I can't get a good feel for how stealing cars or bikes or other crafts goes in SR4. I've looked through the book, and it doesn't really get in to something as low brow as this or as specific on the operation of vehicles.
How do craft ignitions work in 2070? Keys?
Any other security measures that have to be taken out?
What would be the perfect complement of skills to be able to effectively steal vehicles?
Full Version: Stealing Cars/Bikes
I'd say, first and foremost, a solid Hardware skill is absolutely vital to hotwire modern (2070) cars. I imagine that most cars also have an option to operate door locks, and even the ignition, entirely using the owner's commlink, as well, so a hacker may be able to fiddle themselves a new ride without too much effort.
Of course, once you're in and the car's running, don't forget GridGuide. Your car has a transponder and GPS that tells the road, and the cops, where you're trying to go (if you're on autopilot), where you are, how fast you're going, etc. I suppose you could jam those signals, but that's suspicious in and of itself.
I'd figure, before the owner figures out the car has been stolen, you have anywhere from 5 minutes to a few hours (depending on the location) to get the car where it needs to go to swap transponders and move the car again before the cops are alerted and looking for that signal.
Along the same lines, it may also not be wise to swap transponders in a regularly used lockup, as there may be a log kept of the car's path in GridGuide. I'd say, ideally, have another transponder on-hand or nearby. Drive the car to a nearby parking garage or lot, swap transponders (using Automotive Mechanic), and ride on out of there to your lockup or chop shop. Even then, it's not perfect, but given the level of traffic, you'll probably disappear into the noise.
Of course, once you're in and the car's running, don't forget GridGuide. Your car has a transponder and GPS that tells the road, and the cops, where you're trying to go (if you're on autopilot), where you are, how fast you're going, etc. I suppose you could jam those signals, but that's suspicious in and of itself.
I'd figure, before the owner figures out the car has been stolen, you have anywhere from 5 minutes to a few hours (depending on the location) to get the car where it needs to go to swap transponders and move the car again before the cops are alerted and looking for that signal.
Along the same lines, it may also not be wise to swap transponders in a regularly used lockup, as there may be a log kept of the car's path in GridGuide. I'd say, ideally, have another transponder on-hand or nearby. Drive the car to a nearby parking garage or lot, swap transponders (using Automotive Mechanic), and ride on out of there to your lockup or chop shop. Even then, it's not perfect, but given the level of traffic, you'll probably disappear into the noise.
On a regular car the transponder is most likely wireless, and probably linked to the cars system. The simplest way to handle the transponder would be to either edit its data or spoof its datatrail.
You steal my bike, I kill you.
| QUOTE (Silo) |
| I can't get a good feel for how stealing cars or bikes or other crafts goes in SR4. I've looked through the book, and it doesn't really get in to something as low brow as this or as specific on the operation of vehicles. How do craft ignitions work in 2070? Keys? Any other security measures that have to be taken out? What would be the perfect complement of skills to be able to effectively steal vehicles? |
I would think under the SR4 Rules if you hacked the car's Pilot you could pretty much take over it.
| QUOTE (stevebugge) |
| I would think under the SR4 Rules if you hacked the car's Pilot you could pretty much take over it. |
How would I do that?
If I remember right from the device rating table, your average car or bike would be a device rating 3. So you do a hack-on-the-fly against that. Your average car probably doesn't have any IC on it, so I'd ignore that (though as a GM, I'd roll a random chance that it's owned by a hacker, or someone who knows a hacker, and thus does). So pretty much you're running a hack-on-the-fly where an alarm means it transmits an "I'm being stolen!" message to Lone Star and its owner. Once you're in, I'd say it's an Edit to open the doors and an Edit to get it started without proper authorization, but then operation would be pretty easy without an alert.
The problem would be, of course, that the wireless nature of... Well, everything, means that every vehicle is implicitly low-jacked, and it would be depressingly easy to trace it. If you just want a getaway vehicle, though, you might be able to get away with temporarily disabling the wireless on the computer.
The problem would be, of course, that the wireless nature of... Well, everything, means that every vehicle is implicitly low-jacked, and it would be depressingly easy to trace it. If you just want a getaway vehicle, though, you might be able to get away with temporarily disabling the wireless on the computer.
