Skip to content

Feature: Surface verified caller identity (CNAM / VerifiedCaller) on incoming WebRTC calls #191

Description

@deepakjaiswal1

Summary

Surface verified caller identity — caller name (CNAM) and a verified/attested indicator — to a WebRTC client on incoming calls, so a softphone can display trusted caller information.

Motivation

Verified caller identity improves answer rates and reduces spoofing/fraud. A WebRTC softphone receiving an inbound call has no way today to obtain a caller name or an indication that the calling identity has been verified/attested by the network.

Relationship to camaraproject/VerifiedCaller

The CAMARA VerifiedCaller project (brand-registration + verified-caller APIs) already addresses the calling/enterprise side: registering brand identity and announcing secure/branded calls, currently scoped to calls over 4G/5G. This proposal is deliberately complementary and concerns the called-party consumption side: exposing verified caller identity to a WebRTC client via WebRTC signaling / webrtc-events notifications — a delivery channel outside VerifiedCaller's current 4G/5G scope.

The intent is not to duplicate VerifiedCaller. Where a verified-identity data model already exists there, this feature should reference/reuse it rather than define a parallel one.

Proposed capability

  • On an incoming WebRTC call, expose:
    • caller display name (CNAM), and
    • a VerifiedCaller indicator conveying verification/attestation status.
  • Deliver via webrtc-events incoming-call notifications and/or call-handling responses.

Open questions for the WG

  • Reuse vs. define: can we reuse the data model / attestation semantics from camaraproject/VerifiedCaller (verified-caller API) rather than defining new fields here?
  • Is verified-caller information for WebRTC delivery in scope for the VerifiedCaller Sub Project, for WebRTC, or a joint effort? (VerifiedCaller currently scopes to 4G/5G.)
  • Attestation source (STIR/SHAKEN or operator platform) and how much detail is surfaced.
  • Privacy considerations for exposing caller name/identity to the called client.

@stroncoso @teikuran

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    enhancementNew feature or request

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions