3278
Feb 3 2006, 08:50 PM
First, let me preface this with the caveat that I have not yet read my copy of SR4.
However, given the prevalence of wireless technology in SR4, is there a stated capacity for smartlinks to be wireless? If not, is the unstated capacity there?
neko128
Feb 3 2006, 08:51 PM
It's stated, and in fact used as an example, if I remember correctly. You can do things like fire the gun remotely on a wireless network with a smartgun link.
I'm still reading through my copy; I've skimmed the whole book, and now I need to get more deeply into it... But I THINK you can also do things like hack someone ELSE'S Smartgun link, and then remotely... Say... Eject their clips. In the middle of a firefight. That mental image amuses me.
runefire32
Feb 3 2006, 08:52 PM
smartlinks are now, by default, wireless.
Dashifen
Feb 3 2006, 08:59 PM
@neko128
Yes, you can do that. Might be a hell of a hack as, if the opponent is smart, the smartlink is only talking to their commlink and their commlink has a firewall as high as they can get it plus all the Programs necessary to defend its turf, but if you can get through all that then, yes, you could make it eject the clip or do anything else that a smartlink does (i.e. mess with the targetting to remove the +2 pool modifier that smartlink has).
BlackHat
Feb 3 2006, 09:01 PM
QUOTE (Dashifen) |
@neko128
Yes, you can do that. Might be a hell of a hack as, if the opponent is smart, the smartlink is only talking to their commlink and their commlink has a firewall as high as they can get it plus all the Programs necessary to defend its turf, but if you can get through all that then, yes, you could make it eject the clip or do anything else that a smartlink does (i.e. mess with the targetting to remove the +2 pool modifier that smartlink has). |
Or use a "spoof" program to spoof that guy's ID... fooling the device in that case is probably a lot easier than hacking into his commlink - but requires you to be within a couple of feet of him.
runefire32
Feb 3 2006, 09:06 PM
QUOTE (BlackHat) |
Or use a "spoof" program to spoof that guy's ID... fooling the device in that case is probably a lot easier than hacking into his commlink - but requires you to be within a couple of feet of him. |
If you're that close...you're close enough to knife him or be knifed...ejecting his clip at that point is the LEAST of your worries
BlackHat
Feb 3 2006, 09:09 PM
QUOTE (runefire32) |
If you're that close...you're close enough to knife him or be knifed...ejecting his clip at that point is the LEAST of your worries |
Agreed. I'm just saying you COULD.
Dashifen
Feb 3 2006, 09:17 PM
QUOTE (BlackHat) |
QUOTE (Dashifen @ Feb 3 2006, 03:59 PM) | @neko128
Yes, you can do that. Might be a hell of a hack as, if the opponent is smart, the smartlink is only talking to their commlink and their commlink has a firewall as high as they can get it plus all the Programs necessary to defend its turf, but if you can get through all that then, yes, you could make it eject the clip or do anything else that a smartlink does (i.e. mess with the targetting to remove the +2 pool modifier that smartlink has). |
Or use a "spoof" program to spoof that guy's ID... fooling the device in that case is probably a lot easier than hacking into his commlink - but requires you to be within a couple of feet of him.
|
Don't forget that to spoof someone with their ID, you have to have also spent time to percieve them on the Matrix. Throw that commlink into hidden mode and you have to find it before you can percieve it. Encrypt it, too, and you could have to decrypt it before you can percieve the Access ID. Now you've spent three matrix actions on trying to get to their smart link meanwhile the sammie just shot them in the head.
KB12
Feb 3 2006, 09:33 PM
On the topic of having to be close:
There are probably plenty of ways to get around this. I imagine that if you knew where the enemy was going to be standing so you could hook up either a wired or wireless antenna so you could hack it remotely. A wired one is a definite possibility, picture it as having a really really long wire to your antenna. A wireless antenna would be the concept of re-routing a signal through another network, something you could definetly do in SR3 (Matrix) and I presume you could in SR4 too.
~ KB12
hobgoblin
Feb 3 2006, 10:59 PM
QUOTE (runefire32) |
QUOTE (BlackHat @ Feb 3 2006, 04:01 PM) | Or use a "spoof" program to spoof that guy's ID... fooling the device in that case is probably a lot easier than hacking into his commlink - but requires you to be within a couple of feet of him. |
If you're that close...you're close enough to knife him or be knifed...ejecting his clip at that point is the LEAST of your worries
|
what the range of a rating 0 rfid again? 3 meters?
and there are times, like when someone puts said gun to your head (lets leave the headshot cant kill in SR discussion of it tho). with a simlink you can then in theory crack his smartlink (if he have one) and covertly flip the safety or something similar. and then make it eject the clip. that way, even if there is a bullet in the chamber (another detail that SR do not cover), he will most likely be so surprised by the sudden ejection of the clip that he will try to fire the gun with the safety on, buying you some seconds...
