Wageslave Alice has a copy protected program on her commlink, and she wants to loan it to Wageslave Bob. She doesn't have the access code to allow her to just make a copy for him, so she actually has to move the program off of her commlink entirely and on to his.
Unbeknownst to either party, Shadowrunner Eve has intercepted the wireless signal between Wageslave Alice's and Wageslave Bob's commlink and has set her own commlink to copy all traffic sent between the two.
Here's the question: when Shadowrunner Eve later goes back and looks at the coppied traffic, does she find that she now has a working copy of the program that was moved from Wageslave Alice's commlink to Wageslave Bob's? Or is copy protection in SR4 smart enough to know the intended destination of the program when it moves, and stubbornly refuse to allow the program to work if a copy of that data ends up somewhere other than it's destination? If the latter, can Shadowrunner Eve go through the process of cracking the copy protection to turn the data into a working program, or does she just have a chunk of worthless data clogging up her intercepted traffic file?
And in any case, would the scenario be any different if Wageslave Alice had obtained the access code that would have let her copy the program to Wageslave Bob's commlink instead of just moving it?
Also would a scenario based off of wired connections and the Intercept Traffic action instead of wireless transmission and the Intercept Wireless Signal action be essentially the same, despite wording differences in the two sections? ("Intercepted communications can be copied/recorded without any additional tests." vs. "Once the signal is intercepted, you can monitor the traffic and even copy/record/forward it without making any more Intercept Wireless Signal actions.")
Think about things now. You buy a computer game and it come with a registration code to allow you access.
Now in SR you'd be required to register that code with the company via the matrix when you enter it into the program. You can't simply give him the Code because that unique code is attached to a SIN card. This is why people don't just share CD-Keys in SR.
She could give him the program with out having to remove it from her comlink. However he'd have to register the program before it could function. But as I suspect it be attached to a SIN card. Thats why copy protection is tough. You can't just swap CD-Key's you have to hack the program and remove the need for it.
This all assumes is legal corp programing, not private programmer or shadowrunner made stuff.
That being said. If you intercept the program during transfer and copy it down onto your comlink. Your free to try and break the copy protection.
Let us consider the first example:
Alice is trying to rehost her program to Bob's commlink. In this case, the fact that Eve has intercepted the program does not allow her to install the program on her commlink as-is, because Bob is currently using the license key. However, I would argue that Eve can use the standard rules on p228 of the SR4 book. If Shadowrunner Charlie had sent Eve a copy of one of his programs (without rehosting it), the effect would be the same; Eve would now have a legitimate copy of the program, but no license for it.
Now let us consider the second example:
If Alice had a site-license (the ability to install the software on multiple commlinks), then Eve could simply install the software on her own commlink. Now, whether or not the software will work depends on how the manufacturer implements its DRM, which is probably up to the GM. For instance, many modern software companies issue a site-license that allows you to install the software on a set number of computers, and then leave it up to the Licensee to determine who can and cannot install the software (so, in principle, a dishonest Licensee may install the software on many, many more computers than he has actually purchased licenses for).
There are two problems I can see with a "Product Activation/License Key" model for copy protection in Shadowrun.
First, nothing in the copy protection section of the rules says that a matrix connection is required for making legitimate copies. Just an access code. Given the fact that runners sometimes find themselves in either Dead Zones or in buildings that have been blocked from the outside matrix by use of wifi-inhibiting paint or other means, I think it'd be kind of important to mention in the rules if it were a requirement.
Secondly, it'd seriously discourage the use of copy protection on illegal programs. Neither the author of an exploit program, nor the end user, would want that program phoning home each time it's moved from one device to another.
So, if the copy protection were entirely self contained code, smart enough to tell if it's been copied or not, would that change your answers?
I never said it phones home every time.
It just phones home once when you activate it.
Look and Windows XP. After 30 days you are required to phone home to windows with the activation key for your operating system. Afterwards its no longer required. A similar concept would exist with the programs. Your required to activate the program after its installed but then its no longer required.
illegal programs would be given away already activated and have different copy protections.
Those sending and sharing illegal programs should use fiber optic wire not wireless signal with few exceptions.
| QUOTE (Jack Kain) |
| I never said it phones home every time. It just phones home once when you activate it. |
| QUOTE |
| illegal programs would be given away already activated and have different copy protections. |
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul) | ||
And when would would you have to activate it? |
the idea of loaning someone a program is counter to the very idea of copy protection. you dont loan someone your access to a program. if bob wants to use said program my guess is that he either have to grab a time limited rental version of the matrix or shell out for a full copy (said rental one can probably be upgraded to a full time one later on if bob feels the need).
now, if noth alice and bob works in the same office it may be that said office is running a "program server", where they are paying for x number of users being able to access the program at the same time.
my guess then is that if said server is set up, one would need a key of some sort to access the server, and the transfer of the program would be encrypted and maintained in a time locked box. do not connect to the server again to renew you program use (it will be kinda like signing out a tool from the factory tool storage) within a set time and you loose access to said program.
this system will even allow workers to bring programs home if they do not have them and need them to work on some project over the weekend. that is if they are not living on corp territory, as i would expect any and all computing tools they use are owned by the corp and loaned to the worker, complete with a program server for both home and office use.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You buy the program its tied to the commlink. Have a nice day.
