Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Offices.
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4
ornot
I don't think the office will have gone entirely the way of the dodo. There will still be folk that want staff meetings with people physically present and stuff. It depends more on the kind of business model. There are plenty of jobs that require an actual physical presence (health clinics leap immediately to mind) just as there are many that might be distributed.

Personally I see lots of wage slaves living in Corporate Housing, either in or close to their 'offices', and in or on an archology or corporate compound. The idea of lots of people practically living in their cubicles, having minimal personal effects seems very cyberpunk to me. Sort of the inverse of a home office, and instead an office home.
Blade
Yes, it's more cyberpunk this way (in one of my short stories I mention a guy whose wife had maternity leave: she could work from her home).

But the problem is, it doesn't make much sense. By allowing office workers to work from home by connecting to a virtual office, you can save a lot of money without really affecting the productivity...
mfb
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
..you mean, like on your debit card or ID?

that's under the control of the person who possesses the card. they can easily learn to fake the signature, since they have a copy to start from.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
That applies to signatures today as well.
Are the still used? They are.
So, obviously, you are missing something.

dude, come on. the fact that people continue doing something is far from proof that what they're doing isn't stupid or pointless. signatures remain in use because they've got the weight of tradition behind them. the prevalence of identity theft proves beyond doubt that signatures are useless for security--maybe even worse than useless, because people still think that signatures offer protection.
knasser
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (knasser)
The entire point of signatures is that they verify something is authentic. Even if it takes an artist a whole two hours practicing your particular signature, the critical feature of it being beyond doubt is lost.

That applies to signatures today as well.
Are the still used? They are.
So, obviously, you are missing something.


Earlier you claimed that electronic signatures could not be used because they were forgeable and you could not be certain of authenticity.

I said signatures are forgeable and you could not be certain of authenticity.

You argued they could.

I said they couldn't.

You now say "so what?" It doesn't prevent them being used.

Please join this last statement up with the first. There is a disconnect here. You are now agreeing with me that electronic signatures have no disadvantage compared to traditional signatures. Sadly, I think your agreement is just an accidental oversight on your part which will be corrected once you realise you haven't been considering the thread as a whole.

Now I hope we're done with this as I really wanted to address the issue of offices and for no reason that I can see, something that has no impact on that is spilling all over the place.

QUOTE (Rotbart von Danin)

But even there the point is:
Given the state the Matrix is in, you don't want your workers to dial in.


Did you read my earlier example about the Node? Home access is pretty much just as secure as on site working under Shadowrun rules. If anything, the fact that the hacker can work from home instead of squatting outside an employees house makes the traditional centralised approach better for the hacker.
Jaid
any responses to the physical security aspect though?
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (mfb)
they can easily learn to fake the signature, since they have a copy to start from.

'Easily' is a bit exagerated.

QUOTE (mfb)
signatures remain in use because they've got the weight of tradition behind them.

Not only. Handwriting still has certain characteristics that can be examined in detail - and those will certainly be used when such a contract disputed is brought to court.
But most of the time, it's security is simple pattern matching, because that can be done by anyone... but not anyone can fake them.
The point about security is not that it can be broken - it's how easy it is broken, and how easy it is to implement.

QUOTE (mfb)
the prevalence of identity theft proves beyond doubt that signatures are useless for security--maybe even worse than useless, because people still think that signatures offer protection.

Identity theft is usually done by using supposedly 'secret' information... like your birthday, your SSN, etc.
Blade
The physical security isn't important for most office workers... But sure when it matters, it could be nice to have them work in a office (or protect their homes, or have them live on corporate turf).

But in general, there should be not much need for that.
knasser
QUOTE (Jaid)
any responses to the physical security aspect though?


Yes, fair point. Physical security of the workers is going to be better in an office (normally). But a question remains as to whether this is a significant degree of "better". If you can change the risk of something bad happening from 40% to 30%, is it really worth taking extreme measures (giving up the whole idea of telecommuting) to achieve it.

If your workers live in a secure enclave then the security issue is void and they might as well telecommute. If they live off site and come in to work, then they're still vulnerable to being abducted at home, threats to loved ones, magical or technological control, assasination, etc.