September
Feb 4 2006, 12:12 AM
Also, since the smartlink is now part of your cybereyes, couldn't you hack the smartlink and flood his eyes with static?
hobgoblin
Feb 4 2006, 02:39 AM
just hack the eyes for that

and i find it more likely that he is using display contacts, unless he have gotten cybereyes for some other reason. but those to can be hacked wirelessly. how i have no clue. getting displays, much less wirelessly enabled displays, into a pair of contacts is way beyond what i can figure out even on a theoretical level.
neko128
Feb 4 2006, 02:58 AM
Can you relay your signal through another receiver? I'm thinking here about those funny eye drones, but almost anything could apply.
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
how i have no clue. |
you don't hack them. you hack the guy's commlink, which the contacts route data through via skinlink.
Azralon
Feb 4 2006, 04:34 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
QUOTE (hobgoblin) | how i have no clue. |
you don't hack them. you hack the guy's commlink, which the contacts route data through via skinlink.
|
That's only if your target has had the presence of mind to disable all other forms of communication with his device. If it will talk only to his comm for whatever reason, then you have to go through the comm first.
i don't think contacts have a high enough Signal to hack them, unless you're close enough to your target to punch.
Angelstandings
Feb 4 2006, 04:40 AM
It's strongly indicated in the book that hackers are meant to have to first hack the commlink to gain access to any other devices on a person. I can't think of any example where that would not be the case.
EDIT: Can you come up with an example where someone wouldn't configure their PAN that way? Sure it's possible to leave a device open to direct attacks, but I can't think of a reason why anyone would so I don't think it would ever come up.
well, like the man said--if the device in question is configured to only accept input from the user's commlink, yeah, you have to hack the commlink (which is silly to me but oh well). but if it's not, you don't, unless the device in question has too low a signal rating to transmit to your location.
though, come to think, that's what the whole mesh network thing is for, so never mind. if someone's devices aren't configured for a single input, you can hack 'em.
hobgoblin
Feb 4 2006, 03:17 PM
QUOTE (mfb @ Feb 4 2006, 05:39 AM) |
i don't think contacts have a high enough Signal to hack them, unless you're close enough to your target to punch. |
well, unless there is something specific in the text for contacts, their range is 3 meters, just like any other rating 0 device...
as for hacking a device directly. so far noone have pointed to a bit of text that says specificaly that something like that can or cant be done. hell, we dont even know if you can run a smartlink setup without a comlink iirc...
Angelstandings
Feb 4 2006, 08:37 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Feb 4 2006, 10:17 AM) |
QUOTE (mfb @ Feb 4 2006, 05:39 AM) | as for hacking a device directly. so far noone have pointed to a bit of text that says specificaly that something like that can or cant be done. hell, we dont even know if you can run a smartlink setup without a comlink iirc... |
|
QUOTE ( pg 304) |
Wireless devices also tend to leave a datatrail as they interact with other networks around you (one good reason to operate in hidden mode and keep everything in your PAN slaved to your commlink). |
The above says it's a good idea to slave all your devices in your PAN to your commlink. If that's an example of a good idea, we can assume someone could have the extraordinarily bad idea of choosing not to slave one or more of their wireless devices to their commlink -- which would leave it open to hacking without having to go through a commlink first.
QUOTE (pg 304) |
If you consider a device’s wireless link to be a nuisance, you can have it removed completely with a Hardware + Logic (8, 10 minutes) Extended Test—or simply purchase a non-wireless device in the first place (always an option, though it may get you some funny looks). RFID tags can also be removed with a tag eraser (see p. 321). |
So, anything can have their wireless link removed, which makes a lot of sense for a lot of devices.
hobgoblin
Feb 4 2006, 08:52 PM
last quote have been talked about before on other threads. but thanks for the other one. hmm, by extension the first quote allso makes it appear as if you dont need a comlink to run a pan, its just a very good idea

or maybe im reading to much into it...
hell, i would say that even if you slave your pan to your comlink, there will be a datatrail. all you need are for some other device to log data traffic even tho its not addressed to that device (known as promiscuous mode IRL networking).
basicly, radio traffic can be picked up by anyone. thats why you in theory can have a mobile phone pick up the traffic to other phones managed by towers within range.
a more practical application of slaving would be that devices dont give a damn about any other device traffic then whats coming from your comlink. still, with a spoofed address or a hacked comlink, thats no big "problem" (for the hacker atleast).
a bigger issue is range. im guessing that unless the text specificaly says that a device have a radio range based on its rating, the range is equal to a rating 0 radio. and thats what, 3 meters? still, it makes taking the subway a security risk (like its not one allready)...
