Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: SR5: Trying to Understanding Ownership
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
BlackJaw
So the new version includes the concept of Ownership, as an attribute of wirelessly enabled devices, software, files, etc. Essentially if it's on the matrix it gets an official owner. Page 236: "Every device, persona, host, and file has an owner. This is a special relationship that offers special privileges."

Sadly, this simple concept, which does a lot for gameplay in some ways, has some implications that as near as I can tell, aren't spelled out well in the current rules.

Ownership vs Marks
Ownership has it's own rules, and many actions require ownership or interact with an owner, essentially doing things that simple users can't do. A good example is the Invite Mark matrix action which requires ownership of the device inviting the mark to initiate. Not mater how well you hacked the device, only the owner can have it invite marks.

Ownership is also defined as the equivalent of having 4 marks on a device. Page 236: "For all intents and purposes, owning an icon is the same as having four marks on it." The trick here is that you can never place 4 marks on a device. Take Hack on the Fly from page 240: "When targeting an icon, you put one mark on it, up to a maximum of three marks per icon." Brute Force has similar wording, and even the section on Marks themselves notes on page 236: "You can put multiple marks on a single icon, up to a maximum of three (unless youíre an owner; see below)."

Changing Ownership
Ownership is also not something you can easily change. Page 236 notes that ownership isn't just a name field inside a device's icon, but instead is having the device/etc registered with all the Grids. "Ownership, at least in the Matrix, is something that is registered with both the device (or other icons) and the grids, so itís a bit more involved than just putting a ďProperty of [blank]Ē sticker on it. " That is to say it's partially recorded outside the object itself, so simply hacking the device isn't enough to change ownership.

The book notes that there is a way to change ownership of a device you've illegally acquired, but involves a complex altering of the device's hardware, page 237: "You can illegally change a deviceís owner with a Hardware toolkit and an Extended Hardware + Logic [Mental] (24, 1 hour) test. A glitch on that test results in the item sending a report to the authorities." I interpret this to be the matrix equivalent of removing the VIN numbers imprinted on various parts of a car. You actively dig around in the electronic guts of the device locating the hard coded ID numbers in the various chips and either remove them or change them so they no longer line up with the previous owner, leaving you to easily register the "new" device as yours.

Changing the ownership of a digital file is a lot easier: you make a copy and the new copy is owned by you. Page 237: "use Edit File to copy it (the copyís owner is you) " Unfortunately this is only an option for files. "Note that you canít change the owner of a persona or a host. "

Legally changing an owner, say when you buy something from a store, is described as a simple "process that takes about a minute. " (page 237) but it isn't associated with matrix action. It's unclear if this prevents Spoofing an ownership change, as "change owner" may or may not be a legitimate "command" to be spoofed. In my opinion it is not a legal command because changing ownership involves things outside the device itself, like registering ownership with the grids, so simply altering the behavior of the device isn't enough. The owner themselves must also take actions on their end to inform outside entities that ownership is altered. To my mind it seems like the entire registering externally concept was designed to keep hackers from being able to simply change a listing inside the device to get ownership.

Yes that does make it a lot harder to hack & steal, but in 4th edition it was possible for a semi-skilled hacker to hack entire car lots of vehicles and send them auto-driving off to the chop-shop. I'm personally happy that 5th edition makes it more difficult to steal devices, although I do wish the hardware check was tied to device rating instead of a flat, not so easy, threshold. Stealing an RFID or Metalink should be a lot easier than stealing a military vehicle.

Owners
Ok, so who can be an owner? This is where it gets really vague. Page 237 notes: "A security guardís weapon might be in her holster, but its owner is the corp that employs her. " and page 236 notes: "Each Matrix object can only have one owner." There are no indications that an owner has to be a person. This gets a little complicated because when ever a device needs to make a defensive matrix roll, they get the applicable matrix attribute and their owner's applicable mental attribute. For example: The security guard's gun is owned by Knights Errant. What exactly is Knight's Errant's Intuition?
The closest thing to an answer, I think, is found on page 237: "When a defense test calls for a Mental attribute, use the ownerís rating. Even if she isnít currently defending or even interacting with the device, her previous interactions and settings affect the defense test. If a device is completely unattended, the Device Rating stands in for any Mental attributes an icon needs but doesnít have. For example, a device that an owner sets and forgets, like a door lock, uses its Device Rating in place of Intuition as part of the defense pool against a Control Device action." This sadly isn't much clearer. The security guard's gun isn't unattended, the security guard has it in his holster or hand. The guard, however, isn't the owner, and may not even have the authority to alter it's security settings/etc. Maybe the corp has a security spider, so you can use his attributes. Maybe you should just use the gun's device rating, probably 2 or 3, and move on. It isn't clear, but that's what GMs are for. They'll need to adjudicate things as it fits the situation.