What I'm saying is that if there are four doors into your vault, is it worth going to a lot of trouble to lock just one of them?
mfb
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
'Easily' is a bit exagerated.

it really isn't. anybody can do it, it's not hard. maybe it wouldn't stand up to a handwriting expert, but it will fool 99% of the people who look at it. and if your document is suspicious enough that they call in a handwriting expert to examine it, you've probably screwed up anyway--your point of failure wasn't the signature. when's the last time you heard of an identity thief getting caught because he screwed up the signature on a receipt?

what you're talking about, with the close examination and all that, that's really rare. that sort of scrutiny simply isn't going to come into play unless there's already some other reason to suspect the document is a fake. in that case, yes, you'll need an expert forgery. signatures are only an okay method of authentication if they're constantly rigorously scrutinized--which, in most cases, they are not.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (knasser)
Earlier you claimed that electronic signatures could not be used because they were forgeable and you could not be certain of authenticity.

Because they depend on cryptography and cryptography was never more than a speedbump in SR.

QUOTE (knasser)
I said signatures are forgeable and you could not be certain of authenticity.
You argued they could.

Not really.
My point was and will be that it's more likely that an electronic signature will be subverted in SR than a physical.

QUOTE (knasser)
You are now agreeing with me that electronic signatures have no disadvantage compared to traditional signatures.

Still no.
Electronic signatures have disadvantages additionally to physical signatures.
That's the point in not using them when it matters... to reduce the amount of possible insecurities.

QUOTE (knasser)
Did you read my earlier example about the Node?

Honestly, I didn't even bother.
Every secure installation is offline.
Everything else has choke-points that are much easier/cheaper to maintain than upgrading the security elsewhere.

QUOTE (knasser)
Home access is pretty much just as secure as on site working under Shadowrun rules. If anything, the fact that the hacker can work from home instead of squatting outside an employees house makes the traditional centralised approach better for the hacker.

What prevents him from hacking the house?
What prevents him from hacking the network hub, tapping into the connection?
What prevents the hacker from hacking the central data link at the company?
What prevents him from doing all this from home, too?

In short, nothing.
All your idea manages to create are additional vulnerabilities to the one of a central server at a central office.
knasser
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
The point about security is not that it can be broken - it's how easy it is broken, and how easy it is to implement.


No, that is the point. We're talking about something used for authenticity. If the court knows that it's possible for a half-way competent artist to forge a signature, then that is sufficient to negate its usefulness.

For legal contracts, the security comes from a trusted third party, either someone with an original copy or a reliable witness to the signing. Makes no difference whether its a written signature or an electronic signature. Well actually, in reality it does because the electronic one is harder to forge, but here I'm only trying to address your strange belief that in SR2070, signatures are going to be anything other than an historical footnote and I'd very much like to get back to the discussion about offices.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (mfb)
it really isn't. anybody can do it, it's not hard.

Most people are quite... artistically challenged.
Especially in a world like SR, where even the ability to read and write is on the decline.

But, given training, such things are possible... as are others.

QUOTE (mfb)
maybe it wouldn't stand up to a handwriting expert, but it will fool 99% of the people who look at it.

90% of the people don't need to be fooled. wink.gif

QUOTE (mfb)
what you're talking about, with the close examination and all that, that's really rare. that sort of scrutiny simply isn't going to come into play unless there's already some other reason to suspect the document is a fake. in that case, yes, you'll need an expert forgery. signatures are only an okay method of authentication if they're constantly rigorously scrutinized--which, in most cases, they are not.

You mean, like the dispute of a contract one side claims things the other doesn't? wink.gif
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (knasser)
No, that is the point. We're talking about something used for authenticity.

Authenticity is just a form of applied security, so it is The Point.

QUOTE (knasser)
If the court knows that it's possible for a half-way competent artist to forge a signature, then that is sufficient to negate its usefulness.

Actually, it's the other way round... it's assumed real until proven otherwise.

QUOTE (knasser)
For legal contracts, the security comes from a trusted third party, either someone with an original copy or a reliable witness to the signing.

And if you go to such lengths, electronic signatures are useless, as the don't provide any benefits anymore.