Synner
Feb 4 2006, 08:57 PM
QUOTE (SR4 p.212) |
LINKING AND SUBSCRIBING Now, just because all of your devices can talk to other devices doesn’t mean that they will. For simplicity, privacy, and security, you may configure your devices so that they only interact with another specific device (usually your commlink, as your PAN’s hub) or a specific network (your PAN). This [snip] offers a degree of protection from snoopers and hackers. Rather than allowing any stranger access to all of your electronics, anyone that wants to interact with your PAN must connect to your commlink first. |
hobgoblin
Feb 4 2006, 09:07 PM
thanks synner. final nail in the coffin. want to play it realy safe: forget about the comlink. run your smartlink specificaly to your contacts or cybereyes via skinlink.
still, that makes you forgo some of the perks that a comlink with a sim module can give you (like tought controled fire rate and so on). maybe unless you can use the sim module without a attached comlink.
i seriously need to order myself a copy (never liked PDF's. but maybe if that sony ebook device with pdf ability is nice and cheap).
Angelstandings
Feb 4 2006, 09:10 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Feb 4 2006, 03:52 PM) |
all you need are for some other device to log data traffic even tho its not addressed to that device (known as promiscuous mode IRL networking). |
IMHO, any attempt to fit SR's hacking rules into a real world network security model makes it all fall apart -- leading to nothing but tears and crying... alone, in the shower... for hours on end.
hobgoblin
Feb 4 2006, 09:19 PM
some of the concepts or terms can be used, atleast to illustrate something.
its when you try to apply stuff like traffic sniffing, port scanning and other real life ways of breaking in that things fall flat.
hell, i recall someone going ape in the SR3 section because he could not hex edit files...
QUOTE (Angelstandings) |
IMHO, any attempt to fit SR's hacking rules into a real world network security model makes it all fall apart -- leading to nothing but tears and crying... alone, in the shower... for hours on end. |
haha, yeah. especially when they start trying to place too much importance on the VR metaphor, like it's some kind of metaplane or something, instead of a cybernetic interface.
Brahm
Feb 5 2006, 05:55 AM
QUOTE (Angelstandings) |
QUOTE (hobgoblin @ Feb 4 2006, 03:52 PM) | all you need are for some other device to log data traffic even tho its not addressed to that device (known as promiscuous mode IRL networking). |
IMHO, any attempt to fit SR's hacking rules into a real world network security model makes it all fall apart -- leading to nothing but tears and crying... alone, in the shower... for hours on end. |
Such has always been the nature of the SR Matrix. Not just security either. But then if the real world made for a great game all the time we would have a lot less need of games.
MK Ultra
Feb 5 2006, 02:57 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
thanks synner. final nail in the coffin. want to play it realy safe: forget about the comlink. run your smartlink specificaly to your contacts or cybereyes via skinlink.
still, that makes you forgo some of the perks that a comlink with a sim module can give you (like tought controled fire rate and so on). maybe unless you can use the sim module without a attached comlink.
i seriously need to order myself a copy (never liked PDF's. but maybe if that sony ebook device with pdf ability is nice and cheap). |
My first SR4 character has all his gear equiped with skinlink and routed throug his implanted comlink, nothing (not even the comlink) ever being wirreless by default. He uses a secondary external Comlink with its own Monocle and Headfones for the communication with the environment, only enabeling the wirreconection to this secondary comlink externaly via his datajack after disabeling the wirreless conect of the secondary manually by physical switch. Even than the Datajack does never conect to the secondary and his main pan simutaniously, functioning as another security "airlock". This stuff is pretty inconveniant but he ought to be paranoid after getting stuck in DEUS Arcology and being in prison all the wile, since before the wirreless revolution. He´ll probably get used to it and relex a bit with time.
