Full Version: Commlink Sanity
| QUOTE (The Jopp @ Mar 14 2006, 05:26 AM) | ||
Yup, you got it right. |
Not that having a disgusting number of Agents on different commlinks buys you much, because to do anything on other nodes they have to move there.
As for swamping a node, if it is a node of import and not just someone's commlink it is going to have some sort of Virtual Machine setup where your login has a Response associated with it but that is only a slice of the node's total resources. So you'll just bog the crap out of the slice you got during login.
You'd have to make multiple logins to bog the actual machine itself. So first you have to break in. Then either keep breaking in or break in initially with Admin rights and create a login account. That isn't going to be a cakewalk because that'll be a fairly heavily protected area, for obvious reasons.
Beyond even if you bogged the machine itself normally the higher the rights of a user the more priority they get to a limited resource. So even if the whole machine is bogged the slices with the highest priority, that normally being system processes themselves even above admin, could still be clipping along fine.
Of course this isn't detailed in the core book, you'll have to wait for Unwired to get canon specifics. But in the meantime that is a close approximation for how a big iron system would protect itself. Not just from malicious logins, but from people that don't know what they are doing and accidentally spawn countless processes.
EDIT Even commlinks could have a measure of protection from a slimmed down VM scheme. Say you start degrading your login only when Programs > Response/Total Logins. So lots of logins can obviously put the pinch on, but they do have to have multiple logins. You could do that with Agents. But obviously nothing like that is detailed in RAW at the momment.
EDIT 2 The rapid spawning of Agents from Agents could also be limited by software protection. The section on Cracking of software protection is a bit vague, but it is a really good idea to interpret it as each Cracking allows you to create one extra copy of the program. If each copy of the program can only be run once that makes creating the fodder army somewhat tougher, unless you take the months required to write your own Agent.
Of COURSE I'd have to hack into the system, i'm not gonna be a fool and login to a system using some kind of ID because it would probably limit my access and what I can do within the system.
And i will upload the agent on the TARGET node in order to slow it down. Thus the node Im gonna hack into will get it's response bogged down due to my agents keping it bogged down and attacking anyone trying to do anything about it.
This has nothing to do with logins, it has to do with ONE hacker either using a fake account or hacking himself into the system and then upload agents.
Agents don't need to log in, they are being uploaded by the hacker who is already inside the system.
If we wanna get extreme about it he could have gone in with administrator rights (with a bit of difficulty but still fully possible for a good runner) and then locked out all other accounts from the system and reedited the systems subscription list.
Hmm, no, the "making copy protection tougher" is just silly, that way i'd rather have some copy protection program as my encryption and firewall if the copy protection programs have gotten harder to crack than corporate computer systems.
Yes, a hacker have a lot of potential with programs but they are still software and the GM can do a lot of nasty things, like computer viruses or someone hacking into your commlink and erasing your data.
If copy protection was so bloody hard then the entire consumer right from everything of music files to documents and programs would be very, very wrong.
Just see what happened with the entire SONY business and their little malicious ware, and hacking programs are more often written by the actual hacker, and why would he copy protect his own program?
And i will upload the agent on the TARGET node in order to slow it down. Thus the node Im gonna hack into will get it's response bogged down due to my agents keping it bogged down and attacking anyone trying to do anything about it.
This has nothing to do with logins, it has to do with ONE hacker either using a fake account or hacking himself into the system and then upload agents.
Agents don't need to log in, they are being uploaded by the hacker who is already inside the system.
If we wanna get extreme about it he could have gone in with administrator rights (with a bit of difficulty but still fully possible for a good runner) and then locked out all other accounts from the system and reedited the systems subscription list.
Hmm, no, the "making copy protection tougher" is just silly, that way i'd rather have some copy protection program as my encryption and firewall if the copy protection programs have gotten harder to crack than corporate computer systems.
Yes, a hacker have a lot of potential with programs but they are still software and the GM can do a lot of nasty things, like computer viruses or someone hacking into your commlink and erasing your data.