QUOTE (knasser)
Makes no difference whether its a written signature or an electronic signature.

Actually, in theory, it does - where you can never 100% reproduce a physical signature, any electronic signature, once the encryption is broken, is 100% broken.

QUOTE (knasser)
Well actually, in reality it does because the electronic one is harder to forge

Unfortunatly, in SR, it's the other way round.



That doesn't mean that people wont use electronic signatures en masse... and probably think those are safe.
It just means that important things done by people that know that they aren't won't use them.
knasser
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (knasser)
Did you read my earlier example about the Node?

Honestly, I didn't even bother.


Well that about sums it up then. Pretty much all of the rhetorical questions you just levelled at me were actually answered in the post I made.

I'll be generous and give you the cliff notes, despite the fact that you seem more interested in telling others what you think rather than listening to what they think.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

What prevents him from hacking the house?


The same firewall and IC that would prevent him hacking the node on the company site. It's part of a distributed, company node.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

What prevents him from hacking the network hub, tapping into the connection?


This is SR4 and there is no "hub", no SAN, no LTG. But if you're talking about sniffing the wireless data traffic, the fact that it is (a) entirely passive and (b) limited to visual / VR data that the user requires to interact with the node where the data actually resides.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

What prevents the hacker from hacking the central data link at the company?

See previous answer regarding hubs, but if you're talking about hacking the company's systems, then the usual IC and firewall stuff.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

What prevents him from doing all this from home, too?


Nothing - that's my point. It doesn't make a difference. And if it doesn't make a difference then it's not a reason to give up telecommuting. The security is the same.
knasser
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 12 2007, 02:06 PM)

QUOTE (knasser)
No, that is the point. We're talking about something used for authenticity.

Authenticity is just a form of applied security, so it is The Point.


Okay. I really can't believe that you're not now being deliberately and willfullly ignorant.

So you're actually saying that whether or not a signature is reliable is not the point? Great - that's what I'm saying. It is not a reliable means of authenticating something. Therefore does not have an advantage over an electronic signature which you say is unreliable.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

QUOTE (knasser)
For legal contracts, the security comes from a trusted third party, either someone with an original copy or a reliable witness to the signing.

And if you go to such lengths, electronic signatures are useless, as the don't provide any benefits anymore.

Again - this is what I'm saying. Neither traditional nor electronic signatures have an advantage over each other (in SR reality, perhaps). But what you stubbornly refuse to accept is that the logical consequence is that if they're equally valid or invalid then there's no reason not to use the more convenient electronic signature.

QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)

QUOTE (knasser)
Well actually, in reality it does because the electronic one is harder to forge

Unfortunatly, in SR, it's the other way round.


Hard to believe in a world of cyberarms, skillwires and AR. But the fact that neither of them (in SR) are difficult to forge and the authentication comes from third parties means that the vastly more convenient electronic signatures will be more likely used.
Demon_Bob
If I can't make my workers come into the office how can I force them to relocate and buy from the company store? We provide decent living quarters for affordable rates, as well as reliable services. Now they can go downstairs do all their shopping in Company approved and secured stores without worry. The office is just an elevator ride away.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (knasser)
The same firewall and IC that would prevent him hacking the node on the company site. It's part of a distributed, company node.

Oh, so instead of having several networks separated through chokepoints, each of them having additional security, we only have one big node you...
So, after hacking in, you have immediate access to... everything.
Regardless where you come from... that's a hacker's wet dream... you can't even shut it down if the alarm is triggered. wink.gif

QUOTE (knasser)
This is SR4 and there is no "hub", no SAN, no LTG.

Wrong. Matrix Topology on p. 206 states otherwise.

QUOTE (knasser)
But if you're talking about sniffing the wireless data traffic, the fact that it is (a) entirely passive and (b) limited to visual / VR data that the user requires to interact with the node where the data actually resides.

No, actually, I'm talking about Intercepting Traffic, p. 224.
Which can be used to insert maliceous commands... or code...

QUOTE (knasser)
And if it doesn't make a difference then it's not a reason to give up telecommuting. The security is the same.

