Honestly, if someone had a certain minimum amount of money and skills to start with, I'd let them parlay this into a positive quality that abstracted it into giving them a steady source of cash, basically Day Job rebranded and maybe with a higher nuyen payout and the downside that every month a not-exactly-thorough search will be rolled against their relevant stealth abilities to represent the chance of a dogged investigator or a really unlucky derp moment putting someone on the trail.

Well fuck. Every uninstaller for every program ever no longer functions.

(And yes, yes it is possible to "delete yourself" step 1: when a program is run, it is now in RAM and no longer requires disk access to run, because of this fact, it can erase the sectors of the hard drive where the program is stored permanently. Then the program exits. It is no longer a running program and the OS garbage collects the RAM.)

I'll thank you if you never work in any tech department. Ever. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

A computer isn't going to work off of RAM when you tell it to stop reading the RAM. There's always *something* left over, and when that something is enough algorithms to continue a process like RAM access? It's complex enough to hold other information as well. At some point, "DELETE EVERYTHING LOL" breaks down.

Having actually programmed in Assembler, actually, yes, yes you can.

Works like this:

Step 1:
- Delete all files on the computer.* A running program can delete its own executable.
Step 2:
- Get address block of the current instance of self (very doable, I personally do not know how, but I know that it's possible given programs like Cheat Engine which can get a list of memory blocks for every running program.
Step 3:
- Set counter to 0x000000
- Loop the following:
- - if counter is outside the memory block of this program, then set the memory value at the counter to 0.
- - increment counter
Step 4:
- set counter to the first memory block of this program
- Loop the following:
- - set the memory value at the counter to 0.
- - increment counter

The program will erase all files off the hard drive, then crash every running application on the machine, except itself, until it wipes out all RAM values, then it begins overwriting itself with 0s as well. Eventually yes, the program will encounter a memory location that is effectively the next instruction, and set it to 0, crashing itself, but there'd be practically nothing left of the program at this point, as all variable blocks are defined before all functions, and as we're working in assembler, we're using a register (not a RAM address) to store our "counter" variable, thereby leaving only the remnants of a program that nukes computers. There'd be literally nothing left to trace back to anyone.

This process would leave little more than a smoking crater where there once used to be a warehouse. There'd be fragments of the program itself left over in volatile (!) memory, but it'd be incredibly difficult to recover (as you would need to determine the values held in RAM without shutting off the machine--unfortunately as there is nothing else on the machine to allow you to load and run programs....).

*Some files will be locked by the OS, such as the OS itself this is unavoidable. For the most part, these files can be ignored, or you can perform a cleanup action on these files between steps 3 and 4 (the point at which there is no longer an OS enforcing the lock).

When that agent goes online you do.


No. They explicitly state it in the core rulebook.-



There is no Replicate program option on page 114. There is an Autosoft option on page 113, however. That, of course,

...Says nothing about the need for an Access ID whatsoever, to the surprise of no one.



Completely missing the crucial step of gaining access in the first place. It can't just 'copy itself over' without access. Also, if those are the 3 programs it has loaded up, how the fuck is it going to hack? It's not bringing everyone else with it!




HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

"If you disagree with me, then shadowrun will asplode!"

Funniest fucking thing I've seen today.

What you're looking for is on page 110-111, section header "Copied Agents and IDs"



Oh, cute. Selective reading. Here's what was immediately before the small bit you quoted: "One Pilot 3 (Cascading 3, Exploit 3) to create the account". Please note how it has one agent to do the hacking, and then one to go on the commlink and fuck shit up.

No. I'm not looking for that section, since I've already made mention of the rules. It's cute that you think you're teaching anyone anything though.



Please note how that doesn't solve the problem of one agent trying to hack hundreds or thousands of commlinks while using the same AID.

It's best not to jump into a conversation until you understand what's going on and can keep up. It's quite rude otherwise.

First of all: take your patronizing tone and shove it you know where.

There is no problem at all with the agent hacking all those 'links with the same AID because there will be nothing linking that to the hacker.

It would seem that unlike you, I have actually read the replies in this thread.

I don't know where you get the 8 - according to SR4A, p.234, the threshold to detect an intruder is the rating of the stealth program alone - in your example this is 5.