If copy protection was so bloody hard then the entire consumer right from everything of music files to documents and programs would be very, very wrong.
Just see what happened with the entire SONY business and their little malicious ware, and hacking programs are more often written by the actual hacker, and why would he copy protect his own program?
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
| Nope, an agent is a PROGRAM and not a DEVICE therefore they are not using the personas subscription list. Any drone WOULD do it though since a drone is a DEVICE. |
Under agents, p. 228, if you wish for an agent to operate on a commlink/node not your own, it counts toward your subscriber limit.
| QUOTE |
You don't have to have them subscribed to one another, though. You can simply say: "Coordinate your actions with icons X, Y, and Z"'; as long as the actions are matrix-oriented, the agents should be able to reasonably follow that directive. |
No, because in order to communicate with one another, they have to be subscribed to one another.
| QUOTE |
What I'm confused on is this: Black IC has the ability to prevent a decker from jacking out *and* logging off. However, if your buddy with the 2070 equivalent of hitcher jacks (or a biomonitor) sees that you're under attack, he should be able to pull your plug. But that's also jacking out, which Black IC won't allow. |
Black IC makes it hard for you to take any actions to disconnect yourself, but I'd allow someone else to do it if they were "riding along"; i.e., they were subscribed to our commlink, had a set of trodes/datajack of their own, and used AR to watch you. You'd take dumpshock, but they wouldn't have to make the extra rolls.
| QUOTE |
| I see that dumpshock is still an issue, and while the rules aren't as specific on this as they were in 3rd, I can easily see that your datatrail would be left undefended. But I can't see your icon taking any further damage if your commlink is shut off for you, and I can't see why you would be stuck in cybercombat if someone else pulled your plug. |
Per p. 220, if you jack out without logging off, you leave your persona behind.
There's a lot to respond to here, so I'm going to buck netiquette and use multiple posts to address it. Apologies in advance
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
Of COURSE I'd have to hack into the system, i'm not gonna be a fool and login to a system using some kind of ID because it would probably limit my access and what I can do within the system. And i will upload the agent on the TARGET node in order to slow it down. Thus the node Im gonna hack into will get it's response bogged down due to my agents keping it bogged down and attacking anyone trying to do anything about it. |
If your agents aren't going to be loaded on your persona, you need to take a Simple Action for each one to load it onto the target node. Security hackers are going to be patrolling the area, and your slowly growing host of icons is going to be very suspicious.
Yes, you can probably use your admin access to boot everyone else and lockdown the subscriber list, but you've just written "T3h leetz0r is here!" in words that can be read from Rivendell to the mouths of the Anduin. Someone's about to physically pull the plug on the node you're logged into, or just take the whole network down until they can figure out how you got in.
| QUOTE (Brahm @ Mar 14 2006, 05:45 AM) |
| As for swamping a node, if it is a node of import and not just someone's commlink it is going to have some sort of Virtual Machine setup where your login has a Response associated with it but that is only a slice of the node's total resources. So you'll just bog the crap out of the slice you got during login. You'd have to make multiple logins to bog the actual machine itself. So first you have to break in. Then either keep breaking in or break in initially with Admin rights and create a login account. That isn't going to be a cakewalk because that'll be a fairly heavily protected area, for obvious reasons. Beyond even if you bogged the machine itself normally the higher the rights of a user the more priority they get to a limited resource. So even if the whole machine is bogged the slices with the highest priority, that normally being system processes themselves even above admin, could still be clipping along fine. |
It's worth noting that even today's networks aren't a single machine, and 2070's corp matrices aren't likely to be a single node, either. There' s going to be a net of nodes, some of which have wireless access to the outside and some of which are wired to those outer nodes (the "proxy servers", if you will). You can load a billion agents onto the node you first hack open, but all you'll do is bog down that one machine, not the corp matrix as a whole. Were I a sysadmin who got an alert that one node's Response was dropping precipitously, I'd probably reboot it if I couldn't figure out why.