The security of your example is a nonexistent nightmare.
Even a facility that uses a single chokepoint has more options in the case of an attack.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (knasser)
It is not a reliable means of authenticating something. Therefore does not have an advantage over an electronic signature which you say is unreliable.

You still manage to miss the point. It's about the degree of reliability.
In SR, this clearly favors physical things.

QUOTE (knasser)
Neither traditional nor electronic signatures have an advantage over each other (in SR reality, perhaps).

Electronic singatures just have additional disadvantages, especially in SR.
Thanks for agreeing to that one.
knasser
QUOTE (Demon_Bob)
If I can't make my workers come into the office how can I force them to relocate and buy from the company store? We provide decent living quarters for affordable rates, as well as reliable services. Now they can go downstairs do all their shopping in Company approved and secured stores without worry. The office is just an elevator ride away.


Now that I like. I think the solution is enclaves. For clarity, I think the problem is that there's no big reason for offices to be very common in SR2070 and yet offices are a staple of shadowruns.

But the role of offices can be filled quite well by corporate enclaves. In fact, I think I have just had an excellent idea for a run through a little Renraku enclave where everyone works from home. It will be a slightly different atrmosphere if the runners are sneaking through a suburban street in a gated community. Very cool in fact.

On the subject of signatures, I'm done. I will post nothing more. The argument is leaving me with a sour taste in my mouth and it has nothing to do with what this thread is about.
knasser
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 12 2007, 02:23 PM)
QUOTE (knasser)
The same firewall and IC that would prevent him hacking the node on the company site. It's part of a distributed, company node.

Oh, so instead of having several networks separated through chokepoints, each of them having additional security, we only have one big node you...
So, after hacking in, you have immediate access to... everything.
Regardless where you come from... that's a hacker's wet dream... you can't even shut it down if the alarm is triggered.


Taking the points one by one:
Firstly, you can have as much security on your distributed node - the home access network - as you can on any "chokepoint" in your office. So it's just as easy or hard for the remote hacker either way.
Secondly, it doesn't need to be access to everything once you hacked your way past it. You can have as many nodes as you like. You are thinking that it must be one single node that contains all data just because I said a node can be a network. So can several nodes if that is what you want.
Thirdly, you can shut it down with just as much trouble as you can shut down a node "onsite."

In SR4, the whole concept of martix being tied to geographic location is archaic.

QUOTE (Rotbart Van Dainig)

QUOTE (knasser)
This is SR4 and there is no "hub", no SAN, no LTG.

Wrong. Matrix Topology on p. 206 states otherwise.

Where?

QUOTE (Rotbart Van Dainig)

QUOTE (knasser)
But if you're talking about sniffing the wireless data traffic, the fact that it is (a) entirely passive and (b) limited to visual / VR data that the user requires to interact with the node where the data actually resides.

No, actually, I'm talking about Intercepting Traffic, p. 224.
Which can be used to insert maliceous commands... or code...


Well then you have to hack the node, open yourself up to IC attacks, alerts, etc. And as I said, you can load the node up with just as much security in a distributed network as if it were a single machine in a central office or any choke point. It's just as strong as something where everyone connects on site. Though no working company wont have people connecting from off-site anyway.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (knasser)
Firstly, you can have as much security on your distributed node - the home access network - as you can on any "chokepoint" in your office. So it's just as easy or hard for the remote hacker either way.

Basically, your network node is as easy to target as a server directly connected to the matrix.
Hacking a chokepoint and then hacking a node is much harder - and hacking chokepoints after those is really ugly.

QUOTE (knasser)
Secondly, it doesn't need to be access to everything once you hacked your way past it. You can have as many nodes as you like. You are thinking that it must be one single node that contains all data just because I said a node can be a network. So can several nodes if that is what you want.

Either it's a single node, or it's a network with central servers.
Pick one. wink.gif

QUOTE (knasser)
Thirdly, you can shut it down with just as much trouble as you can shut down a node "onsite."

If you take the chokepoint offline, you are offline - but that's it.
If you take your network node offline... you just dumpshocked everyone and ruined what they were working at.

QUOTE (knasser)
In SR4, the whole concept of martix being tied to geographic location is archaic.

QUOTE (knasser)
Where?

