 The Fundamental Problem With Matrix Rules |
  |
 Sep 1 2007, 10:03 AM
Post
#51
|
|
|
Hoppelhäschen 5000  Group: Members Posts: 5,807 Joined: 3-January 04 Member No.: 5,951  |
That 'specific hardware' usually is a really crappy diode that produces electric white noise by thermal shift that is digitalized as a good random seed. And I'm not really convinced that it's insufficient randomness what makes SR encryption so weak...
BTW - as Intervall time increases exponentially, this fixes the 'try until you succeed' problems for Extended Tests: Try until hell freezes over. (Well, not really. Response 1 + Decryption 1 would still beat Encryption 6 after a few years or so.) |
 |
 
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 12:01 PM
Post
#52
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 5-September 05 From: LAX, UCAS Member No.: 7,687 |
I like that. Combined with my take on Serbitar's encyrption houserules, that just about fixes the setting's encryption issues (I think). House Rule Encrypt/Decrypt - Encrypted signals and encrypted files are handled in two different manners, both requiring an extended test. Decrypting a signal requires a Electronic Warfare + Decrypt (encryption rating x3) test with an interval equal to the encryption rating – the character’s Response rating in combat turns. Decrypting a file requires a Hacking + Decrypt (encryption rating x3) test with an interval equal to the encryption rating – the character’s Response rating in hours. Now if a good solution to the damn script kiddie problem could be found (though I like hits limited by Logic). Question - with hits limited by Logic, would an agent's Pilot be the limit to it's hits or would agent hits be unlimited? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2007, 12:10 PM
Post
#53
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 5-September 05 From: LAX, UCAS Member No.: 7,687 |
Just ran a couple house rules, and found that Logic (or Pilot) x2 generally equals the exact amount of dice an agent would be rolling anyways (ie Pilot + Program rating, the latter generally equal to Pilot in the common IC set ups I make). Rather nice, definitely something to think about.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 06:20 PM
Post
#54
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
It's just as hard to decrypt an encrypted data connection as a file. Why would you think it's easer, and/or why do you see it as desirable that it be easier? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2007, 08:21 PM
Post
#55
|
|||
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
From a pure gameplay standpoint it makes for better drama to crack into the mainframe and grab the data only to find out that it's encrypted and you don't know what the paydata that people are getting killed for even is than it does to have your party hacker send a float drone on a passive listening sweep three weeks before the run and submit the recordings to analysis while the rest of the party is sitting in a Taco Temple or a Blue Donut. The game is more enjoyable and tells better stories if people crack into nodes now and then decrypt the paydata later than it does if people can't crack into nodes until later and then already have the keys to the paydata once they get in. Waiting for rewards until after the run is over is kind of cool. Sitting on your hands to be allowed to go on the run at all is not. -Frank |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2007, 08:38 PM
Post
#56
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
ahnd that, i guess, is the reason we rarely see encryption correctly presented in hollywood movies...
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 09:55 PM
Post
#57
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
I can see that. The problem I run into is that the runners want to crack the data encryption so they can forge traffic allowing them to do whatever the hell they want and getting the cooperation of everyone in doing it. It sort of takes the challenge out of breaking in when you can have the receptionist hand them security credentials and usher them to their office to use while conducting the 'security audit'. And if you can trivially break the encryption they can have the CIO call up the security office and the receptionist and do exactly that. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 1 2007, 11:59 PM
Post
#58
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Banned Posts: 3,732 Joined: 1-September 05 From: Prague, Czech Republic Member No.: 7,665 |
Realistic and decent encryption would be essentially impossible to break in to. Unless you succeeded in dismantling any device on the encrypted network, at which point the entire system is compromised.
And that's not what people want. People don't want to begin every single adventure by acquiring the commlink of a site employee or ripping a camera out of the wall. That's "realistic", but it's boring. Real encryption is both better and worse than what makes for enjoyable storytelling or gaming. -Frank |
|
|
|
|
Sep 1 2007, 11:59 PM
Post
#59
|
|
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
@ktz:
it only does so if you plan to have them break in at night, ninja style while they go in kevin mitnick/sneakers style... but if you want to be a pain in the ass for them, have the leadership introduce a set of codewords or phrases that needs to be used to signal that one is indeed some CEO or whatever... |
|
|
|
|
Sep 2 2007, 12:08 AM
Post
#60
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,537 Joined: 27-August 06 From: Albuquerque NM Member No.: 9,234 |
As they can decrypt all their traffic and see the magic phrase this doesn't help. They can do live video calls and produce a pretty damn convincing call if they have enough recorded images and voice, as computers in SR4 are pretty fast. . . |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 2 2007, 12:16 AM
Post
#61
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 171 Joined: 5-February 05 Member No.: 7,053 |
I'm not sure that's entirely foolproof, kzt. I would imagine a few security agents running Stealth and Analyse checking for that kind of forgery would probably catch on eventually. As a defense, it's not foolproof either, but it would help. Adds nice tension, too. How much do you trust your cover ID? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 2 2007, 01:09 AM
Post
#62
|
|||||
|
panda! Group: Members Posts: 10,331 Joined: 8-March 02 From: north of central europe Member No.: 2,242 |
question is, what is said phrase, how often does it change and so on. it can be hidden at the start, the end, or anywhere inbetween. and i would probably make it variable. a kind of challange, response system where one party say something, the other party respond something and so on. yes, anything can be pulled of if one throw enough data at it, and have enough time. but do they? |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Sep 2 2007, 06:46 AM
Post
#63
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 5-September 05 From: LAX, UCAS Member No.: 7,687 |
Purely a stylistic thing - transmissions you want to crack on the fly, especially for hijacking drones etc. Files otoh, you can just copy and take home to crack later most of the time, and this kinda encourages that (and shorter hacks). Basically for all the reasons Frank already stated. I totally realize it's not realistic, and originally had both thresholds at rating x4 (Serbitar's original house rule IIRC) with an interval of minutes for transmissions. Nearly had a player rebellion, so this is the compromise version.
Ah, the "kick the door" approach to entry after a fashion ;) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th September 2025 - 09:30 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.