On an unrelated note, what do programs do now? Since target numbers are fixed and all, they obiously don't do that anymore.

so being being smart dont help but having good software does.
hmm, bring on the script kiddies

In the DAQ 2.0, in skill groups it lists:

Tasking: Compiling, Decompiling, Registering

Is this a technomancer only thing?

What do the skills "Software" and "Hardware" do? do these replease programming and B/R?

Could some one give me more details on comlinks

--Edit-- I got beat with a much better response.

So what does an OS system rating determine?

Thanks hahnsoo
Could you compare ratings and costs?
And if any of the OS's are buggy?

Whoo, free dice!

To repost Ming's question, because it got me wondering too, what are the differences between the OS's?

Blackkie, I think this is a skill group added more for realism than PCs, plus it's made for 'easier tests'.

Presumably, every PC will have hacking skill over computer skill, since they largely do the same thing. But this gives GMs an excuse to say 'the network administrator is not sure how to hack into the system, even though he has half a dozen certifications'. It's also nice for say the mage or general researcher who knows he'll never hack into the system, but wouldn't mind a little help on 'gather information' tests.

As long as the GM is kind on the hacker, letting him put it in place of computer for most reasonable tests, it makes sense.

If any of the FanPro folks are around I'm curious to know why Hacking is the only activity that doesn't take advantage of the Skill+Stat system. It could easily be done the same as magic spells, where the program rating limits the number of successes which makes sense as so many Hacking tests are extended.

I mean, what's the difference between a spell that rewrites someone's memories or destroys their body and a program that changes data or destroys systems? Right now at least 3 players have commented that they could play a Logic:1 decker as long as they were willing to not build their own systems and could live with the hit to Knowledge skills at char-gen.

As an IT person, software does make a big difference on how long it takes to get things done. Scan a network with a program that uses 1 port at a time? Hours. With a multi-threaded one that hits a dozen ports? Minutes. Compiling software, running simultaneous exploits, even simple data manipulation programs are all places where good/bad software design can significantly impact the time it takes to complete tasks.

After all the effort that went into SR4 to streamline things, it seems snafud to have hacking defy the core design concept of skill+stat.

This seems like an easy Errata fix. "Any entry that says "Skill+Program should be Skill+Logic with successes limited by the Program rating."

I noticed that, too, actually Kigmatzomat (jeez, that's hard to type).

Here's a question: what's the limiting factor for Technomancers/Hackers to acually hack a node. Other than the Firewall rating of a vehicle, I assume the character must be in range of the node's signal to hack it? Am I correct?

I had an event where a hacker was attempting to hijack vehicles on a street corner and I ruled that unless he hit the threshold on the extended test in one round, the car would move past him and out of range too quickly for him to get control over. Then he moved to a traffic light and got a nice shiny new car. Course, then he also got a nice shiny new criminal SIN, but that's a different story

Range is a consideration, yes. Assuming the hacker is trying to brute force hack the car, which it sounds like he is. If he were going through the 2070 equivalent of OnStar to access the car, range isn't as much of a consideration.

There's other things to keep in mind too. Since the hacker is brute forcing this, he's trying to find a hole in the car's software to grant him access, instead of spoofing through an authorized channel (like the OnStar example I mentioned above). Since standard electronic devices only have admin level access, this is an automatic +6 threshold.

And while he's doing the hacking, the car is making tests to discover it. If the car makes threshold before the decker does, it will defend itself. Since many cars probably don't come with IC or their own security deckers, it will likely just shut its network access down (it will "go autistic", if you've ever watched Ghost in the Shell ). Though it may inform the local authorities of the location of the intrusion attempt before it does so ("Help, I'm a car at the corner of 12th and Pine, and I'm being hacked!"). Since cars are designed to operate just fine without networked access, shutting its access down doesn't harm it. It'll still just keep driving via its Pilot rating or the guy behind the wheel.

Important things to keep in mind:

Range: It's very possible a hack on the fly will take more than one initiative pass because of the threshold (probably around 9, 3 for device rating plus 6 for admin access). The hacker needs to stay in the car's range during that time.

Limited attempts: Under the information on Extended Tests in the Game Concepts chapter, it is recommended that on tests where success isn't ensured (and finding a security flaw in the car's software isn't a sure thing), the character should be limited to a number of rolls equal to his dice pool. So if his dice pool for the Hacking + Exploit test is 8, he's got 8 rolls to get the threshold. If he can't do it in that time, he just can't find a flaw in the software.

Glitches: If the hacker rolls a glitch during the Extended Test, the GM can roll 1d6 and subtract that number of hits from the hacker's accumulated hits thus far. If it goes below 0, the test fails. The GM can then rule that the hacker just can not find a flaw in the car's security. If at any time the hacker rolls a critical glitch, the whole test fails and again the GM has an opportunity to say the hacker just can't find an appropriate security flaw right now.

The other way into a car is through the authorized channels. Every car has a limited subscriber list it talks to, with subscribers that likely have dedicated passkeys. For instance, the car's owner might have a dedicated passkey built into his commlink so he can access his car from his PAN. Likewise, the 2070 version of OnStar (GridGuide, perhaps?) probably has a dedicated passkey for the car, so it can do things like unlock the car remotely in case the car is in an accident, the driver is unconscious, and the paramedics need to get inside.

The hacker could go through the driver's commlink to get access to an authorized channel. But hacking commlinks can be harder, especially if the car owner isn't around (like you're trying to hack a parked car). You could also try to go through the OnStar-like service. Advantages there are that range is not really an issue (most of those services use satellite coverage to reach a car wherever it might be) and service's hosts don't go anywhere or get shut off. Of course, in that situation, you're hacking into a full-fledged host, which is bound to have IC, security deckers, and all that fun stuff.

One of the things I've really missed in previous incarnations of the decking rules (and especially since VR2.0) is the possibility of having a group of deckers/hackers/whatevers going together and helping each other out. Is that possible by the book now?

Yes. In the case of deckers working together, they'd use the Teamwork Test rules for Extended Tests. Having a bunch of talented deckers looking for flaws in a car's software, for instance, can be advantageous. Of course, having a bunch of talentless hacks pitching in can actually slow you down if they critical glitch. Sometimes, too many cooks can spoil the broth.

Great, thank you very much. It sounds really interesting - I can't wait to have a look at it myself

i have a feel the car will shut down its wireless system for only a matter of seconds and then come back up. this should be enough to trow of anyone trying to do a hack on a passing car. or it may even do a more selective shutdown, as in shut down only any local area connections but long distance connections remain. realy depends on how smart you want to make the car and where the attack is coming from. like say, kill all connections outside of the known good sources and refuse new connections for x amount of time...

Appologies for the double post, glitched on my perception roll.

and if the discussion goes any further i think it should be taken to a diffrent thread

As a newbie to dumpshock, why would you think it needs a separate thread? This is discussing the core nature of "SR4 hacking and rigging" which is the thread's purpose.

Take a look at the first page of this thread. This one was meant to provide informations about the rules, so that those without the book could ask the ones who have one.
The discussion above has already left the topic. The discussion threads are in the non-sticky section below.

I don´t buy your explanation Synner. You can´t take the Logic attribute out of the equation when hacking. It´s the persona that does the doing? Certainly the case with physical attributes, but with mental? So you´re not actually there at all then? The persona is a separate, thinking entity and the character´s only contribution is skillful use of this entity?

This is by far the most unsatisfying thing I´ve heard about SR4.