QUOTE (SR4v3 @ p. 206, Matrix Topology)
This network connects through numerous gateways and hardwired base sta-tions to the local Matrix infrastructure; together, they form a telecommunications grid. These grids are, in turn, interlinked, forming the backbone of the Matrix itself.


QUOTE (knasser)
Well then you have to hack the node. And as I said, you can load the node up with just as much security in a distributed network as if it were a single machine in a central office or any choke point.

See, hacking a chain of nodes is much harder than hacking a single one.
mfb
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
Most people are quite... artistically challenged.
Especially in a world like SR, where even the ability to read and write is on the decline.

But, given training, such things are possible... as are others.

making a passable forged signature is not nearly as hard as you're making it out to be, because they are not scrutinized nearly as closely as you think they are. yes, if you're dumb enough to forge a document that is blatantly untrue and whose veracity can easily be checked by outside parties, then it'd better be a damn good one because it's going to get checked--and if it gets checked, it will fail, no matter how good it is. why? because a single mage casting Detect Lies on the guy whose signature you forged can detect the forgery even if it's perfect. you use forgeries in situations where the document isn't likely to be verified. to do otherwise is just dumb.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (mfb)
making a passable forged signature is not nearly as hard as you're making it out to be, because they are not scrutinized nearly as closely as you think they are.

I already agreed that, 90% of the time, you don't even need to fool people. wink.gif
mfb
yeah, humans do seem to get a kick out of fooling themselves, doing most of your work for you in that regard. i think we're basically agreeing with each other, here, except that i'm focusing on the 90% and you're focusing on the 10%. granted, the rules focus on that 10% as well.
odinson
QUOTE (mfb)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
'Easily' is a bit exagerated.

it really isn't. anybody can do it, it's not hard. maybe it wouldn't stand up to a handwriting expert, but it will fool 99% of the people who look at it. and if your document is suspicious enough that they call in a handwriting expert to examine it, you've probably screwed up anyway--your point of failure wasn't the signature. when's the last time you heard of an identity thief getting caught because he screwed up the signature on a receipt?

what you're talking about, with the close examination and all that, that's really rare. that sort of scrutiny simply isn't going to come into play unless there's already some other reason to suspect the document is a fake. in that case, yes, you'll need an expert forgery. signatures are only an okay method of authentication if they're constantly rigorously scrutinized--which, in most cases, they are not.

with all the tech of 2070, you would think that any electronic sig would get cross checked with all you other online sig's and some agent would analyze it to make sure it was legit.
Rotbart van Dainig
Yeah, but that doesn't really help as soon as the cryptographic secret is known to the adversary.
Cheops
My roommate just came up with the perfect example of why offices don't telecommute.

He does all his work on his laptop. Said laptop crashed on Thursday morning. Took him all day to recover his data and upload to server and he spent all day on Friday with tech support trying to fix his computer.

For all of us plebs who don't know jack s**t about computers, we don't telecommute because when our computer has a technical problem we lose WAY more productive time than if we were at the office with the IT guys.

Case closed.
Eryk the Red
I simply cannot imagine offices not existing, though Cheops reason doesn't do it for me. In the VR office, not only in the IT guy "right there", but he can access your computer directly.

No, for me, only most important reason to have a physical office is for the sake of the office social environment. VR isn't real, even if it's a good approximation. People will still feel distant from each other, and there would be a loss of synergy between co-workers. And, as a manager, I think it would always feel better to look out the door of your office and see with your own eyes your employees working.

And that's good enough for me.
kzt
QUOTE (Cheops)
He does all his work on his laptop. Said laptop crashed on Thursday morning. Took him all day to recover his data and upload to server and he spent all day on Friday with tech support trying to fix his computer.

For all of us plebs who don't know jack s**t about computers, we don't telecommute because when our computer has a technical problem we lose WAY more productive time than if we were at the office with the IT guys.

That's not a reasonable example. Let me give a better example:

We have a several dozen people who work at home, they are transcriptionists. They do everything at home, but they running a session on our citrix farm. So everything lives in our data center. The only thing that is at their end is the speaker and the keyboard. If the network is down they can't work.