You've got 3 basic options for stealing vehicles in 2070: hack it, crack it or jack it.
Hacking means a rigger/decker who electronically breaks into the vehicles' computer system and registers your Comm as the valid digital key. This is basically the same as taking over a drone and editing the subscription list. The downside is that you need to have the owner in sight long enough to make a Matrix Perception test so you can then Spoof the car. An Edit later and the car will respond to you as the owner.
Cracking requires using Hardware to bypass the computerized alarm and probably Mechanic (ground vehicle) to rewire the car to start manually.
Jacking means point a gun at the driver's head and take their wheels. A fave of the hopped up ganger crowd.
Hacking means a rigger/decker who electronically breaks into the vehicles' computer system and registers your Comm as the valid digital key. This is basically the same as taking over a drone and editing the subscription list. The downside is that you need to have the owner in sight long enough to make a Matrix Perception test so you can then Spoof the car. An Edit later and the car will respond to you as the owner.
Cracking requires using Hardware to bypass the computerized alarm and probably Mechanic (ground vehicle) to rewire the car to start manually.
Jacking means point a gun at the driver's head and take their wheels. A fave of the hopped up ganger crowd.
| QUOTE (neko128) |
| If I remember right from the device rating table, your average car or bike would be a device rating 3. So you do a hack-on-the-fly against that. Your average car probably doesn't have any IC on it, so I'd ignore that (though as a GM, I'd roll a random chance that it's owned by a hacker, or someone who knows a hacker, and thus does). So pretty much you're running a hack-on-the-fly where an alarm means it transmits an "I'm being stolen!" message to Lone Star and its owner. Once you're in, I'd say it's an Edit to open the doors and an Edit to get it started without proper authorization, but then operation would be pretty easy without an alert. The problem would be, of course, that the wireless nature of... Well, everything, means that every vehicle is implicitly low-jacked, and it would be depressingly easy to trace it. If you just want a getaway vehicle, though, you might be able to get away with temporarily disabling the wireless on the computer. |
I'd go with most of this except probably use Control in place of edit for manipulating physical devices. Additionally I would say some basic IC may be part of an advanced theft deterrent system (probably would see something like that on a Westwind or a Limo, probably not on a commuter car). You could use edit to tamper with various onboard files which might include registration tags maybe, navigation files (I wonder if cars pilots save favorite locations in 2070?), fuel or battery level, maintance logs. There may actually be a wealth of useful information stored on the car's system. Thoughts?
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| You've got 3 basic options for stealing vehicles in 2070: hack it, crack it or jack it. Hacking means a rigger/decker who electronically breaks into the vehicles' computer system and registers your Comm as the valid digital key. This is basically the same as taking over a drone and editing the subscription list. The downside is that you need to have the owner in sight long enough to make a Matrix Perception test so you can then Spoof the car. An Edit later and the car will respond to you as the owner. Cracking requires using Hardware to bypass the computerized alarm and probably Mechanic (ground vehicle) to rewire the car to start manually. Jacking means point a gun at the driver's head and take their wheels. A fave of the hopped up ganger crowd. |
Then the old standby of lifting. A towtruck faked to be legal, and something to deal with the lo-jack such as a jammer.
Of course with the current jamming rules all the car needs is an ECCM program + Signal to be greater than 6 and you can't jam it with list equipment. So maybe a Mechanics check to locate and rip out the antenea, perhaps requiring a Hardware test to bypass the security alarm sensor watching for just such a thing.
I like kigmatzomat's listing. Only I'd let you use hardware to hotwire the vehicle as well as defeat the locks.
And my opinion counts double since you're wanting to steal cars in a game I'm running
And my opinion counts double since you're wanting to steal cars in a game I'm running
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| Of course with the current jamming rules all the car needs is an ECCM program + Signal to be greater than 6 and you can't jam it with list equipment. |
I believe that jammers go up to rating 10 not 6, but its morning and I could be very wrong.
| QUOTE (Lagomorph) | ||
I believe that jammers go up to rating 10 not 6, but its morning and I could be very wrong. |
No, you are right. Oops.
