Full Immersion Hacker, Is this viable? Options

[3278]

4. You can remotely Hack through the Wireless interface if you can establish Mutual Signal Range (Through Drones or other proxy Services, Assuming it Lets you in)
5. You can hack through the Matrix (assuming a connection exists, and is similar to 3 and 4 above, dependant upon which paradigm the target uses)

I'm not sure if you've been following the conversation, but the upshot is that some people think 4 and 5, here, are impossible. Their interpretation is that you cannot hack a node you're connected to through the Matrix, only one you're directly connected to with a point-to-point wireless connection.

As for your last question. It stems from an assumption that all Systems will have a Wireless connection. If that wireless is disabled, then the only other alternative is to forge a direct connection in one way or another.

No, you're looking at something else entirely. That question is directed toward the people who think a point-to-point, node-to-node, direct wireless connection is required for hacking: they're using the first half of the clause as support for their interpretation, so I'm asking what about the second clause makes direct connections necessary. Sorry for the confusion.

[3278]

Unless there really are technomantic hacking rays coming from your commlink, I'm not sure why the rules make such a big deal about mutual Signal range (including other things like pinging accessids).

But they don't make a big deal out of it, is the thing. In fact, it's one line, and that line's immediately followed by a line explaining how you hack remotely. What they do make a big deal out of is wireless-defeating technologies, which should indicate that hacking doesn't require a direct wireless link.

[Hida Tsuzua]

But they don't make a big deal out of it, is the thing. In fact, it's one line, and that line's immediately followed by a line explaining how you hack remotely. What they do make a big deal out of is wireless-defeating technologies, which should indicate that hacking doesn't require a direct wireless link.

I don't think the authors realized the implication of that line. It wouldn't surprise me (based on hearing how other books were written) that the various matrix sections were written more or less independently by several different writers who didn't compare notes. These are the people who wrote the matrix rules in the first place after all. On the other hand due to know many players never realized this is the case, maybe it's fair they'll miss it too. And there are always houserules.

In universe, you could argue that wireless blocking paint and the like are a second line of defense. After all, any account on the node will let you hack it. This means as long as you get one wage slave's password, the system is yours. You'll want them to at least get close before they pwn your network.

Also, this isn't the first nor the last time the way NPCs act in the SR world that makes no sense with how the world works.

[3278]

I don't think the authors realized the implication of that line.

What if they did, but included, as the next clause, the other logical way to hack: by routing through other nodes through the Matrix [or another ad-hoc wireless network, or other method of routing]? Does "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" mean something other than that, and if so, what?

[UmaroVI]

What if they did, but included, as the next clause, the other logical way to hack: by routing through other nodes through the Matrix [or another ad-hoc wireless network, or other method of routing]? Does "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" mean something other than that, and if so, what?

Yes, it means something very specific and distinct from that. See SR4A p224-225, "Subscriptions."

The short version:

You can subscribe via routing (1st paragraph).

Subscribing to a node requires that you take a Complex Action to Log On (1st paragraph).

Logging on requires an access account (p225 "Access Accounts," also repeated under Log On on p231).

So, what this means is that there are, indeed, two ways to hack.

Method 1: Get in Mutual Signal Range, which means that you are within the Signal range of the shorter-ranged of the two devices with no routing. Then hack in.

Method 2: Get some kind of account without using Hacking, then hack in via routing.

Method 2 is what you can use to remote-hack stuff - but it won't work on systems that you don't have a way to get an account on without hacking. So if you want to hack the local mall, you can get a Public account (because they just let you have one), then remote-hack in by first logging onto that public account. Or, if you can get a user account some other way (such as by stealing someone's), you can hack in with that. But you can't remote hack a system if you don't have an account already.

[Hida Tsuzua]

I should also point out that kicking off whatever the original account you used to hack doesn't immediately do them any good. Hacking creates a new account that you then use*. I don't know if your original account is turned off or not. Now they may shut the account used down so you can't use it again once you are kicked. This gives a reason to care about stuff like being taken out in cybercombat or reboots which otherwise would be a "Wait for Respawn" screen.

*Hacking on the Fly immediately logs you in on the new account while Probing gives you the option to login when you want.

[3278]

So, what this means is that there are, indeed, two ways to hack.

Method 1: Get in Mutual Signal Range, which means that you are within the Signal range of the shorter-ranged of the two devices with no routing. Then hack in.

Method 2: Get some kind of account without using Hacking, then hack in via routing.

Yeah, see, I would say Method 2 was simply, "Connect via routing, then create an account via Hacking to log in." In this way, leaving from your home node, jumping from node to node through the Matrix, and then jumping from some router node to the destination node, is treated exactly the same as jumping directly from your home node into the target node. To me, this makes sense from both a rules perspective, and a common sense one.

edit: Out of curiosity, how do you run Probing? "Probing is a Hacking + Exploit Extended Test with a threshold equal to the target’s System + Firewall. The interval of the test is 1 hour if done in VR, 1 day if done by AR." Does this mean you've got to be within direct mutual signal range for possibly days? Also, can AIs and Agents hack without direct "mutual signal range" connections?

