 Idiot's Guide to the Matrix 2.0 |
  |
 May 6 2006, 12:15 AM
Post
#226
|
|||
|
Running Target  Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534  |
Wasnt your response lowered to 5? Then your effective stealth is 5, too (as your effective system is 5, too, for everything except response degrading calculations to avoid the spiral of death) |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
May 6 2006, 12:18 AM
Post
#227
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
That depends on how good you are - and the intervall of internal scans. But usually, the chokepoint is the biggest obstacle, and the the following nodes are much easier to hack. After you hopped into the secondary systems, perhaps only as a user, you can take your time again to get root everywere else. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 6 2006, 04:25 AM
Post
#228
|
|||||
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
hmm you might be right, but i'm too tired to consider it.... but i think thats an extreme whamy, as you're then essentially get double the dice penalties for it (once for the - dice pool for load, and once of the lowered programs) or am i misunderstanding what i'm doing in my extreme tiredness? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 6 2006, 10:45 AM
Post
#229
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Hm, where does this -1 for load come from?
|
|
|
|
|
May 6 2006, 06:18 PM
Post
#230
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
that is for running 11 programs on a response 6 comm
|
|
|
|
|
May 6 2006, 07:09 PM
Post
#231
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Thats what I meant. Your response was lowerd by one for running 11 programmes.
That was lowering your System to 5 and thus, all your programmes. Of course, after failing the reality filter, your response was 4, and thus all your programmes (stealth, too). |
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 02:16 AM
Post
#232
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 34 Joined: 3-May 06 Member No.: 8,522 |
@ Aku : to clarify the situarion...from the discussion it came out that:
- you are ALONE - you are OUTSIDE the building @ Serbitar The problem is...in past edition the system tryed to be realistic (maybe too much) while in SR4 the system is more symple (maybe too much) :P In theory what Aku did was a "hack on the fly" ... meaning that he has exploited some bug of the programs running on the target network, getting "shell access". Shell access, in poor words, is what allows a user to "do stuff". Since some stuff is rooted deeper into the system, maybe even behind some passive security like passwords and hidden folders and similar things, you may imagine that a hacker may just be content with User-Level access intead of more usefull but more difficult Security/Admin-level access. The problem is that this access to the command shell DOES NOT correspond to ANY account! When the system asks for UserID and Password you are basycally putting up a "mask" and trying to "fast-talk" past the security: < No sir...I'm not editing this file...I'm just an email... > THIS is what your Stealth software does (in past edition it was a "Masking" program ;) ) So...the Aku Icon knoks at the network door and says: "Hi, I am a phone call from WhateverCORP...can I come in?" The Firewall runs a check while Aku tryes to throw smoke and lies all around. Hopefully the Firewall is fooled and lets you in. Now Aku is inside disguised as a phone-call with some basic User-Level access options and, unless he does something "hackish", he should be fine and left alone. BUT this system filters all entering data through a security node to provide extra security. Aku-phone gets inside and is looked upon by some Agents, for the simple reason that these Agents are supposed to look at ANYTHING that comes through. The Agents look at the Icon of Aku...that looks like a phone-call but IS NOT a phone-call NOR it has any valid user account. Aku manages again to disguise himself as some kind of legit data-file...so the Agents are satisfied and let him be. This way Aku is left alone while: - trying to alter the skulpted reality - lounching and subscribing an Agent (that caused a "spike" in the system :P ) - tapping the flow of data in the node - analyzing the node - poking a hidden databomb - running a medic software - stiking around for ONE HOUR probing the hidden node If you think in this terms, it all makes sense. Too bad the rulebook goes in a too simple way explaining such things...so anyone supposes to have a user-ACCOUNT, while in truth they only have user-ACCESS ... that is a very different thing! If Aku, disguised as a warez-porn-movie, manages to find a legit user-ACCOUNT (ID and Pass...or "Key" as the rulebook says) he then can do whatever he wants unpunished, becaus any security-query will receive a proper code-answer. |
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 11:41 AM
Post
#233
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
well, i guess that changes how im viewingt hings, but, to clairify, the INTERVAL time is 1 hour for the slow probing, i made 5 rolls, so really, i was in there for 5 hours!
|
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 11:44 AM
Post
#234
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
And I want to keep it simple. I dont want to have roll 10 times for the various IC in a node, just because it is now possible to set IC to constantly analyze stuff. By just dissallowing this I keep it simple. And with my interpretation of the rules, this comes naturally.