Of course using a Rating 10 jammer is just another way of saying a trail of public nodes dropping out and coming back for LoneStar to follow. Plus there is always the unidirectional communication bugaboo since by the rules, and this doesn't make huge sense to me, the area affected by the jammer is very limited. Maybe it is suppose to effectively negate outgoing too in that area?
| QUOTE (TinkerGnome @ Mar 14 2006, 12:25 PM) |
| I like kigmatzomat's listing. Only I'd let you use hardware to hotwire the vehicle as well as defeat the locks. |
I was on the fence but I decided that while the electronic defenses are more Hardware, modifying the automotive systems are more Mechanic. My reason being that you are making a car-specific modification and you have to understand the car in question enough to do so. In a world of electric cars, the "ignition" system may be a drop in voltage, change of phase, or more esoteric event. Since this is data only pertinent to the automotive world, I figure that starts venturing into Mechanic. The other thing is that disassembling the steering column/dash to get to the correct wiring also falls to Mechanic.
You could always default on skills but time will start to be a factor at some point.
TinkerGnome's players may be cursing me but tough; I'm a GM too. Neener! ;P
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) | ||
I was on the fence but I decided that while the electronic defenses are more Hardware, modifying the automotive systems are more Mechanic. My reason being that you are making a car-specific modification and you have to understand the car in question enough to do so. In a world of electric cars, the "ignition" system may be a drop in voltage, change of phase, or more esoteric event. Since this is data only pertinent to the automotive world, I figure that starts venturing into Mechanic. The other thing is that disassembling the steering column/dash to get to the correct wiring also falls to Mechanic. You could always default on skills but time will start to be a factor at some point. TinkerGnome's players may be cursing me but tough; I'm a GM too. Neener! ;P |
Except that there are two ways to come at this; forcing the ignition to start, or convincing the computer that controls the car it should start the ignition. The former has to do with the mechanical operation of the car; the latter has to do with fooling the computer. Very different approaches.
I see the Hardware only point of view because we are talking electronics...not the engine, which is what, IMO, the Mechanic skill seems to focus more on.
Well, I'd probably allow either Automotive Mechanics or Hardware to work. Older vehicles would probably be Mechanics only, but I anticipate that the level of computer and electronic integration present in the 2070s will be such that you can convince the ignition to fire (hardware) with about the same degree of difficulty as you can bypass it (mechanics).
| QUOTE (neko128) |
| Except that there are two ways to come at this; forcing the ignition to start, or convincing the computer that controls the car it should start the ignition. The former has to do with the mechanical operation of the car; the latter has to do with fooling the computer. Very different approaches. |
To me, though, the first is hacking the system since if the computer is running it should start demanding a valid Comm or start Lojacking the GPS coordinates to the cops.
I figure Hardware disables the alarm systems and the car's brains (Pilot & Sensors). With Mechanics you get the car to function without those those high level systems.
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| To me, though, the first is hacking the system since if the computer is running it should start demanding a valid Comm or start Lojacking the GPS coordinates to the cops. I figure Hardware disables the alarm systems and the car's brains (Pilot & Sensors). With Mechanics you get the car to function without those those high level systems. |
Ah! But the operative word here is "should!" Hacking is, by definition, making computers do things they aren't supposed to do.
If you can break into a computer system, put a loop into the video cameras, unlock the doors, and deactivate the pressure sensors, all without alerting the security forces two floors up... There's no particular reason why you can't break into a computer's dog-brain, and convince it it really isn't being stolen.
| QUOTE (neko128) |
| If you can break into a computer system, put a loop into the video cameras, unlock the doors, and deactivate the pressure sensors, all without alerting the security forces two floors up... There's no particular reason why you can't break into a computer's dog-brain, and convince it it really isn't being stolen. |
Those are really 2 different things. Disabling sensors in a way that the sensor doesn't appear to be disabled is a physical wiring hack, possibly with the inclusion of a couple of doodads (FPGAs) that provide the right loop-back signals. (BTW, you couldn't set a camera to loop video with the Hardware skill unless you brought a video player device to splice into the network. You'd use Computer to get the camera to use its internal memory in a loop)
If the car's computer/pilot/agent is turned on and connected to the car, it WILL obey the rules of subscription lists and all the rest. Hardware skill can a) destroy the computer, b) bypass the computer, or c) replace components. A) & B) means you need mechanic to make the car work with a broken/missing computer. C) means you've brought a spare "hard drive" with preloaded software that says you are the boss (which requires Software to program a new pilot/agent or, if you go for the full computer replacement, a Knowledge or Mechanic check to program with stuff you need to make a car work, like ignition sequences for 4cyl vs. v6 vs inline 6 vs v8 vs diesel; how to shift gears with a transaxle vs. CVT, etc, etc)
Hacking a car.