How many other people out there require direct mutual Signal range to hack?

[Ryu]

Yeah, see, I would say Method 2 was simply, "Connect via routing, then create an account via Hacking to log in." In this way, leaving from your home node, jumping from node to node through the Matrix, and then jumping from some router node to the destination node, is treated exactly the same as jumping directly from your home node into the target node. To me, this makes sense from both a rules perspective, and a common sense one.

I approve of that sense.

[UmaroVI]

Yeah, see, I would say Method 2 was simply, "Connect via routing, then create an account via Hacking to log in." In this way, leaving from your home node, jumping from node to node through the Matrix, and then jumping from some router node to the destination node, is treated exactly the same as jumping directly from your home node into the target node. To me, this makes sense from both a rules perspective, and a common sense one.

edit: Out of curiosity, how do you run Probing? "Probing is a Hacking + Exploit Extended Test with a threshold equal to the target’s System + Firewall. The interval of the test is 1 hour if done in VR, 1 day if done by AR." Does this mean you've got to be within direct mutual signal range for possibly days? Also, can AIs and Agents hack without direct "mutual signal range" connections?

How many other people out there require direct mutual Signal range to hack?

That's a perfectly reasonable houserule for you to make, but if you're going to claim it is actually what the rules themselves say, you should probably back your argument up by quoting the rules, pointing to examples in the rules, or in some other way supporting your argument instead of vaguely saying it "makes sense." As is, your argument is "well, you only showed one sentence in the rules that completely contradicts my belief, also, I'm going to ignore what "Subscription" means and claim it means something else entirely so that I'm right."

[Hida Tsuzua]

Yeah, see, I would say Method 2 was simply, "Connect via routing, then create an account via Hacking to log in." In this way, leaving from your home node, jumping from node to node through the Matrix, and then jumping from some router node to the destination node, is treated exactly the same as jumping directly from your home node into the target node. To me, this makes sense from both a rules perspective, and a common sense one.

edit: Out of curiosity, how do you run Probing? "Probing is a Hacking + Exploit Extended Test with a threshold equal to the target’s System + Firewall. The interval of the test is 1 hour if done in VR, 1 day if done by AR." Does this mean you've got to be within direct mutual signal range for possibly days? Also, can AIs and Agents hack without direct "mutual signal range" connections?

How many other people out there require direct mutual Signal range to hack?

Houserules aren't bad. You don't have to pretend the text says something that it is not. Rob Boyle isn't going to go to your house and punch you in the face for changing his matrix rules. What is a subscription is well-defined and it is not matrix routing. In fact as I've pointed out before, the Half-Remembered by the GM matrix rules that nearly everyone plays by are likely going to be better than the RAW matrix rules. They at least make more sense.

Since the passage occurs when discussing hacking in general, you do have to face the requirements when probing. Agents have a node that they run on and thus hack from there. They can however unlike metahumans load themselves onto another node via hacking or having an account on the node. Thus they can hack from mutual Signal range to mutual Signal range to where they want to go. AIs I've ignored, but I assume they work similarly.

Even with the houserule, you will have to play "Find the AccessID" to remote hack and that's a fun minigame. You either have to define where the node is and make an Electronic Warfare + Scan (4) test, or you have to be in your Signal range of the node and run the extended Detect Hidden Nodes test. Better, but that means you need a good Electronic Warfare test (12+ dice) or accept you have a maximum detection range.

[3278]

That's a perfectly reasonable houserule for you to make, but if you're going to claim it is actually what the rules themselves say, you should probably back your argument up by quoting the rules, pointing to examples in the rules, or in some other way supporting your argument instead of vaguely saying it "makes sense."

Take it down a notch, poncho. I'm not making an argument, I'm trying to understand other people's interpretations of a rule. If you'd like to help me understand, I would appreciate it; if you'd like to have an argument, please, keep it to yourself. You have one interpretation of the rules, which I don't think is an unreasonable interpretation: that's why I'm asking about it.

As is, your argument is "well, you only showed one sentence in the rules that completely contradicts my belief, also, I'm going to ignore what "Subscription" means and claim it means something else entirely so that I'm right."

Yeah, I wasn't making an argument. I asked what other people thought the rule meant, and shared how I have been interpreting it. I didn't make any kind of argument that anyone else should run it this way, or that I'm correct for running it this way. I know it's maybe weird, but what I'm doing is asking questions. I'm not making an argument. I'm asking some questions about how you think the rules work, and how that relates to other rules. The fact that so many people who have this interpretation can't answer these questions, or choose not to, or complain I'm not supporting my "arguments" with rules, well, that makes me think that maybe some people aren't thinking this issue through fully.

What is a subscription is well-defined and it is not matrix routing.

Absolutely. But I'm not sure how that relates to the question. If you can hack a node with "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix," that doesn't mean that routing and subscriptions are the same, only that you can subscribe to a node through a routed Matrix connection, which I'm pretty sure everyone agrees with.