One of my coworkers main job is supporting them. They are not exactly computer literate, but we supply them with a locked down computer and router and it justs runs. It's painful to support them, but it's obviously cost effective. For one thing, I have no idea where we would park another 60 people, and they work at all sorts of hours, getting paid by the word. He spends somewhere between 25 - 50% of his time fixing their issues, sometimes driving out to their house.

They connect via an encrypted VPN session that is always up and running.
Rotbart van Dainig
And there would be the problem of SR since SR1... the lack of strong cryptography.
kzt
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
And there would be the problem of SR since SR1... the lack of strong cryptography.

It wasn't obvious pre-net how useless this made public computer networks. It's pretty damn obvious now.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
And there would be the problem of SR since SR1... the lack of strong cryptography.

and the moment you introduce that, the hacker as a playable character goes out the window...
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 12 2007, 07:52 PM)
And there would be the problem of SR since SR1... the lack of strong cryptography.

and the moment you introduce that, the hacker as a playable character goes out the window...

So it looks like cubicles are here to stay, doesn't it? wink.gif
hobgoblin
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig)
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ May 12 2007, 09:28 PM)
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ May 12 2007, 07:52 PM)
And there would be the problem of SR since SR1... the lack of strong cryptography.

and the moment you introduce that, the hacker as a playable character goes out the window...

So it looks like cubicles are here to stay, doesn't it? wink.gif

perhaps. one interesting thing is that i find nothing about doing "man in the middle" or packet sniffing like attacks in SR. the closest seems to be the EW skill, but that appears to be related to the wireless traffic, so if your not within range of the comlink signal of the target, your only option is to hack the node for some reason...

this is me going by memory tho, so im most likely forgetting something...
Rotbart van Dainig
MitM only has explicit rules for tapping into connections passing through nodes.
hobgoblin
so that makes one wonder, does the traffic of the matrix pass thru any node in general? or are the two available targets the start and end node of the data traffic?

can it be said that the traffic outside of the nodes are inside a vast node?

as in, are the gibson-ish "neon grid" there?

hmm, could it be that we have to stop thinking about LTGs and RTGs as places to observe other icons float by on their way to some node? that when you access a external node you kinda walk into it via a door out of your home node?

that just like real life, there is a vast sea of traffic going on but accessing the routers are virtually impossible, and as nothing outside of wireless is broadcast, going "promiscuous" is useless?

as in, to tamper with a "VPN" in SR you need access to either of the nodes, or be within range of the wireless link if any of them use it?

can one specify that one want the traffic to be hardwired at all points? that one get the MSP so to speak to guarantee that the traffic will never travel over a broadcast style connection?

so to work from home, have ones home covered in blocking paint or wallpaper, then set up a term with a low signal wireless, and use a low signal comlink to interface with it inside said home. or just plug into the term whenever you need to get work done.

yet, isnt the idea of a mesh network that everyone is a router for everyone else? how does that fly with "intercept traffic" requiring you to be inside a node, or "intercept wireless" requires one to be within signal range of the transmitter? its as if the terrain and the map dont match. and it does not help that we, the readers, or at least the veterans of older versions of SR, have a different mental image of how the matrix in SR4 works compared to what the book tell us.
kzt
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
and the moment you introduce that, the hacker as a playable character goes out the window...

Why? I have really strong encryption on my systems, it's part of the OS They keep getting compromised and keyloggers installed. If you can record someone entering the key I don't care how unbreakable the crypto is, it's totally worthless. If you can steal the entire security accounts manager (SAM) database I don't care how strong your login security is, I own every system you have.

What we mostly have is failure of imagination.
Rotbart van Dainig
Because it removes the dynamic, and makes the other players what weeks while the hacker prepares his thing.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (kzt)
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ May 12 2007, 12:28 PM)
and the moment you introduce that, the hacker as a playable character goes out the window...

Why? I have really strong encryption on my systems, it's part of the OS They keep getting compromised and keyloggers installed. If you can record someone entering the key I don't care how unbreakable the crypto is, it's totally worthless. If you can steal the entire security accounts manager (SAM) database I don't care how strong your login security is, I own every system you have.