That's only one corp network design, of course. P. 223 gives examples of a lot of others, none of which are terribly vulnerable to the DoS attack of "I log in and pop open a can of agents".
| QUOTE (The Jopp @ Mar 14 2006, 06:48 AM) |
| Of COURSE I'd have to hack into the system, i'm not gonna be a fool and login to a system using some kind of ID because it would probably limit my access and what I can do within the system. And i will upload the agent on the TARGET node in order to slow it down. Thus the node Im gonna hack into will get it's response bogged down due to my agents keping it bogged down and attacking anyone trying to do anything about it. This has nothing to do with logins, it has to do with ONE hacker either using a fake account or hacking himself into the system and then upload agents. Agents don't need to log in, they are being uploaded by the hacker who is already inside the system. |
I'm saying that on a big system with a VM scheme that'll just bog down the single login, not the whole machine. Plus Azathfeld has a good point about multiple nodes, and complex configurations. The big iron is going to look a lot more like the SR3 decking world.
| QUOTE |
| If we wanna get extreme about it he could have gone in with administrator rights (with a bit of difficulty but still fully possible for a good runner) and then locked out all other accounts from the system and reedited the systems subscription list. |
A lot tougher to get in, especially if it is a node with a high Rating running higher level programs, because it can.
| QUOTE |
| Hmm, no, the "making copy protection tougher" is just silly, that way i'd rather have some copy protection program as my encryption and firewall if the copy protection programs have gotten harder to crack than corporate computer systems. |
It doesn't make it tougher exactly. It makes it more time consuming because of the way the copies are made.
| QUOTE |
| Yes, a hacker have a lot of potential with programs but they are still software and the GM can do a lot of nasty things, like computer viruses or someone hacking into your commlink and erasing your data. If copy protection was so bloody hard then the entire consumer right from everything of music files to documents and programs would be very, very wrong. Just see what happened with the entire SONY business and their little malicious ware, and hacking programs are more often written by the actual hacker, and why would he copy protect his own program? |
So he gets to control who uses his stuff? If you start down that path you can try argue why should it cost anything for any of the programs. Just download cracked programs free! That is where Reality gets an invite to nipple some Trouser Cobra because it is messing with fun at the table.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| If your agents aren't going to be loaded on your persona, you need to take a Simple Action for each one to load it onto the target node. Security hackers are going to be patrolling the area, and your slowly growing host of icons is going to be very suspicious. |
*cut down the quoting*
Ooh, spiffy, my apologies, i missed that part about subscribing agents that are on another node. Actually, not that much effort is needed in uploading an agent, especially since the first agent will take a simple action, then THAT agent will upload an agent and i as a user will upload my own agent. After that they will upload on agent each.
True, this is a brute force approach to a denial of service attack and probably not one of the best things to do, but it would be a nice way of having a "carrier" agent that can upload agents for you that can be put on hold until you need them.
I can also tell the agent to receive order from another persona, and this would be a bit of a stretch but one could probably have it follow the order of another agent, a sort of master control.
Yea, it can be useful and if done wrong it can bring the house down wether you want it or not.
| QUOTE (Brahm) | ||
So he gets to control who uses his stuff? If you start down that path you can try argue why should it cost anything for any of the programs. Just download cracked programs free! |
Well, in one way that is my point. The "money" in shadowrun represents more than just simple cash, it could also represent the time it takes to crack and copy the programs, or the time to program them. It is after all "Resources".
I have no problem with copy protection rules but going with the "you create ONE copy" is a bit silly if we compare to real life is a bit extreme. Having a hacker paying multiple times at character creation to give them more than one set of a program is a bit silly since it's so damn expensive at it is.
If it is to curb the "multiple commlink madness" then it is the wrong way since having a good commlink gets pretty expensive as soon as you start getting multiples of them, and having more than two of them is a bit extreme.