Let me ask this: if "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" isn't saying, "indirectly," then what's it there for? They say you have two options for hacking: either direct mutual signal range, or, "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix." To me, that says that you have two options, directly or indirectly. What do you think that second option means, if it doesn't mean that you can hack in remotely? What's that phrase there for?

It seems like it's a chicken and egg issue. You believe that, absent a direct connection, you need a subscription, and then you can hack access. My read is that, absent a direct connection, you hack access to make a subscription, the exact same way you would directly. I mean, why would a direct connection be treated differently than a routed one?

Since the passage occurs when discussing hacking in general, you do have to face the requirements when probing.

Seriously? You make someone stand within meters of a node for hours or days? Why have probing rules? Anything good's only going to be accessible from 3 meters away.

Agents have a node that they run on and thus hack from there. They can however unlike metahumans load themselves onto another node via hacking or having an account on the node.

Maybe I'm not clear: are you saying a metahuman can't move his persona to another node via hacking or having an account on the node?

Even with the houserule...

Okay, please stop calling it that. When two people interpret a rule differently, it's a real dick move for one to call the other a house rule, because it assumes the answer to the question. I get that you're sure of your interpretation, but I for one am anything but.

[UmaroVI]

Take it down a notch, poncho. I'm not making an argument, I'm trying to understand other people's interpretations of a rule. If you'd like to help me understand, I would appreciate it; if you'd like to have an argument, please, keep it to yourself. You have one interpretation of the rules, which I don't think is an unreasonable interpretation: that's why I'm asking about it.

Well then, let me enlighten you about it, windbreaker.

Yeah, I wasn't making an argument. I asked what other people thought the rule meant, and shared how I have been interpreting it. I didn't make any kind of argument that anyone else should run it this way, or that I'm correct for running it this way. I know it's maybe weird, but what I'm doing is asking questions. I'm not making an argument. I'm asking some questions about how you think the rules work, and how that relates to other rules. The fact that so many people who have this interpretation can't answer these questions, or choose not to, or complain I'm not supporting my "arguments" with rules, well, that makes me think that maybe some people aren't thinking this issue through fully.

I'm not sure what questions haven't been answered, aside from "why did Rob Boyle decide to do this" to which of course nobody has a good answer.

Absolutely. But I'm not sure how that relates to the question. If you can hack a node with "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix," that doesn't mean that routing and subscriptions are the same, only that you can subscribe to a node through a routed Matrix connection, which I'm pretty sure everyone agrees with.

Let me ask this: if "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" isn't saying, "indirectly," then what's it there for? They say you have two options for hacking: either direct mutual signal range, or, "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix." To me, that says that you have two options, directly or indirectly. What do you think that second option means, if it doesn't mean that you can hack in remotely? What's that phrase there for?

This has been repeatedly answered. It means you can hack in remotely if you already have some kind of account. You can start with a User account and use that to meet the requirement, then hack yourself an Admin account.

Seriously? You make someone stand within meters of a node for hours or days? Why have probing rules? Anything good's only going to be accessible from 3 meters away.

I agree, the matrix rules are not terribly well thought out in many ways and this is one of them. Note that you can still get good use out of probing on systems that didn't bother with the limited accessibility (because you want to play it safe, and took extra time). You might also sometimes extract a node, then Probe it later.

Maybe I'm not clear: are you saying a metahuman can't move his persona to another node via hacking or having an account on the node?

I think you're confusing personas and icons. A persona is the program you run on your commlink; you cannot run your persona elsewhere just by hacking into another commlink. Icons are the things you move around on the matrix; you can indeed move your icon to another node by hacking into it.

[Ascalaphus]

(text moved downstream because people posted in the time I made extensive changes)

[squee_nabob]

Yeah, I wasn't making an argument. I asked what other people thought the rule meant, and shared how I have been interpreting it. I didn't make any kind of argument that anyone else should run it this way, or that I'm correct for running it this way. I know it's maybe weird, but what I'm doing is asking questions. I'm not making an argument. I'm asking some questions about how you think the rules work, and how that relates to other rules. The fact that so many people who have this interpretation can't answer these questions, or choose not to, or complain I'm not supporting my "arguments" with rules, well, that makes me think that maybe some people aren't thinking this issue through fully.

You seem to be asking questions about *why* the rules work one way and not the other, which no one save Rob Boyle can answer. If your questions were on how the matrix works, I think Umaro and Hida just answered with page numbers.

If you can hack a node with "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix," that doesn't mean that routing and subscriptions are the same, only that you can subscribe to a node through a routed Matrix connection, which I'm pretty sure everyone agrees with.

You can subscribe if you have an account as stated under subscriptions SR4A 224-225.

Let me ask this: if "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" isn't saying, "indirectly," then what's it there for?

What is it there for is beyond the scope of the thread. No one can answer why, only what is written. If you want to ask why is it there, ask the person who wrote it (although some literary interpretations of 'the author is dead' means that even the author can't answer it).

