Can't repair home office printer, so need a new one

Page 4 of 8  
On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 3:28:38 PM UTC-4, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I work for a firm that deals with a vast number of legally binding documents.
We email PDF's to clients all the time and accept - via email - their documents after they print them out, sign them and scan them back to PDF. We then either print them out for filing and/or further processing or we forward the email to the proper department.
We also have eFax numbers so clients can "fax" us documents. They arrive in our email as PDF's which can be printed out and filed and/or submitted for processing.
In other words, unless the client signs the document in my office or mails or hand-carries the document in, we never see the "original".
We are slowly - very slowly - moving towards digital signing of documents so that no paper copy even exists unless someone wants to print out a copy for their own records.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 5 Oct 2016 13:13:27 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03

The insurance business has been working towards that goal for over 10 years and they are still killing trees at an alarming rate!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/5/2016 3:28 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Don't tell them that a fax is scanned into the wires to send it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is scanned "directly"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/5/2016 11:32 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Right, only pure documents can be scanned, never a tampered or forged document.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Anyone can screw with the system - but if YOU scan something and send it to your shyster, HE can modify the file. If you fax it to him, what comes over the fax is what you sent him - and unless he's a really smart shyster (ever seen one of them?) he can't tamper with it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Okay, I'll play along...
What's to stop him or anyone else from taking the copy delivered by the fax machine, making alterations and simply faxing it to himself/herself again? Fax machines were never intended to be tamper proof, let alone resistant to the possibility. Likewise with fax printouts.
--
People you encounter every day are fighting battles you know nothing
about. Be kind.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But there's no way for the recipient of a fax to be sure whether it represents an unaltered scan of a paper document or has been generated by fax software from, for example, a Photoshop file. And the low resolution of faxes makes it hard to determine whether a fax is of a genuine document or a forgery.
A famous recent case was that of the forged National Guard memos used on 60 Minutes in 2004. In their haste to get out a hit piece against George W Bush in the final weeks before the election, they relied on a boneheaded document examiner who gave them an opinion based on faxes of the supposed memos. The ensuing scandal led to the end of the CBS careers of Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, the segment's producer.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/05/2016 07:28 PM, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

I'm not sure how faxing ensures authenticity.
What's to prevent someone from
1. scanning an original document
2. editing the document with Gimp
3. printing the altered document
4. faxing the altered document?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
123 brought next idea :

Of course it doesn't, but I think they are talking exclusively about 'in transit' modifications.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

If that's the case, then sending a pdf, etc offers no disadvantage either. Once the individual has it, via fax or otherwise, honesty and integrity is the only real barrier to unauthorized modifications. Fax makes it harder to alter in transit sure, but once it's received, thats another matter entirely. I think some people make too big of a deal concerning possible man in the middle attacks while in transit. Fax, pdf, etc. Neither method ensures authenticity.
--
People you encounter every day are fighting battles you know nothing
about. Be kind.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Id ensures authenticity at the recieving end. What was sent cannot be modified like a "digital copy" can You fax something to a lawyer or whoever and he doesn't like it - it stays what you sent. A digital copy sent to the same person can be modified to their liking and it is virtually indetectable.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca Thu, 06 Oct 2016 22:41:32 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Hmm...I really don't understand why you think a fax machine result isn't a digital copy that is somehow protected from unauthorized modification. A fax machine does NOT ensure authenticity. That was never the intention with the technology in the first place.
You can forge caller ID, and if good enough, even forge the sending phone number/fax header details. What you couldn't forge is the digital signature created with your actual private key. As your public key is mated to it and only you have the private one.
One could create new keys with your name on them, and 'sign' the document, but it won't authenticate on the receiving end if they already have your real public pgp key.
You could easily send a pdf that you took the time to digitally sign with your public key. ANY modifications to that file when checked against your published and known key will cause it to fail the digital signature check. Any attempt to swapout your signature for theirs will also fail, as your private key isn't known to them and couldn't be used to generate the digital authentication on your behalf.
If you want to take authentication seriously, that's one of the best methods of doing so. Include the fact you signed it with the email where it's attached. The recipient can confirm the digital signature hasn't been faked AND the attachment is what was signed by the real you. Quick and easy these days, too. They only need your legitimate public key; which they would have if you have done prior business with them. As, obviously, you sent it before hand.
If someone attempts to swap out your digital signature for another, it won't pass authentication because your private key isn't something anyone else would normally have and your signature is based on that key only. YOUR public key can be used to verify it, because it's mated to YOUR private key that only you have. So, your public key (that they do have) will not authenticate the signature if the signature is created by another private key that obviously doesn't belong to you.
And the recipient will know someone went the extra mile to try and pass something off as yours that wasn't actually from you.
If you want to provide authentication for something you sent, sign it with your valid digital signature using PGP. Altering the signature and/or the contents of the message and/or file attachment will fail the authentication when the recipient goes to verify it. Even if they go so far as to create their own public/private key trying to mimick yours, It still won't authenticate as coming from you because it wasn't generated with YOUR private key.
--
People you encounter every day are fighting battles you know nothing
about. Be kind.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I can do that. The CA FTB would not accept it.
Hey, I also thought FAX'es were as dead as mimeograph machines. Silly me!
Apparently, some govt agencies and private finacial institutions will accept no other. Plus, almost every business online will accept a FAX. I will not accept one, but I can send one. ;)
nb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depending on the algorithm in use, the password protection offered may not be as secure as you might think...
--
People you encounter every day are fighting battles you know nothing
about. Be kind.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 18:46:50 +0000, Stormin' Norman

I would recomend a printer with separate ink tanks if you are doing any volume at all - and field replaceable print heads are also a big advantage. I have some (somewhere around 25?) officejet pro printers some with over 600,000 prints on them but most around 20,000 more or less. They are 8000s and I refill the ink 8 or 10 times a year each and replace them when the date runs out or when they stop being accepted by the printer. I get about 4 years or so out of each printhead.
If you do very little printing the HP combination cartridge/printhead with several colors combined are OK, particularly if you have a good ink refill company nearby who can refill them for you at a reasonable cost. I just HATE it when you run out of, say, yellow and the other 2 colors in the cartridge are still half full.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/4/2016 1:46 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

Why do you like a laser printer over an inkjet?
--
Maggie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

TCO (total cost of ownership), speed, moisture fast toner, toner does not clog the mechanism or dry up in the cartridge, and that is just a few reasons why I prefer a black and white lasers over color injkjets.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/6/2016 7:02 AM, Stormin' Norman wrote:

ok thanks!
--
Maggie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Also the laser print quality is much better than an inkjet.
Don. www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.