New Sys Operations and Utils Options

[mfb]

deleted!

[mfb]

nothing here!

[hobgoblin]

err, trash host sounds a bit like a combined crash host and delete file operation:)

and if one could limit operations then i guess that would be the first order of the day when securing a host.

as for nosediveing a subsystem, not goodas the numbers represent subsystem secuirty. you basicly just turn of security but putting a 0 on the subsystem :(

root idont see the need for, the basic utils are a root kit anyways. slash and burn is a bit like erotion from matrix, only targeting a host, not a deck or similar...

[mfb]

yeah, if you use these rules, i'd imagine many hosts have a list of operations that are disabled. that, in turn, makes Matrix runs several million times harder than normal. maybe i'll make a list of operations Edit Host can enable/disable, and exclude stuff like Infect.

several people have wondered why the Edit Host operation uses Control instead of Files. they argue that the operating system consists of files, and that editing those files should logically be a Files operation. this is a good argument; however, a look at the list of system operations in Matrix shows that pretty much anything related to the host itself (as opposed to data that the host contains) is manipulated via Control. the two operations most similar to these new ones are Alter Icon and Dump Log, both of which are Control tests despite the fact that icons and logs are both provably files.

[mfb]

gone!

[hobgoblin]

err, on thing i thought of, most mainframe type servers today have redundant parts. take out a cpu and the backup pops into action while a tech cna just pop the fired one out and put a new one in without turning the system off. now push this forward say 50-60 years when you can have a cray level computer in a keyboard. whats stopping them from say having 5-6 levels of swapouts, hell they can even have a failsafe system where they have 50-60 replacement chips on standby and a "Drone" that replace them as needed. point is, in the sr world a 5 min downtime is death to the company that own the host, no way will they make it easy to damage it "physicaly". the files on it is something else tho :)

[mfb]

yeah, but i figure stuff like that is tied into the security value. as you lower the security value, you're destroying the number of backup processors available and also wiping some of the memory banks that keep track of your packets. in other words, "blah blah blah magic GM hand-wave." i've reached the point where i'm willing to let reality slide a little in favor of game balance (mainly because i'm tired of rewriting these damn rules!).

[hobgoblin]

one other thing: as hosts are the lifeblod of the net, would not any corp owning a host go after you with anything in it its security department if you where trying to fry it? point being, i find this a realy bad idea...

[mfb]

well, note the difficulty of these tests, and the massive expense of the programs involved. toasted hosts are going to be a very, very rare sight indeed. besides which, most deckers are smart enough to keep offline copies of their programs, just in case their deck gets fried--any corporation that doesn't do the same is going to be too stupid to gather the resources necessary to track a decker down, anyway.

but, yes. if by some act of god, someone managed to crash a major host, they probably wouldn't live to spend the money.

[hobgoblin]

hmm, ok...