And that last thing is also a good example, most runners probably download their programs for free anyway.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
| Ooh, spiffy, my apologies, i missed that part about subscribing agents that are on another node. Actually, not that much effort is needed in uploading an agent, especially since the first agent will take a simple action, then THAT agent will upload an agent and i as a user will upload my own agent. After that they will upload on agent each. |
However that is going to require another login, otherwise the new Agent is going to be in the same VM with the Agent that spawned it. Creating a new login from inside the machine will seem odd, but that is where it will be. A good place to put protection in.
If you leave an Agent outside running in one of your commlinks that leaves a trail back to you. Much better to set up a zombie a machine, using an Agent on a lower security machine to .
Still lots and lots of logins in a short period of time is likely going to raise an alert. They might even have a cap on the number of simultaneous external logins. So logining in like that may not be able to bog things down that much anyway.
It is "Resources" at chargen. Unless they have changed this too (and I've seen no evidence of that, despite reading the Gear chapter fairly thoroughly), it is money and naught else afterwards.
~J
~J
| QUOTE (The Jopp @ Mar 14 2006, 10:57 AM) |
| I have no problem with copy protection rules but going with the "you create ONE copy" is a bit silly if we compare to real life is a bit extreme. Having a hacker paying multiple times at character creation to give them more than one set of a program is a bit silly since it's so damn expensive at it is. |
I disagree. For about 150K you can set yourself up with a full set of programs, a boffo commlink, and a second mid-range commlink for show. If you are going to rig on the side with the leftover from maximum Resources you can install a Control Rig in your head, buy a C-N Patrol-1, a second vehicle, and a squad of drones.
If anything they are a bit too cheap at character creation, but really it is the Availability right now means you can get anything listed at character creation. Which is where a problem shows up in scalability in play right now.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| However that is going to require another login, otherwise the new Agent is going to be in the same VM with the Agent that spawned it. Creating a new login from inside the machine will seem odd, but that is where it will be. A good place to put protection in. |
What do you guys mean with "new login"???
If the character has hacked the system and uploads an agent on THAT node it will be a running program (hopefully with stealth) who then proceeds with its own order to upload its own program, another agent. Why would that agent need a new login? it is not a user, it is a program.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| I disagree. For about 150K you can set yourself up with a full set of programs, a boffo commlink, and a second mid-range commlink for show. If you are going to rig on the side you can install a Control Rig a Patrol-1, a second vehicle, and a squad of drones. If anything they are a bit too cheap at character creation, but really it is the Availability right now means you can get anything listed at character creation. Which is where a problem shows up in scalability in play right now. |
Ah yes, but that was not my point. Some GM's wont allow players to use a program on two commlinks unless they A: Crack it, and get to upload said program on 1 more commlink. Or B: Buy two programs of the same sort at chargen.
THAT annoys me because it would be a natural thing for hackers to have secure copies of their software, and that wont change from today when it comes to backup files. You DONT want to have a virus that wipes out your 150K worth of programs.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) | ||
What do you guys mean with "new login"??? If the character has hacked the system and uploads an agent on THAT node it will be a running program (hopefully with stealth) who then proceeds with its own order to upload its own program, another agent. Why would that agent need a new login? it is not a user, it is a program. |
This is from back in the my discussion of a VM scheme. Each login has it's own session with a slice of the computing resources. Anything spawned on the machine from that session is limited to resources allocated to that VM. Creating another Agent from on the machine only fills up that slice, it doesn't create another slice. You need to create another login to get another slice.
No, this is not in the core book. But that is approximately how large computers work.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
| THAT annoys me because it would be a natural thing for hackers to have secure copies of their software, and that wont change from today when it comes to backup files. You DONT want to have a virus that wipes out your 150K worth of programs. |
There are software protection schemes that are instance counters. If they manage to protect the program well enough that increasing the instance count is the weak point then this is what it would look like.