What we mostly have is failure of imagination.

problem is that that while its realistic, its not cyberpunk.

thing is, good old gibson had no idea how computers worked when he wrote neuromancer, and the stuff he created in its place is still part of the concept so to speak.

basically, its man against machine. the human outsmarting the automated defenses more or less.

as in, its a vr action game of sorts, the vr ninja vs the simulated security gorillas.

that, and going dumpster diving for print outs of passwords and similar is less glamorous then going head to head with a black IC wink.gif

there is a reason why they prettied up the interfaces in the movie "hackers". if people had to watch the actors look at code going over the screen for more then 5 min they would walk out of the theater.
djinni
QUOTE (knasser)
Isn't the whole concept of an office a little archaic?

There are paper files, you have to have a hardcopy of information for specifically important things like your SIN, the national library, copyright etc...
however once again that is common sense and realism.
in a realistic world there would be no "Mr. Johnson" or "Fixer" since they are automatically targets.
Meriss
A quick thought on signatures. If the Japancorps are entrenched firmly in the UCAS and CAS heartland would they not bring in chops? Now a chop is a small (anywhere from 1 inch to 3 inches square) ceramic, plastic, bone etc. carving of a series of Chinese/Japanese characters, then pressed into an ink pad and stamped on various documents. This thing is unique and with a little tweaking (RFID tag, Bimoniter Tag etc.) could solve a number of signature problems. It's also been around Asia for centuries and some how I don't see the Japancorps giving up their heritage. Of course the possiblities for ritual magic are endless. But can you see the look on a runner groups face when you tell them what they must retrieve?
stevebugge
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)
Are you saying that a company wouldn't do something stupid and inefficient simply because it's run by stubborn old men? 'Cause I find that scenario tragically believable.

This just needs to be quoted for truth. Businesses do so many things simply because "It's how it's done" than for any really good reason.
hobgoblin
QUOTE (stevebugge)
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ May 11 2007, 09:18 AM)
Are you saying that a company wouldn't do something stupid and inefficient simply because it's run by stubborn old men?  'Cause I find that scenario tragically believable.

This just needs to be quoted for truth. Businesses do so many things simply because "It's how it's done" than for any really good reason.

it goes for people in general.

their parents have done so, their grandparents, and maybe even older. so why should not they do so?

thats the basis for culture. and if there is anything thats hard to change, its culture...
kzt
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
thing is, good old gibson had no idea how computers worked when he wrote neuromancer, and the stuff he created in its place is still part of the concept so to speak.

basically, its man against machine. the human outsmarting the automated defenses more or less.

I always thought it was considered vital to maintain the essential truths about computers revealed in that glorious and outstanding resource that is so loved by every possible Shadowrun player: The movie TRON. wobble.gif
Doomclown
QUOTE (Cheops)
For all of us plebs who don't know jack s**t about computers, we don't telecommute because when our computer has a technical problem we lose WAY more productive time than if we were at the office with the IT guys.

This would be a good example, except that I work at the office and I still don't have IT people around. The tech support guys have their own office somewhere and do everything over the phone and internet. We have a number of office buildings and it wouldn't be cost effective to have a local tech support team in each of them, except a skeleton crew of hardware specialists to hand out spare keyboards.

Anyway, I think it makes a lot of sense that by 2070, a number of companies have experimented to some degree with the office-less office. If you were inclined, you could probably hint at this in your games without too much effort. Office buildings that are overcrowded because they were built/bought during the Telecommuting Era, offices in coverted apartment buildings where commercial space is in short supply, offices annexing nearby buildings for supplementary space, etc. These concepts might also help to vary the terrain a little from the classic SR office/office complex.
Catharz Godfoot
Efficient systems for corporate data creation and processing ('offices') would probably take two forms.

The first is a secure arcology. Think Gooplex +1. It's got an internal network completely disconnected from the matrix, living quarters, food, stockpiles, and recreational stuff. In such a system there are no offices, because that would waste space when you're already provoding people with rooms.
In the most dystopic form, you're basically running a coffin hotel with everybody jacked into your VR a la The Matrix. This is for companies afraid of breaking copyright laws who use bodies because they're cheaper than agent licences.
In the most utopic form, you've got a bunch of highly-paid researchers living in their luxurious private homes which are located in a remote ultra-secure (think posh Supermax prison in space) facility. Remember that you don't actually have your researchers in labs. That would be far to much of a risk. The labs are totally automated, and the researchers access them via the matrix.