@ Angelstandings
Sounds like a personal experiance
hobgoblin
Feb 5 2006, 04:01 PM
hmm, that sounds like a walking version if a NSA desktop setup. one computer for the external world, one for the internal world, and never connected. this complete with seperate physical networking and all...
3278
Feb 6 2006, 06:54 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
thanks synner. final nail in the coffin. want to play it realy safe: forget about the comlink. run your smartlink specificaly to your contacts or cybereyes via skinlink. |
Or just buy a smartlink that's 10 years old, so that instead of being wireless, for which there would be practically no benefit at all, you have to actually touch the gun in question, which completely eliminates the possibility of some douche setting a wireless antenna near where you'll be, or wandering within 3 meters of you, hacking your comm, and firing off your gun while it's in its holster.
I mean, really. Why would anyone bother to have a wireless network that included their own gun? If wireless technology is this permeating, I wouldn't even have a commlink at all.
QUOTE (3278) |
I mean, really. Why would anyone bother to have a wireless network that included their own gun? If wireless technology is this permeating, I wouldn't even have a commlink at all. sarcastic.gif
|
So you can carefully place you're gun on a table acting all innocent like, and then try to get the bad guy lined up while he's reciting hisBBEG monolouge, and then popping him one wirelessly?
neko128
Feb 6 2006, 07:26 PM
QUOTE (3278) |
QUOTE (hobgoblin) | thanks synner. final nail in the coffin. want to play it realy safe: forget about the comlink. run your smartlink specificaly to your contacts or cybereyes via skinlink. |
Or just buy a smartlink that's 10 years old, so that instead of being wireless, for which there would be practically no benefit at all, you have to actually touch the gun in question, which completely eliminates the possibility of some douche setting a wireless antenna near where you'll be, or wandering within 3 meters of you, hacking your comm, and firing off your gun while it's in its holster. I mean, really. Why would anyone bother to have a wireless network that included their own gun? If wireless technology is this permeating, I wouldn't even have a commlink at all. |
Because in some places, it's required? there's a passing comment in the SR4 book I read last night, mentioning that (if I recall correctly) broadcasting your ID is required by federal law in the UCAS.
Actually, it's required on UCAS federal property, i beleive the line is (aska gov't buildings)
Azralon
Feb 6 2006, 07:36 PM
QUOTE (Aku @ Feb 6 2006, 03:19 PM) |
So you can carefully place you're gun on a table acting all innocent like, and then try to get the bad guy lined up while he's reciting hisBBEG monolouge, and then popping him one wirelessly? |
BBEG monologues are something of a lost art in Shadowrun, per my experience. I have to install Wired-3 in my masterminds just so they can get a chance to talk a little more before combat ends.
PC1: "Get him!"
BBEG: "Okaysomyplanwasactuallytoframeyouforthemurderof..."
PC1: *BLAM!*
BBEG: "Ow!Soanywaythemurderof..."
PC2: *BLAM*BLAM*
BBEG: (dies)
... Oh, hey, maybe I'll have them prepare their speeches ahead of time and just use a Free Action to wirelessly broadcast a hyperlink to the document.
PC1: "Get him!"
BBEG: "Please click
here."
PC1: *BLAM!*
BBEG: (has time to get away)
PC2: "Huh? Oh, sorry, I was reading his speech."
neko128
Feb 6 2006, 07:38 PM
QUOTE (Aku) |
Actually, it's required on UCAS federal property, i beleive the line is (aska gov't buildings) |
Ah, you're correct; the quote I was thinking of (page 210, right column, last paragraph) only mentions federal property. However, it also has to be broadcast in high-security zones (see example 3 on the same page, and the description of hidden mode on the next page)... And most definitely, the more paranoid corps will do the same on their own turf, even "public" bits like malls... So the general point still stands.
QUOTE (Azralon) |
QUOTE (Aku @ Feb 6 2006, 03:19 PM) | So you can carefully place you're gun on a table acting all innocent like, and then try to get the bad guy lined up while he's reciting hisBBEG monolouge, and then popping him one wirelessly? |
BBEG monologues are something of a lost art in Shadowrun, per my experience. I have to install Wired-3 in my masterminds just so they can get a chance to talk a little more before combat ends.
BBEG: "Okaysomyplanwasactuallytoframeyouforthemurderof..." PC1: *BLAM!* BBEG: "Ow!Soanywaythemurderof..." PC2: *BLAM*BLAM* BBEG: (dies)
... Oh, hey, maybe I'll have them prepare their speeches ahead of time and just use a Free Action to wirelessly broadcast a hyperlink to the document.
|
Nah, what you need to do is have it transmitted, like an audio ad. And a new bit is loaded everytime the runners advance into a new area/room.
