So, I've been meaning to ask this for a while, but only just remembered:
What hacker actions require mutual signal range? The book says "most do" and then never mentions it again. I would say anything that requires feedback requires mutual signal range, so things like sending commands to your drones would not require it.
Does this pop up somewhere in the rules, or is it really a house rule thing?

There's probably a section about it in Unwired, but I don't like Unwired.

I think this is an area where common sense and a basic understand of computer suffice to make adequate GM calls.

I think it gets "abandoned" because runner more often then not operate in areas where the hacker can route traffic via the matrix.

Other then that i think most scenarios would involve some kind of broadcast. Like a sensor transmitting readings.

I have had it used against me though.

Facility could scramble some flying drones. The drones only had wireless enabled when doing a flyby of a predesignated hot-spot that had a very short range transmission. They were not rigged so that made them slightly less annoying, but very difficult to try and interfere with their programming.

I would suspect nearly all wireless communication follows a hand-shaking model (Node A and B need to talk back and forth to negotiate communication) and would therefore apply the need for mutual signal range. Exceptions can occur though. For example you have a strong transmitter which sends signals straight to a device 10km away (1 hop), the return signals then would traverse across the matrix to return (many hops)

See below.

In a nutshell, any matrix activity that requires two-way communication requires mutual signal range. For instance, hacking, file editing, browsing, cybercombat... But not spoofing a command (it's a fire-and-forget), decrypting wireless traffic (you just need to hear it, not broadcast back), or searching for a hidden node (again, you just need to hear it).

So? Just because all drones can be rigged doesn't mean they are rigged all the time.

The context appeared that the drones lacked "rigger adaption", not that they were "jumped into" as it appears you are implying.

I know of no matrix activity that does not require mutual signal range by raw. I can justify house rules for the ones you've specified but I can also justify every matrix activity requiring mutual signal range.

As an example, it's perfectly plausible that each signal level is a different TYPE of antenna or protocol, so that a transmission being broadcast at a signal power of 5 requires a device with a signal of 5 to receive it*. I see no reason a device can't multi-band it's transmissions. However, that's clearly a house justification for mutual signal range. Likewise, claiming spoofing is Fire-and-forget as opposed to command/response/authentication is a house rule for one way spoofing.

If someone can point me to some RAW that says some matrix activities are one-way and specifies which ones, I'd appreciate it.

You need either mutual signal range, or a matrix path to subscribe. Many matrix actions can only be preformed on nodes you are subscribed to.

My context was the following:
The drones were not actively rigged by a person, therefore the task was easier as they was a slight delay on adapting to changing situations. They had to either be given the orders up front and hope the pilot understood, or wait for a flyby to get updated orders to the changing battle.

The drones did have rigger adaptation, but due to their current config there wouldn't be a constant signal to facilitate the communication (legit or hacking).

IE the windows were so narrow hacking was next to impossible.

So they are dropping in and out of signal range? ergo in and out of the matrix? and the signal rating of the drones was something like a 1 (40m range) or 0 (3m range)?

I can see that happening. My PC rigger's drones are set up to attempt to use beam link whenever possible (laser or microwave), and failing that they only use Radio in short bursts, adjusting their Signal rating to the minimum needed to maintain connections. They drop to Matrix routing only as a last resort. Maximum network defenses, of course.



-k

It seems pretty obvious which things need a mutual signal (i.e., basically all of them), though there are a couple major questionable areas. The biggest is Spoofing, I'd say; AFAIK, the consensus is that spoofing commands does not require a two-way connection. Others include broadcasting a help call or Issued Command, Jamming, etc.

Now if you can provide a piece of RAW which says "hacking is only possible when standing right next to the node"...

Why would you neeed that? Mutual Signal Range can be gained through Matrix Relay.

Which is why most (if not all) corporate nodes should have a very secure gate node, sort of a front desk you have to go to after looking at the foyer (the public node), and every non-public node in the building should have almost no signal range, or be hard wired.

No Arguments there... problem is that it is WAY more convenient to not do that. And as you well know, Convenience drives more advancement than does security.

While true, what are your thoughts on nodes slaved to the same node talking to each other? Even if they have to go through that other node.