It seems like it's a chicken and egg issue. You believe that, absent a direct connection, you need a subscription, and then you can hack access. My read is that, absent a direct connection, you hack access to make a subscription, the exact same way you would directly. I mean, why would a direct connection be treated differently than a routed one?

What parts of the book support your read? I'm curious to know what supports the other *interpretation*. Also, you are asking why again, which is the second time, and is not a question on *how* the rules work (as you claim above).

Maybe I'm not clear: are you saying a metahuman can't move his persona to another node via hacking or having an account on the node?

I have not seen any rules in the book that explain how a metahuman can do this. Please direct me to the part that explains this (page numbers appreciated).

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

A few relevant pieces of text/rules, UmaroVI.

If a node has been hacked on-the-fly, the hacker has found some gaping hole in the system security that allows him to access an account on that node. The hacker has not actually acquired the passcode for the account, however, and the exploit is likely to be noticed in a security audit and/or patched in the immediate future...

If the target node was carefully probed before the hack, however, there is a better chance that the hacker can use the same method to regain access at a later point. Either the hacker has ascertained a passcode that will allow him to access the account legitimately in the future, or he has discovered a re-usable exploit (p. 96)—the gamemaster determines which.

Notice that in neither case did the hacker have a legitimate account. You can hack an account remotely as the hack attempt allows you access to an account on that node thorugh the exploit phase, at which point you are logged on into that account. Depending upon what access level you were trying for, the account will have the appropriate access levels. If you have a legitimate account, it is not a hacking test, it is a computer test. Q.E.D. And note: Socially engineering an acccount is also a legitimate ploy to use for the hacker.

A backdoor is a means for a hacker or technomancer to gain repeated access to a node with less effort than hacking their way in every time; this means it is typically hidden from the site administrators, though in the case of repeated use of legitimate accounts this might mean hiding in plain sight. Before leaving a node they’re likely to come back to, some hackers will take the time to code in an account or exploit that will let them access the node again.

Again, They did not have a legitimate account, they hacked in. They are now taking the time to create an account or exploit that they can reuse when they return.

A hacker can also route his connection through a proxy server as a means of hindering traces. This increases the threshold by +4 for Tracking Tests for each proxy server used. The drawback, however, is that each proxy server reduces the hacker’s Response by 1.

Not so very useful if you cannot Hack remotely. Obviously, they are useful, so therefore you can hack remotely.

Not sure where you get the idea that you cannot hack remotely through the Matrix. Obviously, it does not work quite the way that you think it does. If you do not have legitimate access, you must hack, and you can do that remotely, as long as you fulfill either Mutual Signal Range, or Connection through the Matrix. If you are in possession of a Legitimate Account, then you are not hacking, you are using standard computer protocols (and thus the Computer Skill, not Hacking), and must still satisfy either Mutual Signal Range, or Connection through the matrix.

Now, not all systems will be hackable at remote ranges unless steps are taken by the team to enable such things. This is where System Security Comes in. It is really not all that hard to keep a remote hacker out (though the countermeasures are also not that difficult to employ). All this will depend upon Budget (on the Target's Side) and upon the available Resources (on the Hacker's Side). It is a constant battle between securing a site and allowing it to be somewhat useable by those who use it.

Anyways, Have a nice day...

[Ascalaphus]

I've been worrying about this whole mutual Signal range thing, and I finally found the flaw.

The goal of hacking into a node is to create your own account on the target node. In
order to hack a node, you must either be within mutual Signal range of the target node’s
device or have an open subscription with the node through the Matrix.

This text is imprecise to the point of being wrong.

Hacking a node obviously requires accessing it:

* Accessing a node

So having MSR doesn't free you from the need for a Subscription.

What I think they meant in the core book was:

CODE

The goal of hacking into a node is to create your own (privileged) account on the target node. In order to hack a node, you must be able to connect to it, (either indirectly through routing, or directly through MSR or wired access) and use a Log On action to Subscribe to it.

Now, this whole business with "removing the Public Account (PA) used to achieve a Subscription to begin hacking remotely" - that goes exactly the same with MSR, since MSR needs a Subscription too.

So can all computers be made unhackable by removing the PA? I don't think so.


Warning: long exposition

[ Spoiler ]

To connect to a node (aside from the one on which your persona is
running), you must subscribe to it. A subscription is a two-way com-
munications link through the Matrix. This is a steady link that can be
maintained for extended periods of time. You must subscribe to a node
if you want to “travel” to it in the Matrix, which means that you must
be able to either connect with it directly (with a wired connection, or
when within mutual Signal range) or by establishing a route through
the Matrix network. Subscribing to a node is a Complex Action (Log
On, p. 231). When you log on to a node, your icon appears there.

So, we need to Log On to acquire a Subscription.

You open a subscription to a node, and your icon appears there. This
requires no test, but does require either the proper authentication to an
account (such as a passcode) or a hacked account. You also need a con-
nection to the node’s device, either with a wired connection or a wireless
connection (by being within mutual Signal range or establishing a route
across multiple devices).

