In what way have you chosen to implement this house rule?

...well, in our group we basically do it the "old way" by holding back 1 die from the Hacking pool per IC construct suppressed. So yes if you go around crashing IC whenever you meet it (instead of finding more creative ways to get around it) your pool is going to suffer.

...party IC"? wooohooo, Kegger!
...uh what? Not that kind of party IC?

I'm not sure if this thread is supposed to be about whether or not crashing IC would alert security, but I have some clarifications about your scenario that might help you.

A few clarifications:
1) There may not be a warehouse node at all. It may sound like a line from The Matrix ("there is no spoon"), but don't confuse physical addresses with logical addresses. Nodes are logical addresses that may or may not correspond to physical locations. The warehouse security cameras could easily be subscribed to a security systems node in some security company's headquarters in Tokyo.

2) You never have to subscribe to a node to access the Matrix. The mesh network known as the Matrix is considered to be ubiquitous and omnipresent (except in extreme cases such as inside a reactor core, in an abandoned mineshaft, or some specially sealed chamber). You may be bouncing your matrix connection through a microscopic wireless bridge floating around along with the dust on the floor, which in turn connects to a wireless bridge built into the glass in the window, which in turn connects to a wireless bridge on the streetlamp outside but you never have to say "I'm subscribing to Streetlamp#42435 in order to check my email and then go hack MCT's warehouse security cameras."

If you want to hack the cameras, you can try subscribing to them, then hacking their device defense systems (firewall, etc). If the warehouse was a closed system (wireless blocking spray paint), and they have some records in their computer system, then you would need to be inside the blocked walls to find some wireless access point to hack into the closed system to get what you want.

But if the hacker was just sitting in an MCT warehouse reading his email or even if he was hacking into an MCT system, MCT would never know anyone was there unless he tripped a physical alarm in the warehouse or they traced him back to that location with Trace IC.

Hope this helps.

This is sort of my question...I'll try to ask it more clearly.

Even on a closed system, wouldn't holy-hell erupt anytime an alarm is tripped? Forget the security hacker in the building...wouldn't MCT centralize their matrix security, connect to closed systems via hardwire, and have, effectively, a barracks full of security hackers and IC available to travel to any MCT node, be it a closed system or otherwise? It's not an issue of cost; skillwired wage-slaves are cheap, commlinks are cheap, and optical cable is already in the ground, I'm guessing largely unused. It's just an issue of security, and I think you could connect closed systems to distant closed systems via hardwire without compromising the security, provided the connection is controlled within the closed system.

So anytime you trip an alarm, a node wouldn't simply have active IC or whatever...it would be crawling with security hackers/IC, with frequent patrols afterwards, whether you're hacking a super-secure closed-system or just on the low-end, but closed, warehouse inventory node.

Obviously MCT is just an example...I'd figure every Corps would have this.

It is important to remember that there is still an underlying backbone and the matrix is not just a mesh network. ergo it is not that extreme to connect to wired gateways.

A mesh network suffers one basic security problem: man-in-the-middle attacks. While running an encryption program reduces this risk, it does no eliminate it. Intercepting Traffic [BBB, pg224] discusses this very risk.

I personally prefer to keep my subscribed devices in Signal rating in order to negate that risk.

The thing to remember is: the more nodes your signal touches the more logging that occurs. Running ghosted (ie Hidden; BBB pg211) keeps you from being able to receive calls and messages from people outside of signal range, but still allows the team to establish a PAN based team-net and control all subscribed devices.

MAC (Media Access Control) address is the lowest identifier given to a NIC (Network Interface Component). A DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) server will assign an IP address and relate it to a specific MAC address. That IP then becomes the unique address (assuming a public IP is assigned) to the device. Even today, a MAC address can be software overridden (equates in the game to part of spoofing).

So a mesh network carries traffic indiscriminately across its public interfaces, keeping its private interfaces secured by a firewall. One great way to keep your identity from being logged everywhere is to compromise a node within your signal range and then shell back out onto the matrix. Think of it like telnet or ssh. Once you telnet/ssh into host #1 then telnet/ssh out to host #2, it appears as though you are originating from host #1, not your com link.

Voice/text services are based in some of the some principles as today, like VOIP & Dynamic DNS. Based upon a central provider being authoritative for you "phone number/LTG number" calls to you are routed to your current location on the matrix. That central provider can hold messages for you.

The cool thing is that it is all possible. It is also not perfect and the weaknesses can be exploited by a hacker (or a well stocked script-kiddie). The speed at which it can be hacked or encryption broken are the two points that with our current understanding do not seem plausible.

No, you have no control over packet routing from your PC to the destination once it leaves your local site. If you run one end or the other you can influence this set of choices, but you have no control over what the intermediate systems do. And every system that your data touches can make whatever record they deem appropriate.

The routing protocols make decisions as to how to get packets from your PC to the destination based on various metrics, like bandwidth reliability, hop count, cost, politics, etc, all encapsulated in the programing that weights them in various ways. And at each intermediate node this decision gets run again, with the preferences of the person or organization controlling how the router weights the various metrics. It can choose to just throw your data away instead of forwarding it.

At every step the router can suck out the data on your packets and do with it whatever it wants, like replicate it to an NSA collection site. But in fact, for >99.999% nobody cares and the traffic just gets forwarded without any records.