<runners enter the lobby of BBEG copr. Compound>
Everyone receives the following through their audio line.
"Ah, so you've finally found my compound. I guess you're going to try and find me now eh?..."
<move tot he next room>
"..well, it wont be that easy you see, because i've got all sorts of nasty things..."
etc
hobgoblin
Feb 6 2006, 10:51 PM
QUOTE |
I mean, really. Why would anyone bother to have a wireless network that included their own gun? If wireless technology is this permeating, I wouldn't even have a commlink at all. sarcastic.gif
|
rember, we are seeing it from the runners perspecitve.
for say a security guard the story will be diffrent. with a wireless link the corp system can track the gun, count how often its used and so on.
basicly there are not enough joe wageslave style benifits from having it that way listed.
its kinda like how you may look at wifi today. why would anyone use it as people can just hijack your connection or even break into your network if you have it attached behind the firewall.
2 most common reasons is that 1 its very convinient, and 2 they dont have a clue about computer security. and frankly i dont see that change (sadly).
basicly, when it comes down to selecting between userfriendlyness and security, security looses on any item made for joe. the more loopholes joe have to jump thru to get something done, the more likely it is that he will find himself something else that will not get in his way.
hell, people bypass security rutines all the time becase they are in a hurry or some other crazy reason.
still, high level secuirty companys like knight errant or similar will probably issue skinlinked smartlink systems for their troops. but the comlink will still be there, alltho with a high rating firewall and encryption.
rember that to attack a device you have to be within 3 meters of it or go thru the comlink, either option have its problems if its the smartlink your after...
And THEN... Instead of having a Com, be a Technomancer.
Paul
Mar 28 2006, 03:01 AM
QUOTE (Synner) |
QUOTE (SR4 p.212) | LINKING AND SUBSCRIBING Now, just because all of your devices can talk to other devices doesn’t mean that they will. For simplicity, privacy, and security, you may configure your devices so that they only interact with another specific device (usually your commlink, as your PAN’s hub) or a specific network (your PAN). This [snip] offers a degree of protection from snoopers and hackers. Rather than allowing any stranger access to all of your electronics, anyone that wants to interact with your PAN must connect to your commlink first. |
|
Wait so it just adds one more step in the prcoess then right? I mean all your post really says is "I hide really well in a crowd, then take my time while you're smoozing the waitress, and hack your shit." Now instead of one step, I have three. Gee, it's so much more difficult now isn't it?
Otherwise what you're saying is "We have magic button that we press when we want to be hack proof made by Lofwyr or the gods of Role Playing."
Synner
Mar 28 2006, 08:44 AM
QUOTE (Paul @ Mar 28 2006, 03:01 AM) |
QUOTE (Synner @ Feb 4 2006, 04:57 PM) | QUOTE (SR4 p.212) | LINKING AND SUBSCRIBING Now, just because all of your devices can talk to other devices doesn’t mean that they will. For simplicity, privacy, and security, you may configure your devices so that they only interact with another specific device (usually your commlink, as your PAN’s hub) or a specific network (your PAN). This [snip] offers a degree of protection from snoopers and hackers. Rather than allowing any stranger access to all of your electronics, anyone that wants to interact with your PAN must connect to your commlink first. |
|
Wait so it just adds one more step in the prcoess then right? I mean all your post really says is "I hide really well in a crowd, then take my time while you're smoozing the waitress, and hack your shit." Now instead of one step, I have three. Gee, it's so much more difficult now isn't it?
Otherwise what you're saying is "We have magic button that we press when we want to be hack proof made by Lofwyr or the gods of Role Playing."
|
Huh, no...
It means a whole lot more than that if you've been reading any of the different threads on the subject. My post simply means it isn't as simple as people were making it out to be and that you can make your PAN relatively safe with a tiered-PAN system or even pull it off-line by disconnecting the two systems. That is assuming you use a local PAN to run critical systems in the first place.
The most popular configuration set up by this rules is to have a private commlink for your systems and a public commlink for connecting to the Matrix - completely disconnected from one another. This essentially makes you unhackable over the open Matrix, though you are still vulnerable to direct Spoofs from nearby hackers (basically your suggestion) - but getting that close in a situation where someone is using a smartgun is potentially complicated. However, there are other options to protect your PAN which have been covered in depth in other threads and I won't rehash here.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.