My interpretation: use the stats of the person present who is in charge of the security of that device. Is it a ganger? He owns the gun, so use his stats. Security guard with a corp owned gun? I'd probably use the stats of the security spider on duty. Is it an unattended maglock on something that probably hasn't gotten a lot of maintenance? I'd us device rating.

Owner Stats vs Device Rating
Page 237 says "if your slaved smart-gun is the target of a hackerís Brute Force action, it would use your Willpower or its Device Rating," which implies that if the device rating for an object is better than the owner's or master's owner's mental stat for devices in a PAN, you use the device rating. This is actually really important for Host systems because their device ratings can go as high as 12, and they apply to Files and IC in a host. (see page 247 for IC and the Edit File matrix action on page 239 for Files.)

Masters vs Owners
Ownership and Master/Slave status do not seem to be well connected. It looks like you need to be the owner of a device to slave. The section on page 233 starts with "If you want extra protection for some of your devices, you can slave them to your commlink or deck. " I interpret "Your device" as one you own. There are no rules for needing X marks on a device to change it's slave status. So an owner can slave a device, but I've found nothing in the section of the book on PANs that says it affects ownership. It does affect it's defense pool as slaving lets you use the higher on both attributes (matrix and owner's mental) of the Master if it's higher. Page 233: "Whenever a slaved device is called on to make a defense test, it uses either its own or its masterís rating for each rating in the test. "

This difference between Owner and Master/Slave can be important for Spoofing. Just because a device is slaved to a Host (part of a WAN) doesn't mean you can spoof the device once you get a mark on the host. The host may be the master, but it isn't necessarily the owner.

Determining Owner
So you've spotted an Icon in the matrix, and you want to know who owns it. Matrix Perception would theoretically be the check you need to ID the owner, but determining ownership isn't listed as one of the options for matrix perception. However, "Itís not an exhaustive list, but it should give you a pretty good idea about how to use Matrix Perception" (page 235.) Your GM might rule that Ownership, being something registered with the icon and the various grids, should be something easily checked, and maye the SIN of the user that owns the device should pop right up (see below.) Alternatively, Ownership counts as having 4 marks on a device, and spotting the marks on a device is a listed option for Matrix Perception, but it expressly says you don't know who the marks belong to unless you're familiar with them or have seen the Persona that placed them. Page 241: "If you get a list of marks, you can only recognize marks you have seen before or marks left by personas that you have marks on yourself. Otherwise you only get a count."

Considering a Persona is an Icon with an Owner, this gets very interesting for Deckers, as it could be showing their current (Fake) SIN, and/or the SIN of the Deck's Owner. the Alternative concept of having it only show 4 Marks makes things a lot more anonymous for Hackers, but I'm not sure the Megacorps would have built that system to work that way.

Ownership & SINs
So do icons, and thus wirelss devices, have a SIN associated with them?
Legitimately purchased objects have their ownership changed to the person buying them, as per page 237: "When you buy that commlink, the store or manufacturer transfers ownership to you." Buying things tends to involve the use of a SIN in Shadowrun. Page 366: "No aspect of modern or legal life can function without a SIN. Those who donít have one canít get a job, canít buy food, canít even walk down the street." This implies that all of your wireless enabled objects may have an Owner with a SIN, and those two might be linked or even listed. For Shadowrunners that's probably a Fake SIN, but it does mean you may need to keep track of which Fake SIN any of your gear was purchased under, and whenever you burn a SIN you will want to change ownership of everything owned by that SIN to the new Fake SIN or you will loose ownership status.
If true, that also means anything you leave behind on a run might be used to determine your (applicable fake) ID. Those objects, unless they are a "nobody" RFID tag or a throwback device with no wireless (see page 421) are going to be owned by a SIN. Considering just about every object you buy in a legitimate store at least has an RFID tag, it's a good reason to ensure you're using your tag eraser regularly, and that you make smart use of fake SINS.