Okay, we were hacking to get an account, so what's the alternative?

When you log on to a node, you do so at a certain access level, which is
defined by your account. There are four types of accounts, public, user,
security, and admin, in order of least to most access. Except for public
accounts, access to an account level requires authorization, which is
described in the next section, Authorization and Authentication.
A public account is a sort of “foyer” for a node. When logging
on without any authentication, you get a public account. Public ac-
counts usually allow the user to access public information about the
node, and could also allow a small amount of functionality, like the
ability to order food, shop, fill out forms, etc., depending on the node’s
purpose. Most retail outlets, malls, restaurants, and other nodes open
to the public offer this account to customers.

So if you Log On to get a Subscription without already having an account you can authenticate, you get a Public Account. But hey, Subscription; you can hack for something better now.

Access rights tell the node what the user of an account can
or cannot do. In principle the administrator of a node sets the
privileges related to certain accounts. Most nodes, however, tend
to have the same categories of access rights. There are four levels
of access rights: User, Security, Admin (see Account Privileges, p.
216, SR4), and Public.

Public Access Rights
If a connection is established without sending any informa-
tion except the access ID, the connection is automatically granted
public access rights. This is the type of access a user receives when
she is entering the public part of a node. The public account allows
access to public data like website information, blogs, databases,
personal profiles, and so on. Depending on the accessed data,
different access rights might come with the public account, for ex-
ample the ability to write without a username in public forums.

Unwired confirms SR4A; if you connect without authenticating another account, you get a Public Account. This doesn't appear to be optional or up to the discretion of the admin.

Employees at a secure physical facility are not allowed to be
in areas to which they do not require access as part of their jobs.
Likewise, users in a secure system should not have access to actions
that are not critical to their performance. A simple way to do this is
to deny lower account levels the ability to do certain things, such
as see some or all of the files or subscriptions in the node, making
or accepting commcalls, running certain programs, etc.

The question here is: can you remove the "privilege" of Subscribing to a Public Account? There's no clearly enumerated list of privileges and which ones can be altered or assigned. There is, however, an example:

Tux’s, Seattle, UCAS
There’s no hotter spot on the ‘Trix than Tux’s, the VR night
club for the preeminent hacker. Tux’s requires that its patrons hack
their way in, and moves its physical location almost every day (some-
times hiring shadowrunners to insure the secrecy of the move).
Sculpting: The sculpting in Tux’s is completely random,
and subject to the whims of its patrons. Normally a consensus is
reached at some point each night, but the occasional “sculpting
battle” rages through the VR landscape.
Hardware: [need info from Topology chapter] Changes ac-
cess ID every night.
Authentication: No access allowed.
Privileges: All privileges moved to admin.
Attributes: Firewall 5, Response 4, Signal 6, System 5
Spiders: none, except for the patrons, usually Security
Consultants and Risk management engineers
IC: 1 Rumpelstiltskin 4 (patrolling)
Resident Programs: Analyze 5
ARC: Terminate Connection
Topology: Single node connected to the Matrix via wireless.

Notice that the physical location changes daily and is kept secret. No mention is made of people physically traveling there to hack their way in. It would be noteworthy, so I take the absence of mention as proof that people don't use MSR to hack this place.

There are no normal accounts you can authenticate for. So the only way to Subscribe is via the Public Account you get when you try to Log On without authenticating. From there on, you can start hacking your way in.

All privileges have been moved to Admin, but this place still gets guests, so apparently connecting is still possible to the only possible account, the Public one. Therefore, connecting to the Public account must be something different than a privilege, and not revokable by the admin.

TL;DR version: you can't delete the PA. If someone connects to a computer without authenticating for some specific account, he gets a PA, whether the admin likes it or not.

Common (IT) sense and game mechanics

[ Spoiler ]

From a RL standpoint, it's weird you can't remove the Guest account.

On the other hand, the game mechanics almost insist (without social engineering) that you begin hacking through the PA. There's no other vector of attack than through an account; it's all basically "high level" hacking.

So it's not realistic, but it works. Squeakingly, but it works.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

The Issue is, Ascaphalus, that you do not need to log on when you are Hacking-on-the-Fly.

Hacking on the fly is an Hacking + Exploit (target’s Firewall, Complex Action) Extended Test. Reaching the threshold will get you a user account on the node. If you want a security account, increase the threshold by +3, for an admin account increase it by +6. When you beat the threshold and gain the account, you are automatically logged onto the node with that level of access, and do not need to spend a Log On action (unless you log off ).

So you automatically gain a subscription as soon as you have completed the Hack-on-the-Fly. The Hack automatically Logs you On and creates that Subscription Link.