Is it wireless and activated or is it skinlink connection only? Let’s assume it is an average joe wireless car with signal 3, pilot 3 and response 3.
Now we can do two things, and I choose the simpler one. First of all we need to find the wireless signal and make a Sniffer test (Electronic Warfare+Sniffer (3) test.
After locating the signal we track it back to the originating commlink of the owner (Computer+Browse – Treshold???).
Now we have the commlink so we make an Exploit test (Hacking+Exploit) and get enough access so that we can play as we like with his commlink. Make sure to do this when they are asleep, it’s much easier then.
We locate the car on the subscription list with another browse test and make another Exploit test so that we can modify the cars subscription list as well. If we had done a spoof command we would only have been able to give it an order,that is not what we want, that wold have been the harder option since we are already inside the guys commlink). Edit the cars subscription list to only accept command from your commlink.
Make an Edit (Computer+Edit) test to remove the car from his subscription list and then Spoof your datatrail. Now we are in control of the car, but we do have a problem, tracking.
The The gridlink might be active and its transponder so we need to hack it. Let’s assume that the transponder is a wireless device separate from the rest of the car (The man might want to keep an eye on joe citizen).
We make an exploit test again on the transponder (probably a basic rating 3 unless a luxury car). After hacking into the transponder we edit the information to do something of the following: A: Let it transmit that it is in the same location until you can remove the transponder. B: Shut it down. The gridlink might have to be disabled as well and that should be easy enough to do through the cars pilot.
Now we own a car.
The response and such might be higher with more luxurious cars and if we are unlucky they might have loaded it up with IC and encryption (might be a bit annoying for a good hacker) but depending on the car it might be quite easy to steal a car through wireless.
In the case of skinlink you might have to get a bit closer and use a more…hands on approach.
Is it wireless and activated or is it skinlink connection only? Let’s assume it is an average joe wireless car with signal 3, pilot 3 and response 3.
Now we can do two things, and I choose the simpler one. First of all we need to find the wireless signal and make a Sniffer test (Electronic Warfare+Sniffer (3) test.
After locating the signal we track it back to the originating commlink of the owner (Computer+Browse – Treshold???).
Now we have the commlink so we make an Exploit test (Hacking+Exploit) and get enough access so that we can play as we like with his commlink. Make sure to do this when they are asleep, it’s much easier then.
We locate the car on the subscription list with another browse test and make another Exploit test so that we can modify the cars subscription list as well. If we had done a spoof command we would only have been able to give it an order,that is not what we want, that wold have been the harder option since we are already inside the guys commlink). Edit the cars subscription list to only accept command from your commlink.
Make an Edit (Computer+Edit) test to remove the car from his subscription list and then Spoof your datatrail. Now we are in control of the car, but we do have a problem, tracking.
The The gridlink might be active and its transponder so we need to hack it. Let’s assume that the transponder is a wireless device separate from the rest of the car (The man might want to keep an eye on joe citizen).
We make an exploit test again on the transponder (probably a basic rating 3 unless a luxury car). After hacking into the transponder we edit the information to do something of the following: A: Let it transmit that it is in the same location until you can remove the transponder. B: Shut it down. The gridlink might have to be disabled as well and that should be easy enough to do through the cars pilot.
Now we own a car.
The response and such might be higher with more luxurious cars and if we are unlucky they might have loaded it up with IC and encryption (might be a bit annoying for a good hacker) but depending on the car it might be quite easy to steal a car through wireless.
In the case of skinlink you might have to get a bit closer and use a more…hands on approach.