This concept gets even more confusing for Technomancers, who have a Persona Icon, and Icons have owners, but there is no device and no ability store files, so how can the Persona get a Fake SIN to associate with it's owner? It clearly wasn't purchased with one the way a Commlink or Deck is either. Is this an icon with an owner wihtout a SIN?

The rules don't seem to address this in any detail, so once again it's up to the GM.

Devices Without Owners
There is at least one exception to Page 236: "Every device, persona, host, and file has an owner." RFID tags. Page 440: "RFID tags have owners like all other devices, but unlike other devices a tagís owner can be changed to 'nobody.'" Combined with page 237's rules on unattended devices, you can essentially rule that RFID tags use their device rating for their mental stats if set to being owned by "nobody." If you are using RFID tags as hidden bugs, it's probably worth setting them to nobody so they can't be so easily traced back to you if they are found.
Jaid
for corporations etc that own devices, it's presumably the corporate host that is actually listed as the owner.

after all, a human being doesn't actually have a matrix ID, only the devices that human being owns. whatever device is used by that human being to access the matrix is most likely actually the "owner".
BlackJaw
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 21 2013, 10:20 AM) *
for corporations etc that own devices, it's presumably the corporate host that is actually listed as the owner.
That probably works, but isn't stated (for or against) anywhere in the book.

QUOTE
after all, a human being doesn't actually have a matrix ID, only the devices that human being owns. whatever device is used by that human being to access the matrix is most likely actually the "owner".
"Matrix ID" doesn't show up in the 5th edition core book even once. Maybe it will get reintroduced in the matrix splat book, but right now it's a 4th edition concept that doesn't (yet) apply.

Personally I'd prefer Matrix ID over Ownership is tied to a SIN. Espeically because applying the SIN concept to a Technomancer is trouble and having Street Samurai with their name digitially encoded on their Smartguns will really encourage them to simply stay off-line.
Jaid
QUOTE (BlackJaw @ Aug 21 2013, 12:33 PM) *
That probably works, but isn't stated (for or against) anywhere in the book.

"Matrix ID" doesn't show up in the 5th edition core book even once. Maybe it will get reintroduced in the matrix splat book, but right now it's a 4th edition concept that doesn't (yet) apply.

Personally I'd prefer Matrix ID over Ownership is tied to a SIN. Espeically because applying the SIN concept to a Technomancer is trouble and having Street Samurai with their name digitially encoded on their Smartguns will really encourage them to simply stay off-line.


it can't possibly be SIN. you aren't required to have a SIN to own something, merely to purchase it through the regular channels.

and like i said, however you do it, whether it's called matrix ID or not, it needs to be tied to a device. you can't tie it to an actual physical human being, because human beings don't exist on the matrix unless they access it through a device.
BlackJaw
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 21 2013, 10:38 AM) *
you can't tie it to an actual physical human being, because human beings don't exist on the matrix unless they access it through a device.

Technomancers are the obvious exception, but they probably "generate" a matrix ID automatically when forming a Living Persona.
HugeC
So this got me thinking (can you smell the smoke?). Suppose that in the description of the Spoof Command action, you replaced the word "owner" with "master" everywhere the former appears. Spoof Command would suddenly make sense! You could get a mark on a rigger's RCC|persona, to which his drones are slaved, and then spoof commands to the drones as if you were the rigger. You could get a mark on a host, then spoof commands to drones or other devices slaved to it. Plus you wouldn't have the impossible requirement of getting a mark on a person.

So maybe 'owner' in Spoof Command is a typo?

Owner also appears in Control Device:
QUOTE (The SR5 rulebook @ pg. 238)
You can use this action to control multiple devices at once. If you are the owner of all devices being commanded and they are all being commanded to do exactly the same thing, taking this action costs nothing extra.