Probing is a Hacking + Exploit Extended Test with a threshold equal to the target’s System + Firewall. The interval of the test is 1 hour if done in VR, 1 day if done by AR. Once you reach the threshold, you have found a crack in the system’s defenses that you can exploit to gain
access. You do not automatically gain access; you have found the chink in the armor, but have not used it yet. These exploits do not remain forever, and can be removed if found by the node’s security or if the node is rebooted. As long as it remains in the node, you may use a Log On action to use your hacked account. This process grants you a user account. If you want a security account, increase the threshold by +3; for an admin account increase it by +6.

Alternatively, a Probe generates an Account at the completion of the Probe. To use this account you must actually Log On (using the Action), at which point you can establish a Subscription. Probing works better, if you have the time, because there is less risk of setting off an alarm.

Both of them will allow you to hack remotely (satisfying either Mutual Signal Range or Connection through the matrix), assuming that no other countermeasures exist to help prevcent that very thing (Like an Environment that has no Matrix Connection (or only an intermittent connection), and No Wireless access outside of the facility).

[Hida Tsuzua]

I will admit that Ascalaphus has the best argument in that you can trivially get an public account from anyone. However, I believe Passive mode turns off public accounts.

A PAN in Passive mode can be “seen” by other devices, but cannot be accessed by them without your approval. PANs in this mode will still show up as active networks. This mode is useful for operating in high-traffic areas, where advertising nets or spammers abound. Passive mode allows you to automatically filter out the noise, only alerting you if specific pre-authorized nodes request access. This is the default mode for peripheral nodes and nexi—in the latter case access approval is required from a sysop or ensured by using an established account (see Access Accounts, p. 225).

You're right that the hacking requirements rule don't really matter when it comes to nodes in active mode. You might be right with nodes in Hidden mode (which is odd but whatever). But Passive nodes don't give always give out public accounts. You need approval for any access.

However, I could see the argument that there's no real difference between Passive and Action mode and even declined accessed attempts make a public account and that you can't make an arbitrary rule on your nodes (which is both supported and not supported). I don't think it's a good argument, but it's at least a case.

Not sure where you get the idea that you cannot hack remotely through the Matrix. Obviously, it does not work quite the way that you think it does. If you do not have legitimate access, you must hack, and you can do that remotely, as long as you fulfill either Mutual Signal Range, or Connection through the Matrix. If you are in possession of a Legitimate Account, then you are not hacking, you are using standard computer protocols (and thus the Computer Skill, not Hacking), and must still satisfy either Mutual Signal Range, or Connection through the matrix.

Now, not all systems will be hackable at remote ranges unless steps are taken by the team to enable such things. This is where System Security Comes in. It is really not all that hard to keep a remote hacker out (though the countermeasures are also not that difficult to employ). All this will depend upon Budget (on the Target's Side) and upon the available Resources (on the Hacker's Side). It is a constant battle between securing a site and allowing it to be somewhat useable by those who use it.

The passage that Umaro is using is:

In order to hack a node, you must either be within mutual Signal range of the target node’s device or have an open subscription with the node through the Matrix.

Now let's look at those passages. First off they can totally apply if the hacking is done via mutual Signal range. Secondly, you just need an account to subscribe to a node. If you have the janitor's account on the system (which only has access to the timeclock program), you can legitimately login with that and then start looking for exploits (i.e. hack your way to an admin account). You can change accounts after all.

It also explains why hackers actually care about making backdoors, hidden accounts, and the like. A backdoor means you can now hack safely far away. If you could do that anyways, then why bother? Just hack back in.

Also, lowering your Signal rating to make hackers have to get close to you is listed a possible hacking defense for cyberware (Unwired 103) so it's just not a one-off thing.

Absolutely. But I'm not sure how that relates to the question. If you can hack a node with "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix," that doesn't mean that routing and subscriptions are the same, only that you can subscribe to a node through a routed Matrix connection, which I'm pretty sure everyone agrees with.

Let me ask this: if "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix" isn't saying, "indirectly," then what's it there for? They say you have two options for hacking: either direct mutual signal range, or, "an open subscription with the node through the Matrix." To me, that says that you have two options, directly or indirectly. What do you think that second option means, if it doesn't mean that you can hack in remotely? What's that phrase there for?

It's there saying that if you have an subscription to a node open, you can hack that node. Since a subscription has a definition in the SR rules, that definition relates to the question. Opening a subscription needs an account to be made and is the same as logging on (SR4A 224 & 231, Unwired 55). The only way to get other interpretations would be to change what a subscription is.

For example if you want to hack a Signal 0 node, you can be in 3 meters with the node. You can ask the node for a public account from any connecting route though the matrix and then hack. You can get the account the janitor uses for his timeclock, logon with it, and then hack from any connecting route though the matrix.

One reason why you might need an open subscription to hack is how does one send information to the target node? You can do a data request, but I doubt "what's the admin password?" would be an acceptable request. You could guess a password, but that's nothing big. You have to get onto and trusted by the system into order to hack it. Then again since the matrix itself makes no sense (it's a network nightmare), then the fact that an explicit rule doesn't make sense shouldn't come to a surprise. If people actually cared about their Matrix secrets, then there are thousand of other ways to set hacking to no anyways.