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| Those are really 2 different things. Disabling sensors in a way that the sensor doesn't appear to be disabled is a physical wiring hack, possibly with the inclusion of a couple of doodads |
Not necessarily, no, and that's my point. If the cameras are controlled and have their images distributed by computer, then you can do it on the software level as well. Sure, you can physically interrupt the feed from a camera (assuming it's not wireless), but if all the data goes to a central security computer, you can edit it there as well.
For a car, it'll transmit an alarm if it thinks it's being stolen. That "thinks it's being stolen" is an amalgamation of more than one piece of data, and the decision to send the alarm (plus the alarm itself) are carried out by a single computer, not by every individual thing that MIGHT indicate it was being stolen (door locks, speedometer, ignition, blah blah). Sure, it can be done in hardware; but it's not true that it can ONLY be done in hardware.
So, can I just shoot someone in the face and take their commlink?
| QUOTE (neko128) |
| Not necessarily, no, and that's my point. If the cameras are controlled and have their images distributed by computer, then you can do it on the software level as well. Sure, you can physically interrupt the feed from a camera (assuming it's not wireless), but if all the data goes to a central security computer, you can edit it there as well. Sure, it can be done in hardware; but it's not true that it can ONLY be done in hardware. |
I agree that you could also hack into a network of video cameras and make some changes to the feed using Edit. But this goes back to my "hack it" example where you confuse & override the software. I was explicitly limiting myself to examples based on the Hardware skill since the discussion had, IMO, focused on the uses of Hardware vs. Mechanic when stealing a car.
As I understand the RAW, Hardware allows you to futz with the electronics of a computer, adding or subtracting physical capabilities (Response, Signal, skinlink, memory, hard-links to devices, etc). Computer allows you to make that computer do what you want within its normal range of operations. Software/Hacking allows you to make that computer do something else within the limits of its hardware.
Mechanic is something of a hodgepodge as it lets you repair and modify vehicle systems, which includes vehicular computers. This means it is less capable at metal working, Hardware and Software in general but has specialized knowledge that allows it to work with those systems as they relate to vehicles.
Hardware can work on all computers but it lacks knowledge of special applications. Meaning that with Hardware you could build a computer to go in a car but Hardware skill alone doesn't tell you that it needs to be able to endure X-hz vibration, shocks of Y g-force, and with a temperature range of A-Z. Nor will it tell you what that computer needs to do if it is going to run the car (Does the fuel injection system store its own algorithms? Should the water pump spin up dependant on speed or just wait for temperature? What is the optimal RPM/torque curve? Should the firing sequence vary with speed or torque? etc, etc).
Using the sensitivity and nuisance of current-day car alarms as a yardstick, I'd venture to say that alarms would not automatically notify the police. I'd probably rule, barring any contrary canon information (or even despite it), that the car's security system notifies the owner of the vehicle via commlink, who can then verify the theft and, if the car is actually missing, notify the police via the same "possible theft" notification.
| QUOTE (Silo) |
| So, can I just shoot someone in the face and take their commlink? |
Yeah. And since Commlinks are also your keys/wallet this gives you access to their car. Unless their car has some advanced security system that requires additional input like a password or biometrics (fingerprint, voiceprint) but that goes up to real paranoia and will probably only apply to shadowrunners and riggers. It's a bad idea for a lot of runners since it will add that little extra bit of time to get past the password/biometrics, possibly making the difference between escape and a Powerball to the vehicle.
I'd imagine that, for the security-conscious, fitting your car with hardware locks and ignition only, and removing that functionality from the onboard computer, would not be out of the question. Just something to consider. But by 2070, I'd imagine most people would opt for the convenience over the additional security.
| QUOTE (Geekkake) |
| I'd imagine that, for the security-conscious, fitting your car with hardware locks and ignition only, and removing that functionality from the onboard computer, would not be out of the question. Just something to consider. But by 2070, I'd imagine most people would opt for the convenience over the additional security. |
It wouldn't be impossible, but I'm sure it would fall under the same heading as having your PAN in hidden mode - e.g. suspicious in high-security areas.
| QUOTE (neko128) | ||
It wouldn't be impossible, but I'm sure it would fall under the same heading as having your PAN in hidden mode - e.g. suspicious in high-security areas. |
I'm not entirely certain that's true. I mean, the car would still require a transponder, GridGuide information, etc. But I think your commlink can't be on hidden mode more because of the equivalent to today's law that you have to carry ID wherever you go.