An agent on Joe Q. Average Wageslave's commlink - no IC, no Spiders - which is doing nothing? Yeah. One hour, or twenty. Barring a system reboot, there's nothing TO notice, unless someone takes the time and effort to scan the ENTIRE file manifest for that commlink. Which 99.999999999999999999999% of people who don't bother to get a comlink with better than 2's and maybe 3's, is typically going to do daily, let alone more often than once an hour.


Most of them. We're talking non-management workers here. Sony Emperor (Res2 Sig3; 700¥), running Renraku Ichi OS (Sys2, Fir2; 600¥), with a Basic User Suite (300¥, includes Analyze 2). The total price of that is 1,600¥; I dare say the average Wageslave makes less than 5,000¥/month - IOW, "not quite enough to afford a Middle Lifestyle". Probably down in the 2,000¥/month range, which makes that very vasic, "all 2's" commlink most of an entire month's salary.


It's still not one hack; it's three thousand hacks, for 5¥ apiece.

And with that random up-to-an-hour delay, it's not going to happen in one place; it's going to happen in as many places as those three thousand people can reach in an average of half an hour - including by car, by train, by bus, or maybe by boat.


The handover for the cash takes place before the authorities even know there has BEEN a large-scale hack, let alone that it was one person (and not, say, a few hundred separate teenaged pranksters). So the same rule would apply.

And, handover or not: if the full weight of The Authorities (or whoever) is going to come down on a hacker for a mere 15K¥ lifted from a few thousand security-clueless wageslaves ... then it will come down twice or three times as hard, at least, on someone who directly costs said Authority several million or billion nuyen.

And that's why subscriptions with binding time exist, to allow you really nice things you can't afford.

As a note on the entire thread: The problem with developing computer rules for RPG's is that the target demographic is likely to have a good understanding how things should work. Leading to either overly elaborate and complex rules or huge sweeping abstraction. Personally I really don't feel like learning actual computing principles to play a game

Unwired, p111, emphasis mine:
"Note that when an agent program is copied, the access ID
built into the agent is copied as well.  is means that any copies
of the agent will have the same access ID. This is not a problem
when a hacker is running such copies simultaneously from his
persona (as his access ID is used in that case), or if the copies are
operating autonomously in independent nodes. If a copy tries to
access a node on which an agent with the same access ID is already
running, however, the node will automatically refuse access (even
if the agent tries to hack his way in, the attempt will automatically
fail).  is security feature both deters piracy and prevents mass
invasions by agent mooks (the so-called “Agent Smith” scenario)."

Each copied Agent, operates solely on the single Commlink it has been copied to. And uses Command 3 to operate the Commlink, so the bank sees the Commlink's accessID, not te Agent's.


See above. They directly state the exact opposite of your assertation.


Pardon the misnomenclature, you're right it's an Autosoft. However, it is on page 114 of my (fully up to date) PDF copy.


Way to see only HALF OF A SENTENCE. The second half, even.

The "dropper" commlink has TWO Agents on it. One to hack, one to steal money. Hack-agent gains access, then creates a new, completely-legit Admin level account. The credentials for said account are handed to Theft-agent, which then replicates itself onto the target commlink.

Lather, rinse, repeat.


More like, "if you follow the logical consequences of what you are suggesting, then it becomes impossible to run the shadows in the first place."






My bad - I misremembered it as being "stealth+hacking", or in this case, "stealth+pilot". My money is still on the 8 dice hitting 4 successes before 4 dice hit 5 successes, though.

Actually, it's 8 dice hitting 8 sucesses (2 for Firewall, +6 for Admin access) vs 4 dice (2 for firewall, 2 for analyze) hitting 5 sucesses (your stealth program) - that is more of a close call actually.

I've always stated your two options were each agent uses the same AID, and thus all are succeptible to being caught very easily, or you take an extreme amount of time to hardcode them with their own AIDs.

You keep denying this and then point to the rule which says I'm right. I don't think you get it.

And they're in the Shadowrun rules? GREAT! Point me at them, so that my shadowrunners can sign up for them and get better commlinks, software, and firewalls than they could afford, too!!

...