Here, I don't think master fits as easily. But it does seem kinda lame that if you have, say, taken the time to get a mark on all the garbage masher devices on the detention level, and you want to shut them all down simultaneously, you have to split your dice pool. Seems like it should say, "If you have the required number of marks on..." instead of, "If you are the owner of..."
Voran
I see ownership as 'priority rights'. So even if you get 3 marks on someone's commlink, if they shut it off and reboot, they start off again with ownership and you start with 0 marks. For the corpsec dude I see that as if the gun is 'owned' by EvilCorp and being carried by EvilCorp security guard, or the runner that picked it up off secguard's corpse, ownership allows EvilCorp to still do things to it if within wireless/connection range. And which is also why its bad news to let the thing potentially broadcast if you're looting it too. (Invest in a jammer bag).
DireRadiant
QUOTE (BlackJaw @ Aug 21 2013, 11:33 AM) *
That probably works, but isn't stated (for or against) anywhere in the book.


WANs
saiyanslayer
I've been working with the following concept:

At the factory, the cover for the device is opened and DIP switchs are set from Factory mode to Consumer Mode (which requests an owner and is given). At this point, the factory sets the vendor as the owner and ships the item.

When the item is sold, the ownership is transferred voluntarily.

Item is stolen and is brought back to the shop. the worker cracks the case, figures out which DIP switch settings put the item back into Factory mode, and then figure out how to switch from factory to consumer mode (which requests an owner). Viola.

That's not actually in the book anywhere, that's just my personal interpretation of ownership.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (saiyanslayer @ Aug 21 2013, 01:59 PM) *
I've been working with the following concept:

At the factory, the cover for the device is opened and DIP switchs are set from Factory mode to Consumer Mode (which requests an owner and is given). At this point, the factory sets the vendor as the owner and ships the item.

When the item is sold, the ownership is transferred voluntarily.

Item is stolen and is brought back to the shop. the worker cracks the case, figures out which DIP switch settings put the item back into Factory mode, and then figure out how to switch from factory to consumer mode (which requests an owner). Viola.

That's not actually in the book anywhere, that's just my personal interpretation of ownership.


About the only way it COULD work, really... wobble.gif
Voran
heh, even before the commlink stuff one of my runner tools, in addition to the now not-as-useful bleach-bomb, was the jammer bag, basically either using a jammer or setup as a faraday cage so any bugged things could be squelched long enough to move to a secure site with its own jamming/cage and you could sort through stuff.
Tymeaus Jalynsfein
QUOTE (Voran @ Aug 21 2013, 04:02 PM) *
heh, even before the commlink stuff one of my runner tools, in addition to the now not-as-useful bleach-bomb, was the jammer bag, basically either using a jammer or setup as a faraday cage so any bugged things could be squelched long enough to move to a secure site with its own jamming/cage and you could sort through stuff.


Yeah, we did that too. smile.gif
Jaid
the jammer bag is basically just a headjammer in bag form, no?
BlackJaw
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 22 2013, 11:10 AM) *
the jammer bag is basically just a headjammer in bag form, no?

Or a really flexible Faraday cage. You might also use a briefcase or box with the inside coated in signal blocking paint... etc.
Voran
Yeah. I used to 'double stuff' them too. So a bag within a bag. Just in case 1 of your bags has degraded, the 2nd one usually should be good enough to protect until you can get secure.

If you've really got room, such as a vehicle you can then throw it into a specially prepared crate. Having a 'special car-trunk' has mixed use, as theoretically it could get jarred open if the GM is being funny.
Chance359
have to add these to the usual gear load out.
BlackJaw
QUOTE (Jaid @ Aug 21 2013, 10:20 AM) *
for corporations etc that own devices, it's presumably the corporate host that is actually listed as the owner.

after all, a human being doesn't actually have a matrix ID, only the devices that human being owns. whatever device is used by that human being to access the matrix is most likely actually the "owner".

I saw this quote in another forum post, and it cleared some things up:
QUOTE (GODs and Spiders, Page 360)
Since spiders are considered the owners or administrators of a system, they can command any of the devices in that system without having to gain any marks, since they already have the owner mark for all devices. They have the authority to launch or shut down IC, raise or cancel alarms, or even perform an emergency shutdown of the entire system.

So now we know who is the "owner" of a host and security system. Want to spoof a door-lock or security drone? First you need a mark on the (a?) Spider, not the Host itself.

