[OpenSIPS-Users] Opensips 2.5 and fraud module

[Liviu Chircu]

Hi, Denis!

According to the table data I wrote in the tutorial [1], it's definitely 
seconds. It's a pity that the docs do not reflect this as well -- I'll 
get them fixed!

Best regards,

[1]: http://www.opensips.org/Documentation/Tutorials-FraudDetection-2-1

Liviu Chircu
OpenSIPS Developer
http://www.opensips-solutions.com

On 06.06.2018 14:20, Denis via Users wrote:
> Hello, Liviu!
> It is me, again:)))
> One more, call_duration measured in seconds or in minutes?
> Thank you.
> -- 
> С уважением, Денис.
> Best regards, Denis
> 27.04.2018, 09:25, "Denis via Users" <users at lists.opensips.org>:
>> Hello, Liviu!
>>
>> OK, i understand.
>> .
>> But, to speak the truth, it would be more reasonable to control 
>> exactly numbers, but not prefix.
>> Because, now, "sequential calls" and "total calls", actually, perform 
>> the same control task.
>> My experience tell me, that many fraud cases deal with calling to the 
>> same number in a some time period.
>> Anyway, thank you!
>> -- 
>> С уважением, Денис.
>> Best regards, Denis
>> 26.04.2018, 08:22, "Liviu Chircu" <liviu at opensips.org 
>> <mailto:liviu at opensips.org>>:
>>>
>>> Yes, exactly. Apologies for my incomplete example scenario!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Liviu Chircu
>>> OpenSIPS Developer
>>> http://www.opensips-solutions.com <http://www.opensips-solutions.com/>
>>>
>>> On 26.04.2018 07:57, Denis via Users wrote:
>>>
>>>      Liviu, it seems, i confused.
>>>      You gave an example
>>>      "the "sequential calls" holds the size of the last batch of
>>>     calls sent
>>>      to the same number. For example, if a user were to dial 44 and 45
>>>      prefixes in a round-robin manner, his "sequential calls" value
>>>     would
>>>      never exceed 1"
>>>      So, it seems, that if we have TWO PREFIX field in fraud detection
>>>      table with one profile, with 44 and 55 content, and ONE user
>>>     were to
>>>      dial 44 (for example 44667788 or 44223344 etc) and 45 (4567788 or
>>>     44223344 etc)
>>>      prefixes in a round-robin manner, his "sequential calls" value
>>>     would
>>>      never exceed 1.
>>>      In my case i have only ONE prefix - 810 - and, although, user were
>>>      dial different numbers but with common prefix (810) "sequential
>>>     calls"
>>>      increased by one every call. And when counter reached predetermined
>>>      value calls have started blocking.
>>>      Am i right?
>>>      Thank you.
>>>      --
>>>      С уважением, Денис.
>>>      Best regards, Denis
>>>      _______________________________________________
>>>      Users mailing list
>>>     Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>> ,
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at lists.opensips.org <mailto:Users at lists.opensips.org>
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opensips.org
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20180606/f121483b/attachment.html>