Control of drones questions Options

[FenrisWolf]

Yes, he can still hack in as normal (Hacking + Exploit vs. Firewall + Analyze). But he wouldn't be able to control the drone, until the rigger is dealt with.

I meant outside commands, not outside connections, sorry.

But the PC hacker would then be able to engage in cyber combat with the corp rigger right? Is so, would the corp rigger's control of the drone bearing down on the PC in the back of the truck be temporarily halted during the cyber combat?

[Eratosthenes]

But the PC hacker would then be able to engage in cyber combat with the corp rigger right? Is so, would the corp rigger's control of the drone bearing down on the PC in the back of the truck be temporarily halted during the cyber combat?

Yes, the PC hacker could attack the rigger in the node (assuming of course they spot them via their Matrix Perception check - is the rigger using a stealth program?)

Whether or not the drone continues to attack the PC's depends on how the rigger spends their actions. The rigger could attack the PC hacker in cybercombat, or manipulate the drone to attack others in meatspace.

[LurkerOutThere]

Basically the rigger is going to be having to make a choice, fight in the meat or fight in cybercombat, of course in the matrix you have enough IP's especially with hotsim booster if the NPC rigger is using it, that may not be as much of an issue.

[FenrisWolf]

Could the corp rigger using hotsim spend two of his IPs fending off the pc hacker and still use one IP to shoot the pc in the truck?

[FenrisWolf]

Double posted again.

[Eratosthenes]

Yup. He sure could.

[LurkerOutThere]

It's quite possible considering the corp knows a hacker is present they'll send not just a rigger but a combat spec'd hacker with him into the drone node to watch his back and let him concentrate on shooting the offending runners.

[Karoline]

So would the PC hacker be able to attempt a hack on the fly and gain access to the corp rigger VR controlled drone? If so, what would the opposed test be?

No the PC could not. While the rigger is rigging his drone, the drone is slaved. A slaved drone cannot be hacked except by connecting to it directly with a fiberoptic cable, and even then, they need an extra 6 hits on their hacking test.

So no, a rigger that is rigging a drone is basically safe unless the hacker goes through the process of backtracing the connection (Via the sniffer program) and hacking into the rigger's own commlink (Which is likely to be overwatched by the corp hacker in addition to being highly secure and having its own IC).

Uhm, sure about that? Isn't the whole point of slaving (besides security) the automatic rerouting of connections?

No, to my knowledge slaving is all about security. Now, the slaved device would likely send a message to the master device saying that so and so tried to connect, but the device wouldn't send the connection attempt up to its master. (This also means that the rigger would instantly get the info that he could pass along to the corp hacker so that the corp hacker can go after the PC hacker)

[Eratosthenes]

No the PC could not. While the rigger is rigging his drone, the drone is slaved. A slaved drone cannot be hacked except by connecting to it directly with a fiberoptic cable, and even then, they need an extra 6 hits on their hacking test.

I'm AFB, but I don't think the drone is automatically slaved to the rigger's commlink just because they jump in. I think it could be, of course, and likely should be (if the rigger's smart).

A good example was posted earlier: the example of Netcat and Slamm-O attempting to divert an MCT Flyspy.

[Karoline]

You're right, the rules don't state that the drone is automatically slaved, but that is because such a system didn't exist when the rules were written. Given the nature of the connection and whatnot, I figure that there is 1. No reason a rigger wouldn't always do this, and 2. No reason that a rigged drone would bother accepting commands from anyone but the person rigging it.

So yes, no rule specifically saying that a drone must be slaved while it is rigged, but there is also no logical reason that wouldn't be the norm.

[Eratosthenes]

I agree. A smart rigger would slave the device as their first action, but it may or may not be something a rigger would overlook if they jump in to a drone and find a target rich environment. (Basically, give the players some way to engage in some exciting combat in both meat and cyber space, or just screw'em over and have a lethal drone in their back seat)

Another way for the PC's to deal with a drone rigged in would be to jam the connection. If the signal of the drone is reduced enough, the rigger would be dumped, at which point the hacker could then hack in.

[Yerameyahu]

Does it matter? Rigging overrides *all* other inputs. You can attack the rigger/drone (crash, nuke, etc.), but you can't do anything directly to interrupt his control while jumped in.