That's actually pretty clever- if you have decent quality pilot programs, its a good way to avoid drone hacking. Assuming the protocols exist, you could even keep tabs on what the "drones" (actually pretty much robots, in this case) are doing by having them broadcast sensor imagery, effectively making them operate in "broadcast only, do not receive" mode. That way you still know if one of them runs into trouble. Hell, you could even remove the CAPACITY to receive wireless, and just have them pick up new orders by docking at a port (likely charging batteries at the same time).

Heres why that little sentence basically fell off the books:

Everything requires a mutual signal range. BUT because everything is wireless, as long as you're in range of something that can get range on something else that can get range on your target, you're good!

So even if theres 50 bajillion miles between you and your target, as long as theres a wireless node within signal range of another node all the way down the line. You're good.

Honestly, that makes no sense to me. That implies that everything that's wireless is also open and deliberately functions as a repeater. I can see that as the default setting on commlinks. I can even see the owners of area requiring all commlinks in the area need to be open and serving as repeaters. I can see the owners of an area providing public repeaters. I can't see them allowing public traffic through their sensitive networks.

X device is NOT on the Matrix seems to be a natural result of the shadowrun environment. Runners may want a public commlink but I can see them also wanting a very private commlink. CAS installations do not want some NAN technomancer coming in over the matrix to their private little world. If I was in charge of GangNet, I'd have my matrix link dump all of today's new porn down to chip, scan that chip, and upload it to GangNet. I don't need any suits hopping on my channels.

Does it make sense? no not really, but thems the rules. Wireless is on by default. in Theory, you could hack your way down a street, by jumping from lamp post to lamp post, which has wireless for...who knows what...

The infrastructure is still likely wired, and the commlinks are designed to work like that so a concentrated attack on a few places can't take down the whole matrix (a la Crash 2.0). However, just because they all work like a retrans unit, doesn't mean they have access to your precious files, which is where all the stuff on security comes from, be it shortened wireless, wired, IC/black IC, gateway nodes, wireless inhibiting paint/wallpaper, even underground complexes, or orbitals. It is also possible to do the old "Nothing is saved to my main computer, and the data storage one doesn't have wireless", if you want to. I know all my sensitive corp information is usually saved on a series of these in the institutions I do up, and/or on commlinks that "never" leave the compound.

I dunno why people have trouble with this. The Matrix 2.0 is fundamentally based on the assumption that there's an automagic mesh. If you reject that assumption, prepare for trouble.

Well, to be fair, when the fluff seems to disagree, like with all the drones with retrans, it's not hard to understand why people get so confused.

Drones have retrans because nodes in Hidden Mode aren't part of the mesh. It let's you push the matrix without having an easily traced node hanging out in space.

That, and the Retrans Unit has a much higher Signal than most (all?) drones.

Also, it should be noted that the term being tossed around as "retrans" is not equivalent to what is currently known in networking as "broadcast" (ergo: bridged), rather it is equatable to "routing". Routing is discriminate about the traffic to pass traffic the correct to the correct destination and not to pass traffic that need not be passed. There is also a difference between PAN connected and matrix connected. Some of the authors have even suggested that matrix connections via mesh vs matrix connections via a matrix provider can also be selected much like you can choose you 802.11 connections today and even reject all ad-hoc connections.

What is true is that you rarely have to worry about connectivity and range in 'populated' areas, unless they're specifically making you (Hidden nodes, wifi inhibitors, etc.). Whether this is logical or believable is a question for the house rulers.

You get trouble either way. If there is an automatic mesh then the whole "It's only connected by skinlink and therefore is unhackable" goes away. The same logic that lets characters disconnect from the matrix is the same logic that lets everyone disconnect from the matrix.

Oh, I agree. I'm just saying you definitely can't expect things to make sense if you deny the basic facts. It's a tenuous shared agreement, the Matrix 2.0 is.

I don't see what all the fuss is about..

Most of the time, the Matrix works just fine, meshing and ad-hoccing away. But now and then you have a mission in an area with jamming, or interfering radiation, or deep underground, or far away from civilization. And that's when the retrans drones and mods become necessary.

So, just because a retrans drone exists, doesn't mean the Matrix needs them to function normally inside Civilization™.