Thats your interpretation. This is stated nowhere in the rules. The facts, that you are being able to get security or admin rights indicates something else. Furthermore the rules for hacking in on the fly ssay explicitly:
Phone calls are data. Data does not have access rights. Users and processes have. Furthermore this is again your interpretation.
Aku has a valid user account. He got it by hacking in as a normal user. If he had hacked in as admin, he would have a valid admin account. What else would be the reason to hack in as admin, if you dont get a valid admin account for this session?
Again, your interpreation. You can interprate it that way, but Ic an interprate it a different way. I say, there is no difference between ACCESS and ACCOUNT. This is not indicated in the rulesbook and would make things much more complicated.
Again, your interpretation. Mydifferent interpretation was posted above. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
May 7 2006, 12:58 PM
Post
#235
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 34 Joined: 3-May 06 Member No.: 8,522 |
It's not an "interpretation".
I stated it in the beginning of my post: what I described would be a hacking that followed "real world" rules and principles. SR4 gets too simple and skips it all by directly giving you an ACCOUNT. On this you are right. Agents will scan Aku, but Aku has an account...so no test should be done unless Aku breaks the laws of his current account. I deem this rules too "light", not because I like rolling dices, but because they take away the brain from the hacking process. One thing is having an hacker to figure out a way to get a valid accout (by meat-world legwork/spying/corruprtion/etc) or a safe entry-point (by phisically breaking inside the network building)...becaus hacking from the outside gets you just "access privileges", meaning that you are "hot" untill you get a legit account. Another world is if you just have to roll high on a stupid test...and if you do BAM! you get it all: - you get a legit account - you don't need to break into the building - etc... But yes...the book states that you get an ACCOUNT. I was just trying to explain the reason behind the happenings of this run ;) |
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 01:02 PM
Post
#236
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
That's exactly what they should do: make playing a Hacker an easy and fun thing for the non-nerd to to. And, BTW - when using vulvernabilities, you always use an account... the one the software that has the exploit runs under. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 7 2006, 04:34 PM
Post
#237
|
|
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,148 Joined: 27-February 06 From: UCAS Member No.: 8,314 |
Actually, in the "real world" of computer cracking, if you're using a computer, you have an account. Maybe it's somebody else's legitimate account (which is the easiest way to go), and maybe it's one that you created (as through an overflow error such as the one used by Karl Koch and other members of the Chaos Computer Club in the late 80's), but it's still an account. An agent running on their system could be merely a process, since it's not attached to any external ports, but it would still have to be associated with an account, which would define its privileges.
Furthermore, somebody mentions above that a hacker or agent could use Stealth to look like porn. This is actually not possible in the "real world." You could use Stealth to look like a user or a normal process, but not a file. Consider reading through your process list to see if anything unauthorized is running, and coming across a process (program) called boobies.jpg -- it makes no sense that a data file would be running as a process. One example that sums up both points about stealth nicely is the Open Search Web adware browser hijacking program. It inserts a process called "AIM README.EXE" into your running processes. First of all, one should become suspicious that a readme file has come to digital life; it's like a cookbook getting up and tossing ingredients around and yelling, "BAM!" Second, it is pretending to be a legitimate process, albeit poorly. I think that the core of the debate here is what it means for a user to have a personal account, security account, or an admin account. I mean, yes, a normal user-level account would be able to do certain things without raising suspicions, but the question is, what are those things? At what level can a user scan the node's connections? At what level can they decrypt a normal file? What about a security camera file? The answer, I think, is relatively simple. It's different for each node. Yeah, that sucks, but that's how it is in real life, too. Each administrator has his or her own favorite settings. Some settings are obvious (kernel access and shutdown privileges belong to the admin only), but some are a matter of taste (can users see who else is on the node?). Most of the time, this last point is moot; the overwhelming majority of nodes in 2070 only have an admin account: cameras, vending machines, cyberarms, civilian vehicles, etc. It's the machines that multiple people access and/or use that are going to have different levels of access: nodes that run building security, mainframes, hotel nodes, personal commlinks, and the like. Well, that went on longer than I thought it would. Sorry about that. |
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 04:48 PM
Post
#238
|
|||
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000 Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951 |
Not quite - creating accounts is a step after that. :) Code inserted via buffer overflows is treated as a part of that defective software, which causes it to run under the very same account. (That's why people hate StarForce with such a passion... especially since Windows allows any program to give orders to anything else.) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 7 2006, 04:56 PM
Post
#239
|
|||
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
you never create an account with a buffer overflow attack. what you do is make the original prosess crash, and use that crash to make the os fire up a new prosess that you can use to gain access under the same account that the original prosess was running. as i have stated before, i find the new matrix rules more realistic then the old ones, in a very abstract kind of way :P |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 7 2006, 04:58 PM
Post
#240
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
hmm, to slow yet again...