[Eratosthenes]

Does it matter? Rigging overrides *all* other inputs. You can attack the rigger/drone (crash, nuke, etc.), but you can't do anything directly to interrupt his control while jumped in.

It does matter. A slaved device would not let a hacker hack into the drone (he'd have to go through the master device). A non-slaved device would allow a hacker to exploit their way in, where he could attack the rigger/crash the OS. So no, the hacker would not be able to operate the drone, but he could attack the operator.

[Karoline]

True, but personally if I was a rigger, it is something I would set my drones up to do automatically whenever I jump into them, not something I would simply always do whenever I jumped in. (And really, if the party is 'screwed over' because of a single drone... well, they might not be cut out for the shadows)

Yes, Jamming the connection totally works, though as soon as they drop the jamming for the hacker to hack into the drone, the rigger would pop right back in (though fiberoptics could be an option). Also, I'd think the rigger would set up the pilot (if it wasn't already for some weird reason) to attack stuff if he gets kicked.

[LurkerOutThere]

Why would they drop the jamming for the hacker to hack in, it's their jammer they should know it's skip key? I may need to relook at my books but essentially it makes logical sense that you don't suffer from your own Jammers.

[Karoline]

Why would they drop the jamming for the hacker to hack in, it's their jammer they should know it's skip key? I may need to relook at my books but essentially it makes logical sense that you don't suffer from your own Jammers.

There is nothing in the books about being able to avoid your own jammers, and the very existence of directional jammers seems to indicate that you can't (The entire purpose of the direction jammers being so that you can jam just the enemy and not yourself).

There is ECCM which will help you downgrade the affect of a jammer on you, but if the jammer is taking out the drone entirely, it doesn't matter if you have ECCM or not, because you won't be able to get a response from the drone.

[FenrisWolf]

From my limited knowledge, I believe that the jamming party would jam all signals but their own. That would allow them to attempt to hack back into the drone. Of course, the pilot program of the drone would kick in and light the truck up.

[Eratosthenes]

There is nothing in the books about being able to avoid your own jammers, and the very existence of directional jammers seems to indicate that you can't (The entire purpose of the direction jammers being so that you can jam just the enemy and not yourself).

There is ECCM which will help you downgrade the affect of a jammer on you, but if the jammer is taking out the drone entirely, it doesn't matter if you have ECCM or not, because you won't be able to get a response from the drone.

I half-remember reading something about being able to configure a jammer to block either all signals, or particular ones (so excluding your own team, for example).

As for advantages of Area vs. Directional...directional jammers degrade more slowly, so have a longer "reach".

[Karoline]

Okay, but even if you can bypass the jamming (still not convinced) the drone can't, so you still can't hack into it without dropping the jammer.

[Yerameyahu]

You'd have to be using the *selective* jammer in the first place, and I'm not convinced the rules let you jam any device AND connect to it. It's for jamming other people's comms while leaving yours free.

In any case, shouldn't all drones always be slaved, unless you can't afford the subscription limits?

[otakusensei]

Okay, but even if you can bypass the jamming (still not convinced) the drone can't, so you still can't hack into it without dropping the jammer.

Nah, you setup the jammer to excude the wavelength you're communicating on. If everything is setup in advance there's no trouble.

I'm at work right now, but I believe the difference is between jammers and smart jammers. If I recall correctly smart jammers can be configured to not block you and your team.

[Yerameyahu]

Yes, but how can you selectively jam the drone AND connect to the drone? I feel like you get to pick one. This is not the same as jamming everyone's comms except your team's.

[Eratosthenes]

Okay, but even if you can bypass the jamming (still not convinced) the drone can't, so you still can't hack into it without dropping the jammer.

A drone might not be slaved if multiple people (read, security spyder team/shift) were expected to access it. But even then, it might be slaved to a central control node. It really depends on how the security is set up.

And also, on how many drones that spyder's watching over. If they were supposed to keep watch on 10 drones patrolling a compound, they likely won't slave all of them, due to subscription limits (and response/performance hits). They'd likely just hop into each on now and again, with it configured to send him a message if they spot anything out of the ordinary.

[FenrisWolf]

Even if you could jam the wireless signal to the drone, wouldn't the dog brain take over?

[otakusensei]

Even if you could jam the wireless signal to the drone, wouldn't the dog brain take over?

Yup