Also, I don't have to describe perfectly how something works in the world as part of the rules. For example, I couldn't tell you how a commlink processor works (or even if it has a processor like a modern computer), I know from the rules how to run a program on a commlink. I don't know how Dr. Heinrich was able to figure out how you break all encryption but plot encryption in the order of seconds. But I know how encryption and decryption works (poorly).

As for personas, your persona never actually goes anywhere in the matrix. Instead when you open a subscription, you create an icon on the node you just made a connection (SR4A 225). Now if that node isn't running a persona, you might be able to run a persona there. How one runs and associates a persona isn't described in the books to the best of my knowledge. Agents however can just load themselves onto other nodes in independent mode (SR4A 234).

Also houserules as a bad thing. If I didn't play in Missions and ran an actual campaign*, I would allow hacking though routing regardless of what the rules say or didn't say. However it's better to call a thing what it is and not pretend it's something else. That way when we complain that RAW the matrix is terrible, we can get unified and force them to change the system in SR5 for the better. Otherwise, you end up with a bunch of internecine doublethink to wade though before you can even begin to discuss what to do about the system.

*- Actually I use HERO for my Dark Champions/Urban Fantasy genre games.

[3278]

You seem to be asking questions about *why* the rules work one way and not the other, which no one save Rob Boyle can answer.

That's not at all true. For one thing, I'm asking for opinions on why a rule works some way or another, not facts. For another, designers' intent can often be inferred indirectly [or is already known certainly], by persons not the original designer. [In fact, I've found the original designers often know about as much as you or I about why a rule was written in a specific way.]

If your questions were on how the matrix works, I think Umaro and Hida just answered with page numbers.

Right, and that's definitely appreciated, but have you not ever been in a situation in which two people read the same rules and interpret them differently? You keep asking for page numbers from me, but I'm not making an assertion that needs them: I'm talking about the exact same rules we've all been referring to the whole time.

I have not seen any rules in the book that explain how a metahuman can do this. Please direct me to the part that explains this (page numbers appreciated).

Subscriptions, p224, SR4a, and Virtual Reality, p225, SR4a. It's what subscription is.

As long as we're exchanging page numbers, can anyone tell me where the page is that explains how to disable public accounts on nodes?

[Ascalaphus]

I will admit that Ascalaphus has the best argument in that you can trivially get an public account from anyone. However, I believe Passive mode turns off public accounts.

You're right that the hacking requirements rule don't really matter when it comes to nodes in active mode. You might be right with nodes in Hidden mode (which is odd but whatever). But Passive nodes don't give always give out public accounts. You need approval for any access.

However, I could see the argument that there's no real difference between Passive and Action mode and even declined accessed attempts make a public account and that you can't make an arbitrary rule on your nodes (which is both supported and not supported). I don't think it's a good argument, but it's at least a case.

I guess even an "This user's profile isn't visible to everyone" screen counts as a Public Account session.

The real problem is that the activity mode rules aren't really implemented in enough detail to be useful, and they don't appear to be integrated with the other matrix rules. The only part that really "works" is the rule for detecting a Hidden mode.

It also explains why hackers actually care about making backdoors, hidden accounts, and the like. A backdoor means you can now hack safely far away. If you could do that anyways, then why bother? Just hack back in.

Speed and convenience. You set up the backdoor/hidden account/probe-hacked account ahead of time so that when you need to go in quietly in the middle of a run, it won't take hours to do. Those are very good reasons.

Also, lowering your Signal rating to make hackers have to get close to you is listed a possible hacking defense for cyberware (Unwired 103) so it's just not a one-off thing.

I think everything regarding cyberware hacking needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, since basically they created an unnecessary vulnerability in cyberware to enable combat hacking, and then spent years explaining to players what to do with it, and ended up admitting that wifi-enabled combat cyberware just didn't make any sense.

As long as we're exchanging page numbers, can anyone tell me where the page is that explains how to disable public accounts on nodes?

AFAIK, no such rule exists. It's silly, but it's absolutely necessary to make the Matrix rules work. See my previous post.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Now let's look at those passages. First off they can totally apply if the hacking is done via mutual Signal range. Secondly, you just need an account to subscribe to a node. If you have the janitor's account on the system (which only has access to the timeclock program), you can legitimately login with that and then start looking for exploits (i.e. hack your way to an admin account). You can change accounts after all.

Except that remote hacking can create that open subscription as part of the hack, that is what it does, according to the rules I provided.

It also explains why hackers actually care about making backdoors, hidden accounts, and the like. A backdoor means you can now hack safely far away. If you could do that anyways, then why bother? Just hack back in.

The problem is that when you "Hack back In" you run the risk of setting an alarm off. If you have a backdoor, you have circumvented that process altogether. You only run the risk of setting an alarm if you try to do something your user privgeleges do not normally allow, or a randon sweep catches you in an authentication issue.

