Isn’t it though? You can attack email systems, network operators, and end users in a myriad of ways remotely from anywhere in the world. How can you compromise a traditional fax? Eavesdropping the PSTN itself? Physical access to one of the machines? Stealing the printed document?
Network fax systems are more convenient to use than traditional, but still more secure than email because they’ve been designed to be so.
Where’s the attack surface to exploit this analog and unencrypted data? A government can order their telecoms (and they do), but the same happens with emails providers. Neither is secure from government intrusion, but email is easier to compromise than traditional fax systems because their exposure is so limited.
How's that absurd? If you have 0 experienced security folks on staff/consulting, and no one willing to listen to them, then a fax is almost certainly more secure in practice.
One of those countries is the US.
Fax is unencrypted analog. If practice, tgis is ver certainly not secure.
It's only "more secure" in the sense that unauthorized access to it counts as wiretapping, whereas the feds carved a loophole allowing them to read private emails without going afoul our anti-wiretapping laws.
That you don't see the absurdity means our educational system is also doing what feds built it to do.
> It's only "more secure" in the sense that unauthorized access to it counts as wiretapping, whereas the feds carved a loophole allowing them to read private emails without going afoul our anti-wiretapping laws.
How is that different from techbros trying to claim a loophole for their illegal business, because it's on the internet/through an app/'is a gig job'/on a blockchain?
When legislature hasn't kept up with technology, the only way to fight that behaviour is through lawsuits. Lawsuits have made some headway in dealing with both private, and government malfeasance, here.