This is better protection for a Host setup. The mark a hacker used to get into the host isn't enough to let him spoof all the devices inside it.
HugeC
Nice find! If only understanding the SR5 rules didn't take so much research. spin.gif
Nemo157
That just made me think of something else; when you gain a mark on a slaved device you get an additional mark on the master, not the owner. So if you have 2 commlinks/decks/rcc you can have all your devices slaved to one, but run your persona through the other. Then any hackers attempting to use the transfer of marks to allow "Spoof Command" wouldn't be able to.
Jack VII
QUOTE (Nemo157 @ Aug 28 2013, 11:53 AM) *
That just made me think of something else; when you gain a mark on a slaved device you get an additional mark on the master, not the owner. So if you have 2 commlinks/decks/rcc you can have all your devices slaved to one, but run your persona through the other. Then any hackers attempting to use the transfer of marks to allow "Spoof Command" wouldn't be able to.

Follow up: I think this has come up before, but what if the owner of a device has no representative device or persona. In other words, what if someone doesn't have a commlink, cyberdeck, living persona, etc? All they have is a gun that is wirelessly enabled (for some reason). Is there any way to Spoof it?
shinryu
QUOTE (Jack VII @ Aug 28 2013, 06:10 PM) *
Follow up: I think this has come up before, but what if the owner of a device has no representative device or persona. In other words, what if someone doesn't have a commlink, cyberdeck, living persona, etc? All they have is a gun that is wirelessly enabled (for some reason). Is there any way to Spoof it?


i would assume the gun has to have some sort of owner relationship to function at all wirelessly; in the worst case, the "owner" would be the smartlink hardware or cyberware. so if you hacked the one you could spoof the other.
BlackJaw
QUOTE (Jack VII @ Aug 28 2013, 10:10 AM) *
Follow up: I think this has come up before, but what if the owner of a device has no representative device or persona. In other words, what if someone doesn't have a commlink, cyberdeck, living persona, etc? All they have is a gun that is wirelessly enabled (for some reason). Is there any way to Spoof it?

Short answer: No. If the owner of a device does not currently have an icon (a persona for most people), either because they don't own a Commlink/etc or because they are not currently on the matrix (say because they are asleep), then you can't spoof their devices because you don't have a mark on their owner.

You should also be aware that a Persona is a person on the matrix, while a Commlink is just a device. Having a Mark on someone's commlink isn't enough to allow spoofing as them. You need a mark on the person (their persona) in order to spoof a device they own.

QUOTE (shinryu @ Aug 28 2013, 11:34 AM) *
i would assume the gun has to have some sort of owner relationship to function at all wirelessly; in the worst case, the "owner" would be the smartlink hardware or cyberware. so if you hacked the one you could spoof the other.
With the exception of RFID tags, which can have their owner set as no one, all devices do indeed need to have an owner. Nothing, however, requires that owner to be online for the device to function on the matrix.

As near as I can tell, Spoofing in 5th edition is an inherently limited option, but one with more potent options than standard Brute Force or Hack on the Fly related options. The limit is that you have to have a mark on a icon (generally a person's persona) of the owner to use it, and personas aren't always available. A guard drone may be owned by Bob, but while Bob is asleep or otherwise not on the Matrix, he has no persona... yet the drone is still owned by Bob. To spoof the drone, you'll have to wait for Bob to be online, thus having a persona to get a Mark on. Much like getting a file out of a Host Archive, spoofing devices may require some social engineering. Spoofing can be a much more powerful hack, as it can allow you get Invites to mark things, which is better than hacking marks in a few ways, and allow access to other ownership restricted options that otherwise aren't accessible through direct sleaze or attack options.

Also note that even if Bob has a commlink, it isn't always persona. It isn't Bob unless he is using it to access the matrix.

Now your example of a device being owned by a person with no commlink implies that the owner is a SINnless individual without even a Fake SIN and cheap commlink. An odd situation to be sure. Should they posses a device with wireless capabilities, they may very well not be the official owner for the device in much the same way that security guards at a corp facility may not be the owners of the side arms they carry. (see page 237, second paragraph) The dealer they bought the device from probably has the device owned by a fake SIN that no one uses, expressly so the dealer can sell the item to people that otherwise wouldn't have access to wireless devices.

I suspect, however, that such situations are rare. I bet most people that are that off-gird probably use their devices with the Wireless off, or simple buy throwbacks with no wifi in the first place. For such devices, ownership as registered on the matrix isn't an issue.
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