Handwaving? Yes! On the Crack Pipe Scale only about 4 to 5 pulls, which puts it below average for SR computing.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
| Ooh, spiffy, my apologies, i missed that part about subscribing agents that are on another node. Actually, not that much effort is needed in uploading an agent, especially since the first agent will take a simple action, then THAT agent will upload an agent and i as a user will upload my own agent. After that they will upload on agent each. |
Agents don't load programs on other nodes, they load them on themselves, and they need to have active copies of any programs that they're running. An agent on another node, acting independently, can't access the programs on your commlink, and can't load other agents off of it. Agents loaded onto your persona could be instructed to load other agents off of your commlink onto nodes you've accessed, but each agent loaded on your commlink counts against your Response, not the accessed node's.
You can, very technically, by the rules have an agent with an agent in its active programs, and that agent could have its own agent, and so on into recursive madness. I don't allow it, but the rules don't specifically say that you can't do it. Those recursive agents, however, still don't count against the node's response, only the agents they're loaded onto.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| That still means that if I'm running multiple commlinks with multiple agents, none of which are overloaded with programs, I can have a disgusting number of active agents at any given time. |
Sure.
They are just useless as support in any other Node then the one they run on - because they are not where the action is.
when it comes to software protection im guessing that each program file is encrypted towards a hardware chip in each comlink (TPM anypne). you dont back up software, you have a standing order for it at your local software dealer (if your legit) and then download a new copy whenever the old one gets wiped somhow.
rember, we now have a world where near-instant bandwidth and storage is available, why backup software when you can download a new copy at an instant?
back up user data (images, videos, text files, spreadsheets, the works) yes but not the software itself.
im guessing that cracking a copy basicly is unwrapping the software of its encryption and then reencrypting it on whatever device you want to use it on. so if you have it cracked, you would need to backup. but if not why bother?
basicly its somewhat similar to what valve is doing with steam and half-life 2. i recall hearing someone talking about how much they loved that service as they could just redownload the game after a reformat and discovering that he had lost his game disks...
most likely the accounts in SR will be connected to a SIN...
rember, we now have a world where near-instant bandwidth and storage is available, why backup software when you can download a new copy at an instant?
back up user data (images, videos, text files, spreadsheets, the works) yes but not the software itself.
im guessing that cracking a copy basicly is unwrapping the software of its encryption and then reencrypting it on whatever device you want to use it on. so if you have it cracked, you would need to backup. but if not why bother?
basicly its somewhat similar to what valve is doing with steam and half-life 2. i recall hearing someone talking about how much they loved that service as they could just redownload the game after a reformat and discovering that he had lost his game disks...
most likely the accounts in SR will be connected to a SIN...
Nice concept, but somehow not entirely fitting to SR context:
Basically, TPM needs corps to trust each other.
Basically, TPM needs corps to trust each other.
no, they just need to "trust" the corp court, and maybe the vault-in-the-sky...
allso, rember that tpm is just a encryption module with a (potential) hardwired key. its nothing more, nothing less. for checking if people have payed their software "taxes" its just fine. no valid TPM, no software for you...
allso, rember that tpm is just a encryption module with a (potential) hardwired key. its nothing more, nothing less. for checking if people have payed their software "taxes" its just fine. no valid TPM, no software for you...
| QUOTE |
| Not that having a disgusting number of Agents on different commlinks buys you much, because to do anything on other nodes they have to move there. |
What it'll enable you to do is to launch a massive teamwork hacking test on a node. You're almost guaranteed to get Admin access, which would then allow you to open the gates to let the agents in.
| QUOTE ("Azathfield") |
| No, because in order to communicate with one another, they have to be subscribed to one another. |
That's simply not true. Page 221, under "Issuing Commands", last sentence: "If the controlling character chooses, he can instruct the agent or drone to recieve orders from other specified personas."
