, 10th Army Air and Missile Defense Command in Ansbach, Germany.
She worked as a 25U Signal Operations Support Specialist, according to the Department of War.
One person who attended the funeral told the newspaper the mayor appeared visibly upset after realizing he would not be invited to speak.
“He looked over at his staff, frustrated and seemed angry that he didn’t speak,” the source told the Post.
The attendee said Mamdani eventually understood that his name would not be called, glanced toward members of his staff, and put away the tablet that reportedly contained his prepared remarks.
Another source cited by the newspaper said the decision reflected the wishes of Rampersad’s family, describing them as politically conservative and supportive of President Donald Trump.
“The family is more conservative and wanted to limit any political distractions,” the source told the Post.
Neither Mamdani’s office nor members of the Rampersad family have publicly confirmed the account explaining why the mayor was not invited to speak.
Although he never addressed the congregation during the service, the mayor’s office later publicly released the remarks he had prepared, bringing attention to a moment that underscored the growing political controversy surrounding New York City’s new mayor.
Latest
GOP Just Passed It 232-288 — Pelosi And AOC Lose It On House Floor
The House of Representatives delivered a major victory this week for Americans with disabilities who want the opportunity to work instead of being trapped by a broken federal bureaucracy.
In a bipartisan vote, lawmakers approved legislation aimed at dismantling long-standing barriers within the Social Security Disability Insurance program that critics say have discouraged work and punished self-sufficiency for decades.
H.R. 8884, the **Removing Barriers to Work for Disabled Americans Act**, sponsored by Rep. Austin Scott, R-Ga., passed the House by a vote of 232-188 and now heads to the Senate, where it has been referred to the Committee on Finance.
The legislation restores an important tool that the Social Security Administration lost when its demonstration authority expired in 2022.
Under the bill, the SSA would once again be authorized to test practical reforms under the Social Security Disability Insurance program through Dec. 31, 2030, with demonstration projects continuing through the end of 2031.
Rather than permanently rewriting federal law, the agency would be able to pilot innovative approaches designed to help beneficiaries who are able and willing return to the workforce.
The legislation includes significant safeguards. Participation would be entirely voluntary, and no participant could receive less total income as a result of joining one of the demonstration projects.
Supporters say those protections make the bill a common-sense effort to modernize a system that has too often discouraged Americans from pursuing employment.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., argued the current system is failing many of the very people it was designed to help.
“With over 60 percent of Social Security Disability Insurance recipients expressing an interest in returning to the workforce but less than one percent leaving the program because of a successful return to work each year, the Social Security Administration’s complex rules and regulations are clearly failing to deliver for too many Americans,” Smith said.
“Giving the SSA the authority to test innovative ways to better help disabled Americans pursue gainful employment is pure common sense, and this legislation goes a step further to ensure participation in any new system is both voluntary and will not reduce a beneficiary’s total income,” Smith added.
Smith pointed to what he described as a massive disconnect between Americans who want to work and those who are actually able to do so under the current system.
For years, disability recipients have warned that attempting to return to work can trigger a maze of complicated regulations, overpayment disputes, benefit cliffs, and uncertainty that ultimately makes taking a job financially risky.
Rather than encouraging independence, critics say the current structure often rewards staying on the sidelines.
Supporters argue H.R. 8884 takes a fundamentally different approach.
Instead of expanding government programs or imposing sweeping permanent reforms without evidence, the legislation gives the Social Security Administration the flexibility to test targeted solutions, evaluate the results, and determine what actually helps Americans reenter the workforce before making lasting policy changes.
Backers say the measure reflects a core conservative principle: government assistance should serve as a bridge to opportunity—not a permanent barrier to self-reliance.
The bill recognizes that having a disability does not automatically mean someone is unable to work and that federal policy should encourage those who are capable of seeking employment rather than penalizing them for trying.
The legislation also broadens the agency’s authority to include additional populations, including blind Americans, expanding the reach of future demonstration projects.
The proposal advanced through the House with bipartisan support after clearing the Ways and Means Committee, where lawmakers from both parties acknowledged that the current disability system leaves too many Americans behind.
Still, Republicans led the charge, arguing that practical reforms backed by measurable results are preferable to expanding entitlement programs or making permanent changes without first proving they work.
The bill now moves to the Senate, where lawmakers will decide whether to send it to President Donald Trump’s desk.
Supporters are urging swift action, arguing that restoring the SSA’s demonstration authority represents a fiscally responsible, low-cost reform that could help thousands of Americans regain the dignity, purpose, and financial independence that comes with meaningful work.
If enacted, the Social Security Administration would once again have the authority to launch carefully monitored pilot programs designed to improve employment outcomes, while reporting requirements would provide transparency and accountability as Congress evaluates which reforms deserve permanent consideration.
-
Economy4 months agoVance Leaves Meeting, Looks Straight Into Camera, Announces Stunning Arrest
-
Economy4 months agoAdam Schiff Facing 30 Years In Prison After Bank Records Leak
-
Economy4 months agoSupreme Curt Sides With Trump — He Can Remove The All
-
Economy4 months agoAll Hell Breaks Loose On Fox When Jesse Watters Asks Fetterman One Question
-
Culture2 months agoMichelle Obama Drops Nasty Bomb About ‘Useless’ Daughter
-
Economy2 months agoPrayers Pour In After Fox Host Dies: ‘Senseless Murder’
-
Latest2 months agoFox News Stuns With Announcement About 5 Fired Hosts
-
Economy4 months agoNBC Stops LIVE Broadcast — Breaks Big Trump News