Are the grids everywhere?
I started this line of questioning without explaining the context of my situation. It is going to be a ganger game (low powered PCs) in C or worse Zones.
I started this line of questioning without explaining the context of my situation. It is going to be a ganger game (low powered PCs) in C or worse Zones.
| QUOTE (Silo) |
| Are the grids everywhere? I started this line of questioning without explaining the context of my situation. It is going to be a ganger game (low powered PCs) in C or worse Zones. |
No they aren't, but then again, my statement was "suspicion in high-security areas". I don't think they'd care in a C-zone or worse; just in an A+ zone.
| QUOTE (Silo) |
| Are the grids everywhere? I started this line of questioning without explaining the context of my situation. It is going to be a ganger game (low powered PCs) in C or worse Zones. |
If going around with your Commlink in hidden mode is the equivalent of carrying documentation of ID everywhere, then driving your car around with its transponder/etcetera off would be the equivalent of driving around with no license plates.
| QUOTE (Silo) |
| Are the grids everywhere? I started this line of questioning without explaining the context of my situation. It is going to be a ganger game (low powered PCs) in C or worse Zones. |
You'll have limited Grid access. Those lower class areas that are industrial will still have their traffic data system in place b/c the warehouses will require it. Power for electric vehicles is iffy since it wouldn't be a priority; not many electric semis.
The low end areas that are productive but kinda ratty on the edge of the higher neighborhoods might have power and traffic.
T'aint nothin' Grid in the Barrens. Of course, you can rely on GPS and the like so you're not 100% blind.
| QUOTE (neko128) | ||
If going around with your Commlink in hidden mode is the equivalent of carrying documentation of ID everywhere, then driving your car around with its transponder/etcetera off would be the equivalent of driving around with no license plates. |
I think there was a misunderstanding here. I see where you're coming from, don't get me wrong. What I was saying, is that the car's locks and ignitions may not be connected to it's "commlink", or accessible via wireless connection, for the security conscious. The transponder, of course, would still have to be active and responding to queries.
| QUOTE (Geekkake) | ||||
I think there was a misunderstanding here. I see where you're coming from, don't get me wrong. What I was saying, is that the car's locks and ignitions may not be connected to it's "commlink", or accessible via wireless connection, for the security conscious. The transponder, of course, would still have to be active and responding to queries. |
But why would they have two separate transmitters in the car when having one hooked up to the computer would function perfectly well for both?
security?
or more likely, required by law.
you can update your cars computer, but the transponder remains the same...
or more likely, required by law.
you can update your cars computer, but the transponder remains the same...
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| security? or more likely, required by law. you can update your cars computer, but the transponder remains the same... |
SINs come to mind, and those are stored in your commlink.
Seriously, it seems too over-complicated, considering the all-in-one nature of commlinks. If they're willing to put multiple separate transmittors and devices into a car for the sake of security, then SINs would be separate from primary Commlink functionality for the same reason.
Not quite. the SINs are encrypted and require some significant protection to avoid having other people swipe your SIN data. Encryption requires a CPU.
The car's "transponder" will be a couple of freaking RFID tags that have the VIN, license, registration, and insurance data. Think about it; anything that you have on your car as a sticker will be replaced with an RFID tag. Gridlink will scan the RFIDs randomly looking for people to sick Lonestar on.
RFIDs will also improve navigation since you'll add RFID tags to the road markers to provide fixed coordinate data.
The car's "transponder" will be a couple of freaking RFID tags that have the VIN, license, registration, and insurance data. Think about it; anything that you have on your car as a sticker will be replaced with an RFID tag. Gridlink will scan the RFIDs randomly looking for people to sick Lonestar on.
RFIDs will also improve navigation since you'll add RFID tags to the road markers to provide fixed coordinate data.
Randomly? Why not everyone, all the time, whenever they're anywhere with Gridlink? This is a trivial task for a computer, even a modern one, since Gridlink's job is to be communicating with the car already.
Now, depending on how many people out there have a minor problem with their tags, actually getting a Lone Star officer to respond to you may be significantly more random.