|
|
|
|
|
May 7 2006, 04:58 PM
Post
#241
|
|||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,148 Joined: 27-February 06 From: UCAS Member No.: 8,314 |
Right, but that's not the point. The point is that when you're intruding on a system, you're doing it under an account of some sort, whether you've just created it or not. What you describe can easily be accounted for in the Exploit Extended Test. Ultimately, the specifics don't matter, since the rules handle it the same way. I'd say that if the player knows the difference, have him or her describe how they're doing it, 'cuz this is Shadowrun, where style is just as important as substance. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 7 2006, 05:10 PM
Post
#242
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,498 Joined: 4-August 05 From: ADL Member No.: 7,534 |
Ok, no problem with this. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 8 2006, 11:02 PM
Post
#243
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 34 Joined: 3-May 06 Member No.: 8,522 |
I know that a "file" listing as a "process" and generating system traffic is like a blinking neon signal calling for divine retribution.
But I just couldn't resist the ancestral call of the P.O.R.N. :P Instead, the some account concept scores a good point, being also more in-line with the rulebook. A question. Most devices, as stated above, just have a "default" setting with one account that has total access (Admin Level). Does this means that to hack into a stupid I-Pod I have to get an Admin Account (threshold +6) or that the basic Personal Account automatically grants me Admin privileges? |
|
|
|
|
May 9 2006, 12:28 AM
Post
#244
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
it realy depends on what device is supposed to be used for i think.
with a i-pod (or ares-pod as i guess it would be named in SR ;) ) i would hazard that it would grant you a admin account as if you requested a normal account. but if you try to attack someones comlink that only have a admin account i would think you would run into a higher treshold. |
|
|
|
|
May 22 2006, 08:43 AM
Post
#245
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 22-March 04 Member No.: 6,179 |
So........ is Dash back yet?
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2006, 03:09 PM
Post
#246
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Yes, I'm back as of yesterday, but the inevitable back log of work-related stuff will probably delay the restart of the thread until tomorrow at the latest. At the very least I have to get through all of my email first!! But, this is basically a heads-up to let everyone know that I'm back. Also, Hasimir, I love the way you explained user-access vs. user-account above. Well done, sir.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 9 2006, 08:13 PM
Post
#247
|
|
|
Technomancer Group: Retired Admins Posts: 4,638 Joined: 2-October 02 From: Champaign, IL Member No.: 3,374 |
Hrm ... I'm bogged down (if you couldn't tell by my extended two week absence) with real life at the moment. Honest question: is there still interest in continuing this thread? If so, do we want to continue with Aku's scenario? Would it assist people to switch to a different scenario? Bueller?
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 10 2006, 09:20 PM
Post
#248
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 97 Joined: 30-January 06 Member No.: 8,213 |
I am interest in the thread still but I think you and Aku should set up some time so there isn't 2 or 3 days inbetween a single dice roll. Thanks for what you have done.
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16 2006, 07:06 AM
Post
#249
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 19 Joined: 3-June 06 From: Somewhere in the Utah-Anglo reserve. Member No.: 8,642 |
*knock knock*
hey Dash, hope you and Aku can carry on with this. I was lurking here for a while reading and figured i'd show my support for the topic. Brought up a bunch of good idea's and showed me how I could better describe my players encounters in a full VR setting. **edit- me not proof reading** |
|
|
|
|
Jun 17 2006, 02:37 AM
Post
#250
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 115 Joined: 25-May 05 Member No.: 7,415 |
Thanks for this thread, Dash, Aku.
Serbitar - By your argument, someone who takes their time to hack in and get an admin account would never be scanned ever. Have I read you wrong somewhere? |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th January 2025 - 06:32 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.