It still works fine; your commlink is only part of the automagic mesh if it's in Active mode. If it's Hidden or Passive, it doesn't get used as a router. So you keep your public commlink on Active and connected to nothing in your PAN, you keep your black commlink on Hidden and everything else skinlinked to that one. The black commlink is still hackable as long as its wireless is on -- it's just harder to find. If your smartgun is connected to your black commlink, then it CAN be hacked, they just have to go through the commlink first.

But that's not telling you anything new. It's the way it's always worked. And the way it works today, really. If you want to be 'unhackable', disable your connections. It's the only way.

I think the retrans drone in Unwired is a holdover from past editions where drone rigging was a bit like a oversized RC setup.

Under those rules you could only send drones as far as your remote control deck could get a signal.

In a way, drone rigging have lost some of its bite with the consolidation of rigging and matrix.

You would need that because "mutual signal range" means that the two devices can "hear" each other DIRECTLY, not via routing over intermediate nodes.

SR4A, p. 222:
When two devices are within the range of the lowest Signal rating of the two, they are said to be in mutual Signal range; this is required for direct device-to device communication and for other applications.

So if nearly all matrix actions did indeed require mutual signal range, hacking and rigging would be completely gimped.

Or it would simply take away the wind out of the sails for the "SR4 is all about hacking!" and "I NEED to be unhackable"bunch. As it is not THAT likely to be hacked on the fly just by being on the streets.

I don't think anyone is implying that mutual signal range is required for anything other than device to device communication. However, if a node/drone/etc is currently configured only to allow device to device communication, then that specific device could only be hacked when you are in mutual signal range.

But you do not need Mutual Signal Range between 2 independant devices to have mutual signal range through the Mesh Network (which it appears that you agree with, unless I am reading you wrong). Which is the point. As long as you can draw valid network connections between 2 points, you are considered to be in Mutual Signal Range. That is what the Mesh Network is for, after all.

Well, normally I would admit that I was not sure whether he meant to say that or was just using the term in another meaning than the RAW uses it for, because Yerameyahu is quite savvy with the rules and terminology...but remarks about somebody's general posting style are considered flaming, so of course I won't do that...


1337 h4XX: Root a device within that range and install a proxy on it

My personal handwavium for "no, you can't hack that thing from afar, because the GM said so" is that the device is configured not to accept incoming connections from the outside (ie. like something behind a NAT), which is uncomfortable and everything but still used sometimes. And no, NAT spoofing does not exist

@TJ: The point was terminology, RAW uses the term "mutual signal range" in a clear meaning and that is "two devices which can talk to each other directly". There's already enough inconsistent terminology in the books, no need to muddle it any further

Gotcha... No worries...

Yes, RAW defines Mutual Signal Range as a situation when the two devices can connect directly.

But! There is only one situation when you need MSR, and an indirect Matrix connection won't suffice: for the Detect Hidden Node action.

Everything else can be done as long as there exists at least an indirect path through the Matrix.

I can see what you're saying, but I do think everyone rightly assumes we're including matrix routing under the umbrella of mutual signal range.

I just CTRL-F'ed through SR4A and Unwired about it. They really don't pay much attention to the whole subject; SR4A just says that everything is cool as long as there exists a two-way (in)direct communication path.

Then everyone else's commlinks are only part of they automagic mesh if they're in Active mode. Suddenly in any area outside of corporate zones that
require active mode, the mesh rapidly goes away. In corporate zones that demand zero active modes, the mesh also goes away. Lots of meshless areas.

This depends on how many opt to go passive or hidden once out of those "zones".

Why wouldn't they? That should be as sane as checking your ammo and safety. Am I missing something?

Corporate sponsored law requires certain information be transmitted at all times in many public areas. For that transmission, you need to run in active mode. THeMatrix benefits would be a nice side advantage, too.

Consider the number of people that seem to spill their innermost thoughts onto facebook and elsewhere and then go "oh crap" when someone actually points out openness.

There is likely a million and one little "helper" apps for comlinks that runners have no need for, but that wageslaves love. These all may well require active mode to work. And those that forgo them for security reasons may well be poked fun at as luddites and paranoid. And the "only criminals have something to hide" runs strong even today, would it be any different in SR? Especially only a few years after a massive terrorist plot?

Agreed: normal people use Active Mode.