What's that, you say? There aren't any rules for it?

Then we're back to what I posted, now, aren't we? Because what's good for the goose is good for the gander; if you can get a commlink for a discount as an unimportant (and probably unnamed NPC, then you should damned well be able to do so as a PC too. Even if it required you to have a non-falsified SIN.

Further.



They use their own AID, *not* the commlink they're trying to operate.

[facetious] Wait, TWO agents? What two agents? Didn't you just insist that the one agent being used, was unable to actually hack it's way in? Why yes, yes I believe you DID. [/facetious]

Now we see the intellectual dishonety you bring to the table. It's "one agent" when that benefits you, but "two agents" when that benefits you.

It has always been two agents, each with their own AccessID, one of which recopies itself onto each target commlink.


You buy one, one, Agent. You copy it once. You patch one copy for a new AccessID.

And that's it. You're done. Forever. Those same two Agents can be used and re-used ad infinitum - and each of the two has it's own, separate, unique-to-it AccessID.

The Hack-agent does the intrusion with it's Hack-agent AccessID. Once it creates an account on the target commlink, it is no longer involved, and has in fact moved on to analyzing and hacking the next commlink.

Once access is acquired, the Theft-agent Replicates onto the target commlink with it's Theft-agent AccessID. That replicated copy never interacts directly with any node other than the target commlink. The original Theft-agent copy never does anything except replicate onto commlinks the Hack-agent gains access to.

All of this, EVERY BIT, is in perfect keeping with the rules for copied Agents on page 111 of Unwired, and the Replicate autosoft on page 114 of Unwired.


Right back at you: you don't get it. Intentionally so, I suspect.

... "Command 3".

The only node the Theft-agent interacts with, is the Commlink it's on. It directs that commlink to perform actions on other nodes. IOW, it suborns what amounts to the user's absentee Persona: "This is not a problem
when a hacker is running such copies simultaneously from his persona (as his access ID is used in that case), [...]"

Neither do most people, leading to abstractions that allow for abusive things, that really would never be possible, but the abstract nature of the rules allow it.

It's Always been two agents? So your cunning plan was to steal 10 nuyen?

Again, your use of command is irrelevant. The rules are clear. Your bullshit personal attacks only make it clear that your grasping at straws. I'm exiting this conversation before you get even nastier.

Nice straw man you've got there. Would be a shame if anything happened to it.

Mirror, mirror, on the wall ...

So... Let me see if I have this right... The Agent copied has 3 programs: Replicate, Command and Corrupt. HOW, exactly, do you expect that agent to find the appropriate data to respond with to any query to the target Comlink? None of the porgrams loaded are going to cut it, as the best that can happen is that the Agent tells the comlink to simply respond (command) but unfortunately, it cannot choose what to respond with. You (and many others apparently) are assuming that the Comlink knows the appropriate response. However, if it is a biometric Verification request, or Question Response that is required, HOW is the Agent to know what information to send? It does not. Because it cannot even attempt to locate such information to start with (That would be what Analyze and Browse is for, which the Agent Lacks).

Secondly, with the assumptions in play, that the target is a Rating 2 Comlink (from immediately above in Pax's Response), the second the Agent loads to the Comlink, its Response runs to 0 (without even mentioning the other programs that may already be active). Not very subtle there, is it? So, it is an immediate response degradation severe enough to alert the User, becasue the Comlink just effectively locked up. Way to go Roger Ramjet.

One of many reasons this scheme does not work. *shrug*

One of the many reasons that agents, as written, don't work. Look at the pre-statted ones. There's a hacking one that lacks exploit, for example.*

Ironically, it's also why Technos don't really "work" either.

In any case, you just need a third agent with the required programs. Need more than 2? (Replicate takes the third slot). Get a fourth agent.

*IIRC, it has Stealth, Decrypt, and Spoof.

With Stealth 5 you have a 8.8% chance to get noticed on roll#2, 36.8% on #3 and 66% on turn 4.

Your chances to get into the node for turn:
#1: 0,02%
#2: 12,65%
#3: 57,62%
#4: 88,47%

That means your intrusion will be spotted fairly often - and the intrusion happens while the target is in vincinity of your commlink.