[I know, I know... not RAW but the RAW is very incomplete in this regards...]
| QUOTE (Jack Kain) |
| I thought my windows xp analogy would be clear enough. |
| QUOTE |
| Now the guys writing illegal hacking programs, aren't selling 10,000 copies. They can have each copy require a unique code (as in no other code will work) easier then a corp can. |
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| the idea of loaning someone a program is counter to the very idea of copy protection. |
Why are people getting bent out of shape over this?
Like so much else, SR4 doesn't go into details about how such things work, but abstracts it. Programs have copy protection, which can be defeated with a specific roll. That's all you need to know. Anything else is just flavour. Accept it and move on.
If a player decides his hacker doesn't want to shell out for a program, and would rather steal it from a corp wageslave sharing it (or loaning, if you like) with a colleague, how long is he going to have to wait, with his tap on multiple comms, until the desired program is transfered? How often do you realistically see this as happening?
Something I would like to know is the kinds of program ratings used by corps. Any suggestions?
I generally think of programs as being installed off of the matrix. You don't get a program designed to be installed everywhere you get a copy designed to run on the comlink that installed it. Which you can then back up. However if someone else wants to run it they're going to have to be clever about emulating the origional comlink which is what the copy protection roll is all about.
@ornot I don't know what John Q Wageslave has but the attack programs in corp systems get up into the 8's and above (as occasionally shows up in missions). However typically I consider programs like that to be loaded up with stuff that will try to leave a data trail. They will also fail spectacularly if used against the parent corps systems.
I suggest that on a glitch for the copy protection roll (which can be tried a number of times equal to skill level only) results in some kind of data trail left/signal sent to parent corp etc. As the GM you'll want to roll this behind your screen, pausing every now and then to give a low whistle or chuckle a little.
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul) | ||
That's funny, because I thought the very idea of copy protection was to ensure that addional copies don't get made unless they're authorized. Moving a program from one user's hardware to another means that the first user no longer has use of the program until it's moved back. There's still only one working copy, which was what the original purchaser paid for. |
| QUOTE (ornot) |
| Like so much else, SR4 doesn't go into details about how such things work, but abstracts it. Programs have copy protection, which can be defeated with a specific roll. That's all you need to know. |
| QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Feb 25 2007, 09:30 AM) |
| remember, when you buy programs today, your paying for a usage license, not the program itself. |
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul) | ||
And nearly every usage license in existance specifies that you may only store and run the program from one set of hardware, with specific clauses that allow you to move the program to another set of hardware and run it from there, provided that the program is fully removed from the original set of hardware first. |
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| that clause is there to allow you to upgrade your hardware without having to buy every bit of software again (what outcry that would create). like i wrote, loaning someone something you own is a privilege we take for granted, not a right set in stone. |
The average wage slave is not going to have programs of interest to hackers in general, its is more likely to target them for access codes / low level passwords and social manipulation information.
Corps would also take a dim view of allowing high level work being loaded into a personal comlink as the security risk is a nightmare. ( Of course the wouldn't stop a corp hacker or hacker wannabe from trying this.)
The copy protection described in SR4 is the basic one, if you read through the program descriptions files can have more active protections placed on them in addition to the atypical copy protection scheme. ( Data bombs for example.)
The phone home feature isn't so useful in the SR4 realm as the amount of spoofing going on is rather overwhelming.
lemme preface this by saying that i don't like how SR4 handles storage memory. i think the idea of not worrying (or having to worry) about where your data is actually being stored is completely whacked-out.
however, the fact is, in 2070, you don't have to worry about where you're storing your data. that means that Alice probably never send Bob the program--she just sent him the key that allows him to use it. the program itself is stored who-knows-where. the key itself is easily encrypted; even if Eve downloads everything Alice sends Bob, Eve will have to decrypt the key itself.
there are, of course, giant gaping holes in this concept (why is it easy to strongly encrypt keys to programs, but hard to strongly encrypt anything else of value?). but no more so than any other attempt at explaining the loopiness involved here.
| QUOTE (bait @ Feb 25 2007, 06:34 PM) |
| The copy protection described in SR4 is the basic one, if you read through the program descriptions files can have more active protections placed on them in addition to the atypical copy protection scheme. ( Data bombs for example.) |
| QUOTE |
| The phone home feature isn't so useful in the SR4 realm as the amount of spoofing going on is rather overwhelming. |
| QUOTE (RunnerPaul @ Feb 25 2007, 02:46 AM) | ||
Unique codes do nothing to address the fact that if it is designed to dial home for activation (even for relatively rare events like change of hardware), it exposes both the seller and the end users to being traced by the authorities, should either end of the activation chain get compromised. |
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| there are, of course, giant gaping holes in this concept (why is it easy to strongly encrypt keys to programs, but hard to strongly encrypt anything else of value?). but no more so than any other attempt at explaining the loopiness involved here. |
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| however, the fact is, in 2070, you don't have to worry about where you're storing your data. |
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)