What's more, you need to communicate with other in order to take a Spoof action; and nowhere under Spoof does it say that you have to be subscribed to the agent/drone you're after. In fact, if you did have to be subscribed, the Spoof command would be virtually useless.
| QUOTE |
| Per p. 220, if you jack out without logging off, you leave your persona behind. |
Which is what I don't get. What *is* required to sever your Matrix connection? If I turn on a high-powered jammer, will that disrupt my signal enough to escape from Black IC? What about turning off the commlink? Or yanking it's batteries?
I can see what happens if you sever yourself from your persona, but what happens when you sever your commlink from the matrix-- and what's required to do so?
| QUOTE |
| They are just useless as support in any other Node then the one they run on - because they are not where the action is. |
But if they're on a commlink, they can go anywhere a decker can. If you're keeping them as part of your program load, they can still move about the Matrix. And if you use them to launch massive teamwork hacking tests, you'll get admin access every time; this allows you to penetrate to the next node, and bring them through. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Subscription of an agent or GROUP of agents would only be nessecary if you log off the matrix, as long as you are online you can just send a command to them.
Even if they are on another node you will still be on the matrix and thus able to give them commands.
Even if they are on another node you will still be on the matrix and thus able to give them commands.
| QUOTE (Cain) | ||
That's simply not true. Page 221, under "Issuing Commands", last sentence: "If the controlling character chooses, he can instruct the agent or drone to recieve orders from other specified personas." |
And under the Linking and Subscribing rules, it says that you need to be subscribed in order to communicate, so ordering an agent to receive commands from someone else still requires the agent to subscribe to that icon.
| QUOTE |
| What's more, you need to communicate with other in order to take a Spoof action; and nowhere under Spoof does it say that you have to be subscribed to the agent/drone you're after. |
Spoof is a special case, and it's one-way. It's the exception, not the rule.
| QUOTE | ||
Which is what I don't get. What *is* required to sever your Matrix connection? If I turn on a high-powered jammer, will that disrupt my signal enough to escape from Black IC? What about turning off the commlink? Or yanking it's batteries? I can see what happens if you sever yourself from your persona, but what happens when you sever your commlink from the matrix-- and what's required to do so? |
You'll probably have to wait for Unwired to answer those questions, since they're clearly not covered in the main rules.
Personally, I have a PocketPC PDA, and it will often get frozen in such a manner that I have to manually reboot it before I can shut it down. Even shutting it down doesn't turn it off, it just goes into standy, using a smaller charge to hold the info in its RAM. To kill it entirely, I'd need to yank the battery, but that erases much of the information I've stored on it, including all of my programs.
In the future, when software shutdown methods are more reliable, they might remove any physical shutdown methods at all. You could probably modify your commlink with a killswitch, but it might very well not have any normal way of shutting down without a software command; a command that IC would naturally block.
| QUOTE |
| But if they're on a commlink, they can go anywhere a decker can. |
Only if they're loaded on your persona, which they're not if that commlink is not the one you're using.
| QUOTE |
| If you're keeping them as part of your program load, they can still move about the Matrix. |
No, they can't. For an agent to act independently requires you to load it on an external node.
I'm willing to let players slap in a killswitch or jam their way off the matrix, but there's going to be one mother of a dumpshock headache headed their way...
i would interpet the "presona stays behind" as basicly being a bad way of saying that you can still be traced for some time after you jacked out...
that would be consistent with pulling a ethernet cable, or with how jacking out behaved in older versions...
that would be consistent with pulling a ethernet cable, or with how jacking out behaved in older versions...
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| i would interpet the "presona stays behind" as basicly being a bad way of saying that you can still be traced for some time after you jacked out... that would be consistent with pulling a ethernet cable, or with how jacking out behaved in older versions... |
It does specifically say that your persona is a "sitting duck" after you jack out, so I think it's more than reasonable to say that it still suffers Matrix damage.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld @ Mar 15 2006, 05:33 PM) | ||
It does specifically say that your persona is a "sitting duck" after you jack out, so I think it's more than reasonable to say that it still suffers Matrix damage. |
Sure it could suffer Matrix damage. It has no way of defending itself. But unless I'm missing something, why does it matter? Unless you somehow reconnect and get linked up again with the persona, which I'm not if or when it is even possible.