Also, lowering your Signal rating to make hackers have to get close to you is listed a possible hacking defense for cyberware (Unwired 103) so it's just not a one-off thing.

Yes, Of course, that is one way to protect yourself. Unless you are also connected to the Matrix at the time.

It's there saying that if you have an subscription to a node open, you can hack that node. Since a subscription has a definition in the SR rules, that definition relates to the question. Opening a subscription needs an account to be made and is the same as logging on (SR4A 224 & 231, Unwired 55). The only way to get other interpretations would be to change what a subscription is.

Sort of. A Log On creates the Subscription that you need. A Hack on the Fly provides the Log On as part of its hack. See the quote I provided.

[Ascalaphus]

@Tymeus:

I would argue that:

* Hacking a Node on the fly is "Accessing a Node".
* According to Unwired p. 55, that requires a Subscription.
* To got a Subscription, you need to Log On. You probably get a Public Account.

Then, when you succeed at hacking an account, your Public Account is upgraded to a superior class without you needing to spend another action to Log On again.

[3278]

My read, based on what I'm seeing in the book, is this:

SR4a, p224: "If you want to actually visit the node in the Matrix, whether to do some “on-site” research, hack the node, or just hang out with other icons, you need to log on to the node." To parse that, if you want to hack a node, you need to log on to a node. Then it gives instructions on how this is done: "To connect to a node (aside from the one on which your persona is running), you must subscribe to it.... You must subscribe to a node if you want to 'travel' to it in the Matrix, which means that you must be able to either connect with it directly (with a wired connection, or when within mutual Signal range) or by establishing a route through the Matrix network." To make a connection to a node, you have to subscribe, which requires a direct or indirect signal path.

Then, SR4a, p225: "When you log on to a node, you do so at a certain access level, which is defined by your account. There are four types of accounts, public, user, security, and admin, in order of least to most access. Except for public accounts, access to an account level requires authorization..." When you log on, you are assigned an access level, defined by which level of account you have. Public accounts to not require authorization: it's a foyer, where a nice man is saying, Excuse me, can I please see your papers? Same page: "When logging on without any authentication, you get a public account." If you don't provide authentication, you get a public account. At this point, you have fulfilled all the requirements for a subscription, which means you have fulfilled all the requirements for hacking.

This makes sense in the context of the rules, and makes common sense as well. It doesn't make half the gear [Faraday Cages] pointless and doesn't render whole lifestyles [full immersion] useless within the context of players. It doesn't require logical convolutions like explaining why all nodes aren't just effectively unhackable [Signal 0 + retrans], or why there should be a difference between direct and routed traffic, but only in this context. I totally understand the other reading of the rule, and the semantics that make people read it that way, but I don't share the interpretation, and I don't think I'd accept it even if I did.

[UmaroVI]

Any node in Active Mode will, indeed, automatically give you public accounts if you are just "yo." But in Passive or Hidden, it won't, because it will refuse to listen to you in the first place. To hack one of those, you have to get an account by some other means first, or get in Mutual Signal Range.

The results of this: most places simply cannot afford to run in Passive or Hidden. Banks, corporate sites, building nodes, etc will all have to run in Active to function, so you can remote hack them. However, people can use Passive and Hidden nodes to make it harder to remote hack. If you do this, you also need to keep a very tight lid on ALL accounts on your system; there's no point doing this if every corporate employee has a User account, for example.

The result is that you can do most stuff remotely, but you can design adventures where remote access is simply not an option. Here's an example:

A team wants to break into Shmatalyst Game Labs and steal the errata for the PEACE! supplement to Lightwalk 4th Edition. Because the errata is jealously guarded, only four people (three writers, and the head of matrix security) have accounts (user accounts for the writers, and admin for the security dude). There's no need for anyone else to ever see the node, so it always runs in Passive, and because Shmatalyst hates their fans, they have the node with signal 0 using a Satellite link.

Now, there are 2 ways in. The runners could get one of the four accounts through a "kidnap Bob Royal and beat his account out of him" plan, or they could break in, get their hacker physically next to the node, and hack it directly.

Presumably, this is WHY the rules work that way, because the writers (or at least some of them) wanted to allow GMs the option of forcing hackers to show up in person sometimes, and not just live in the van.

[3278]

Any node in Active Mode will, indeed, automatically give you public accounts if you are just "yo." But in Passive or Hidden, it won't, because it will refuse to listen to you in the first place. To hack one of those, you have to get an account by some other means first, or get in Mutual Signal Range.

Okay, so you're only saying remote hacking is impossible if the target node is in Passive or Hidden mode? That seems like a different issue, but I follow what you're saying, definitely.

In this context, how does mutual signal range help? I didn't know that changes how a node in Passive or Hidden mode responds to you.

The result is that you can do most stuff remotely, but you can design adventures where remote access is simply not an option.

Yeah, that's my read of the situation, although I think possibly not for all of the same reasons. But yeah, you can do most stuff remotely, but the GM can totally arrange things to make that difficult or impossible: I absolutely agree.