Now, depending on how many people out there have a minor problem with their tags, actually getting a Lone Star officer to respond to you may be significantly more random.
Why not just charge their account for the infraction?
Then again, why wouldn't registration, tags, etc. simply auto-renew? It wouldn't be like you'd have to go somewhere to update the RFID tags once they are on the grid.
Then again, why wouldn't registration, tags, etc. simply auto-renew? It wouldn't be like you'd have to go somewhere to update the RFID tags once they are on the grid.
| QUOTE (kigmatzomat) |
| Not quite. the SINs are encrypted and require some significant protection to avoid having other people swipe your SIN data. Encryption requires a CPU. The car's "transponder" will be a couple of freaking RFID tags that have the VIN, license, registration, and insurance data. Think about it; anything that you have on your car as a sticker will be replaced with an RFID tag. Gridlink will scan the RFIDs randomly looking for people to sick Lonestar on. RFIDs will also improve navigation since you'll add RFID tags to the road markers to provide fixed coordinate data. |
Well, in my opinion, you have a rather slanted view on encryption; look up things like Smartcards and the new RFID passport concept in the US, and you'll see how insignificant the resources required for even pretty strong encryption are.
Anyway. You still haven't really counter-manded my argument. The car already HAS a computer (it has to, to have a pilot); it already has a transmitter and receiver. There's no particular reason why it should separate some of them out to a separate transmitter; it's just an unnecesary layer of complication that REDUCES the car's ability to interact with the system.
Run your game however you want, but it's certainly not how I'm going to run mine.
| QUOTE (neko128) | ||
Well, in my opinion, you have a rather slanted view on encryption; look up things like Smartcards and the new RFID passport concept in the US, and you'll see how insignificant the resources required for even pretty strong encryption are. Anyway. You still haven't really counter-manded my argument. The car already HAS a computer (it has to, to have a pilot); it already has a transmitter and receiver. There's no particular reason why it should separate some of them out to a separate transmitter; it's just an unnecesary layer of complication that REDUCES the car's ability to interact with the system. Run your game however you want, but it's certainly not how I'm going to run mine. |
I'm not saying a car will have a separate transmitter. I'm saying the SiN will stay on the Comm where significant encryption routines can be applied. Things should require additional protection when you start broadcasting over unsecured airwaves. (And, BTW, the technologies you mention aren't exactly the most secure. The RFID passports will have a metal sleeve to prevent external scanning.)
The "car transponder" stuff will be handled by RFID, which are passive systems.
And why do I think RFIDs will only be scanned randomly? B/c SR may simplify the world by ignoring bandwidth but I know, deep in my engineer's heart, that there is a finite amount of bandwidth available for searching databases. I also suspect at least part of the sensor net will be active at all time tracking specific vehicles (police, EMT, fire/rescue, hazardous waste, etc) and inidividuals of interest (CEOs, diplomats, and sex offenders).
| QUOTE |
| (And, BTW, the technologies you mention aren't exactly the most secure. The RFID passports will have a metal sleeve to prevent external scanning.) |
Yes, but for the passports, that's because they went with a badly compromised set of standards. They COULD have been secure, and it was chosen to make them not so.
| QUOTE |
| The "car transponder" stuff will be handled by RFID, which are passive systems. |
I still don't see why; there doesn't seem to be any reason for it.
| QUOTE |
| And why do I think RFIDs will only be scanned randomly? B/c SR may simplify the world by ignoring bandwidth but I know, deep in my engineer's heart, that there is a finite amount of bandwidth available for searching databases. I also suspect at least part of the sensor net will be active at all time tracking specific vehicles (police, EMT, fire/rescue, hazardous waste, etc) and inidividuals of interest (CEOs, diplomats, and sex offenders). |
I work every day with databases and search engines handling hundreds of queries per second and millions upon millions of queries per day, sent by arbitrary devices (read: computers) spanning the entire globe. Even by today's technology, it would not stretch the infrastructure to have a mirrored DB, such that one server serves each region, and every scanner in that area queries the DB for every car that passes it (in fact, I helped implement a very similar system, though it wasn't doing cars). I see no reason why, with the better technology of the future, this should strain the infrastructure then if it wouldn't now.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.