The second is the data haven. If your workers aren't living on site, you don't even need a building. You have a server farm rented from some other company, and as knasser and others have been saying, everybody just telecommutes. Security is lax in the sense that any of the inputs (workers) can be compromised, but at least in theory your mainframe is almost impossible to compromise, because it's located in some swiss bank vault.


The signature issue is silly. People use comlinks and credsticks for normal transactions. These already involve secure 3rd-party certificates. For contract issues, you have companies whose buisness it is to keep secure copies. This in itself could lead to some interesting missions.

Oh, and cubicle farms have only been around for about 42 years. I doubt they'll be missed.
Smilin_Jack
I was flippin through my copy of the SSG and I noticed a sub-section I had apparently skipped over and never read. "Working from Home" [pg 11] - the SSG boils it down to the following statement:

QUOTE (Sprawl Survival Guide)
Only low-sensitivity projects are offered to telecommuting workers outside the corporation’s direct aegis; this usually covers  marketing, customer service, sales and technical support.


Granted its a 3E product, but the small section presents some of the same arguments from this thread - from VR offices and happy workers to a brief [from fastjack no less wink.gif ] warning that the corps segregate the telecommuters away from the main systems.
hobgoblin
hmm, im not sure i would park technical support under low security.

but then cleaners have access to more or less all parts of the building at times, and are often sub-contracted...

as for digital signatured and 3rd party certificates. said certificates require encryption tech to work, and SR encryption is a joke...

but then again it seems that the security of a credstick in SR1-3 was based on how many independent sources would verify the data on the stick, in the end querying the carrier. would not something similar be done now? as in, you comlink is tied to your SIN, and similar. and the SIN have its data stored on not one but a lot of computers out there.

its kinda like asking for a 2 (or more) kinds of ids when doing a credit card payment. only that the check is done automatically by looking up the SIN at several different systems and comparing the data on those, with each other and the person standing there (either by what he knows, like a pin code, or using biometic data).
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (knasser)
QUOTE (Jaid @ May 12 2007, 12:48 AM)
even a commute as short as 10 minutes one way is meaningful... furthermore, there's reduced time involved in getting ready for work. you could just roll out of bed, eat breakfast, and get to work nyahnyah.gif heck, if you have someone (or a drone) to bring breakfast to you, you can even skip rolling out of bed wink.gif


I had that. For six blissful months, I worked from home, just me and my spreadsheets.

And I lived next door to a swimming bath as well so I'd get up around 6:50. Be in the pool at 7:00. Swim for an hour. Go home, shower, eat breakfast and be working from 8:30am onwards. Knock off at 4:30 and found I was already home and ready to get ready to go out. smile.gif Not only that, but I have my kitchen there with a well stocked fridge so there was no searching around lousy local shops for an overpriced, unhealthy sandwich.

That set up was probably worth a grand or two on my salary, imo.

...did the out of home thing myself for a while. Loved the commute (1 flight of stairs) & having all the comforts around me really made it nice. I was doing consulting & contract work so the pay was actually pretty good. The best thing was, I had control of my own schedule, so if for example it was really nice during the day, I could defer my workload until evening & go off, shoot 36 etc. Gave it up after about a year for when you are self employed you really get reamed in by the IRS.

Presently I am about a 20 min one way bike commute from my current job (actually 1/2 the time it takes on the bus dealing with connections). When my company moves next year I will probably leave for they will be relocating across the metro area from where I live expanding the commute to 3 bus/tram connections & about 90 min each way.

Yes I would take a lower salary to not lose 3 hrs of my free time each day (& about 100$ month in transit fares). It's called quality of life.
Cheops
QUOTE (hobgoblin)
hmm, im not sure i would park technical support under low security.

I think they meant technical support as in: you bought a piece of our merchandise, you have a problem with it, and now you need some help. Not, our VP is having problems with this year's new commlink we issued.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012