Faxes - possible older machine having issues
-
I think its time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsBB93IqJkE
-
LOL.. yeah... Even the vendor is trying to get me to get rid of it as maintenance costs are really going up. I think they will be on the replacement block for next year.
-
Yes, COAX is a digital line. So that is almost certainly VoIP.
-
-
Much of that movie was filmed in Irving, TX.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Yes, COAX is a digital line. So that is almost certainly VoIP.
So do you think that's my problem? the conversion?
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Yes, COAX is a digital line. So that is almost certainly VoIP.
So do you think that's my problem? the conversion?
Not likely, they have probably addressed that in some way. But it is possible. They should disclose that if it is a problem, though. Do you know if modems work over it?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Not likely, they have probably addressed that in some way. But it is possible. They should disclose that if it is a problem, though. Do you know if modems work over it?
I have no idea. I can send faxes to my main office without any issues through this line, so I tend to agree that it's most likely not the issue I'm having - but you know how it is.. if someone can blame someone else, they will.
-
Sounds like the issue is elsewhere then. Maybe it is on the receiving end?
-
Maybe it is time to look at a hosted fax service?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Maybe it is time to look at a hosted fax service?
I use myFax/eFax and it works good.
-
I can't get them to replace the fax machine, let along consider going to an even more expensive hosted fax solution.
The problem isn't about receiving, it's about sending - so I'd have to have a solution where I could securely send scanned documents and they would then be faxed in.
-
@Dashrender said:
I can't get them to replace the fax machine, let along consider going to an even more expensive hosted fax solution.
The problem isn't about receiving, it's about sending - so I'd have to have a solution where I could securely send scanned documents and they would then be faxed in.
Faxes are completely insecure. Why would they need security for a new solution when they don't need it now?
-
@Dashrender said:
I can't get them to replace the fax machine, let along consider going to an even more expensive hosted fax solution.
Umm more expensive? How?
AT&T phone line is $40-$50 per month + long distance.
eFax.com (MyFax.com) is < $20 per month for the base package.
The users do not know that there is no phone line on the copier because they still walk up to hit and push the fax button. The copier handles it. For the incoming faxes, that goes to a specified person. That person will open each one and forward the email to the department that needs it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I can't get them to replace the fax machine, let along consider going to an even more expensive hosted fax solution.
The problem isn't about receiving, it's about sending - so I'd have to have a solution where I could securely send scanned documents and they would then be faxed in.
Faxes are completely insecure. Why would they need security for a new solution when they don't need it now?
LOL - You're so right, but the HIPAA police seem to think it is... and it is still the defacto standard in the medical community.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@Dashrender said:
I can't get them to replace the fax machine, let along consider going to an even more expensive hosted fax solution.
Umm more expensive? How?
AT&T phone line is $40-$50 per month + long distance.
eFax.com (MyFax.com) is < $20 per month for the base package.
The users do not know that there is no phone line on the copier because they still walk up to hit and push the fax button. The copier handles it. For the incoming faxes, that goes to a specified person. That person will open each one and forward the email to the department that needs it.
Wow, you pay a lot for a phone line, with Cox we're paying around $30 after taxes with no use limit (yes we have to pay for long distance, but that's fairly uncommon). The last time I looked at those fax solutions they wanted 4-15 cents a page. We are looking at sending around 400 pages a day. 400 * $0.04 = $16 a day * 22 days a month = $352 a month. That's a lot more than I pay now, and frankly my pitly little 400 a day does not qualify me for the $0.04, but instead really puts me closer to the $0.15/page cost.
Furthermore - unless the vender has a secure way to send those faxes to me, and a way for me to security send the faxes to them for fax transmission out, it's a no go.. normal email is completely out when it comes to HIPAA.
-
And normal email is more secure than a fax!
-
I believe fax is a direct HIPAA violation because the intent is to a non-authenticated party.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
And normal email is more secure than a fax!
Maybe - depending on how you look at it. It's harder to intercept a fax than it is an email. A hacker has to have physical access to intercept a fax. For an email he doesn't.
Even though we all know that POTS lines are not secure end to end, our elected officials don't know and don't seem to care about it. But they have been told and for whatever reason seem to follow up on it. standard email is not secure, and you can't send PHI over a non secure network (while not specifically named - they are talking about the internet).
Hell if HIPAA really wanted to go all ballistic, they could require that all communications over any medium be encrypted. I'm sure that's just a matter of time.
