VoicePulse, just not worth it.....

I agree, security is paramount, but the issue is at the PBX, not the provider. Do you think any of the POTS providers listed would stay in business if you had to 'white list' countries? Also, they made this change AFTER we had signed up. Reminds me of the old 'New Jersey close' (changing the terms of the contract after they're signed).

Yes, for some it's a plus, especially if you don't call internationally, or have a limited country list. However, this is business, and with business customers, I can't tell them well you can't call that new country you're doing business until you clear it with your phone company? Try that at any Fortune 500 company and they'll laugh you straight out of the building.

Again - I stated my customers have had no problem technically, just procedurally. For a domestic only customer, I'd recommend. But the fact that this is not advertised until AFTER you sign up, that just reeks of bad management. A more effective fraud protection would be monitor usage and then shutdown if call rates become excessive (similar to your credit card fraud protection, if unusual things happen, they lock down the account). VoicePulse is taking the easy way out.

Yes, I hope none of my customers ever get hacked. Furthermore, I hope I never screwup an installation so bad that it does get hacked (I believe I'm doing everything reasonable to lock down the systems I've installed). However, I cannot in good conscience recommend them to my customers anymore, especially those who deal routinely in the international arena.

I would not be surprised if more ITSPs will implement this. The number of asterisk installs where people allow inbound port 5060 and/or allow anonymous SIP calls is simply mind boggling. To make matters worse a number of so called "experts" (some of them authoring books) wholeheartedly recommend these settings. It will take a lot of time before "Joe the VoIP expert" will realize he needs to change the procedures he has been using for the last few years in a number of his "successful" deployments. I am not even talking about "Joe the Clueless" converting the 250,000 people island to VoIP on a $500 budget.

On the other hand ITSPs could take a page from Callwithus playbook. They allow you to set all kind of limits on cost per minute/total cost/call duration for your calls.

best of all, you have failed to notify customers about this change! I just found that all the calls I'm routing through VoicePulse are failed, after reading this forum! Keep up Great Job :))

Here's a clip from the form VP wants their customers to sign. Let's examine it

By signing below, you AGREE to the TERMS OF SERVICE and ALL statements below:
 I understand that I am responsible for all charges accrued on my account. I accept responsibility for all calls that originated from or passed through any hardware or software using my credentials or IP addresses. I accept responsibility for the security of my hardware or software and unique credentials assigned to me by VoicePulse. As such, I accept responsibility for all calls posted to my account, regardless of whether they were authorized or fraudulent.
 I understand that raising my rate cap or allowing international calls on my account poses an inherent risk. I accept responsibility for properly securing the originating device and properly filtering the destination of all calls placed on my account. The originating device and termination destination of all calls will be solely determined by VoicePulse. If a billing error is discovered, VoicePulse reserves the right to re-rate calls to a rate no lower than VoicePulse’s actual cost.
 I understand that refusal to pay any accrued charges on my account or issuing a chargeback will result in immediate termination of my account without refund. I accept responsibility for paying all charges accrued on my VoicePulse account. I understand that VoicePulse may send any unpaid balance to a collection agency for settlement.

First of all, most of this IS reasonable. (However, limiting the white list isn't, that's like saying I'll never call a new person in a new country again!) I agree however, if you misconfigure your PBX, YOU are responsible for the charges.

That said, here's two areas that I have a problem with:

1 - If a billing error is discovered, VoicePulse reserves the right to re-rate calls to a rate no lower than VoicePulse’s actual cost. -- So if they don't bill you correctly the first time, let's get a second bite at the apple!

2 - I understand that refusal to pay any accrued charges on my account or issuing a chargeback will result in immediate termination of my account without refund. -- So if you (correctly) challange a charge on your bill, we'll hold your phone service hostage!!

Folks, If you look at VP's post (elsewhere in this forum), they say they're getting charged (after the fact) for high cost terminations. Well, how is that the PBX user's problem? It seems to me they need to work with their wholesale international providers. Obviously they can't, so blocking international is the only way they can handle this? And then to say, if the underlying provider screws up, and then charges VP they're going to charge you after the fact?!?

All I can say is, good luck VP. Thanks for giving good service to my customers, but I totally disagree with your position, and CANNOT and WILL NOT recommend you as preferred ITSP to my customers in the future.

Voicepulse should not be in the business of "passing along" fraud charges to its customers, then holding customers hostage for them.

The whole "auto collect" nonsense, 900 numbers, fake Caribbean numbers - all of that needs to GO AWAY.

As an example, if the published rate to Kyrgyzstan is $0.40 a minute, then ALL calls to Kyrgyzstan should (MUST) be $0.40 a minute.

PERIOD.

No exceptions for scam artists who setup fake numbers to try and defraud naive Americans.

The problem is NOT the customers. This is the carrier's fault for providing the ability for fraudsters to make up their own rates for a number with no recourse. There is no reason for fraud numbers to exist, and shame on the carriers for providing this service to criminals.