That would take nothing to implement. Services like Truecaller already do live caller ID against databases on iOS / Android. All it would take is a sensible register of verified numbers

▲

Abishek_Muthian 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Several of the bank scammers had their profile verified as the bank in the Truecaller[1].

[1] https://xcancel.com/Abishek_Muthian/status/18063480222902113...

▲

l23k4 an hour ago | parent [-]

Truecaller can tell you about who a phone number belongs to.

Truecaller cannot accurately tell you whether or not the person calling you from a phone number is actually in control of that phone number.

▲

TeMPOraL an hour ago | parent [-]

Won't stop people from trying to make Truecaller, et al. prove that, though.

The problem here is that the correct security posture of the bank against third-party scams also protects the customers from first-party scams. Telling people the bank will never call them for anything, and even if, they're to always hang up and call the number on the back of their card, works equally well against criminals and telemarketers.

	▲	l23k4 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I feel like this is kind-of a solved problem in the jurisdictions where banks are liable for customer losses not arising from gross negligence. If a bank calls their customers directly and trains them to get phished, the bank does not get to claim gross negligence when this happens and has to refund the customer. If a bank tells their customers that they'll never call them (and actually doesn't), they have much better chances of claiming gross negligence on the part of the customer.