Unless I'm missing something, and please point it out if I am, that stranded persona is only a liability if it is used as a source of information instead of as a punching bag.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| Sure it could suffer Matrix damage. It has now way of defending itself. But unless I'm missing something, why does it matter? Unless you somehow reconnect and get linked up again with the persona, which I'm not if or when it is even possible. Unless I'm missing something, and please point it out if I am, that stranded persona is only a liability if it is used as a source of information instead of as a punching bag. |
Sounds about right. Cain had some objection to it, though.
| QUOTE |
| Sounds about right. Cain had some objection to it, though. |
Cain and Brahm disagree about something? Shocking!
| QUOTE (Azathfeld @ Mar 15 2006, 06:36 PM) |
| Sounds about right. Cain had some objection to it, though. |
He seems to object to a lot of things for quite dubious reasons.
| QUOTE (Dissonance) |
| Cain and Brahm disagree about something? Shocking! |
One situation where it does seem important though to distinguish what that stranded persona is and what damage to it means is where the hacker is still online to the Matrix, but a given persona is stranded because of node becomes issolated from the Matrix. Also with Technomancers because damage has a lot more meaning with their Living Persona. No time to type out all my thoughts on that right now.
| QUOTE |
| And under the Linking and Subscribing rules, it says that you need to be subscribed in order to communnicate, so ordering an agent to receive commands from someone else still requires the agent to subscribe to that icon. |
Not really. You neither have to access them nor do you have to let them establish communication with you for them to play Simon Says. Agents can operate autonomously, so they only need to be subscribed to their own commlink. They're perfectly capable of reacting to what other icons do, without having to subscribe to them.
| QUOTE |
| Sure it could suffer Matrix damage. It has no way of defending itself. But unless I'm missing something, why does it matter? Unless you somehow reconnect and get linked up again with the persona, which I'm not if or when it is even possible. Unless I'm missing something, and please point it out if I am, that stranded persona is only a liability if it is used as a source of information instead of as a punching bag. |
Well, first of all, the "source of information" thing is quite the vulnerability. Black IC also removes the paydata; and can call a security decker to delete, scramble, or data bomb everything on the commlink. Any and all information you have on that commlink becomes wide open to invading deckers/agents/IC.
If you can successfully disrupt your matrix connection, the information on your commlink is safe. And, you *should* be able to simply yank the batteries on the thing, and dumpshock yourself to high heavens. But apparently, you can't for some strange reason.
| QUOTE (Brahm) |
| Unless I'm missing something, and please point it out if I am, that stranded persona is only a liability if it is used as a source of information instead of as a punching bag. |
Having your custom persona trapped on a foreign host to be decripted, analysed and any personal information it may contain open to security is a very bad thing indeed... might as well just give them a self-addressed envelope for all it's worth.
[edit]
Not to mention the need to acquire/code a new persona - any decker worth half their rep would not recover a compromised persona... who knows what kind of data bombs and tracers would be interlaced into the code program.
One thing I find interesting in this whole debate about multiple commlinks is bandwidth... if you think you can wander around with a personal PAN of even 5+ commlinks without the network picking up on such a large usage from a single source, you gotta be fooling yourself. You might as well put a neon light on your head with an "I'm here" sign. The idea is to not be noticed, covering your data trail, watching your trace path, etc... with that much bandwidth, there's no way you can cover your ass and not be traced. One Trace IC on one of your agent-running commlinks is all it takes for them to follow all your actions. And with so many stuff running, you risk a greater chance of not noticing said Trace IC till you've given them all the information they need to physically pick you up.
I find that having two commlinks for a runner is a good thing, more than that and it will become a liability. With a personal tiered network you can have one commlink running a firewall with nine programs and et a -1 modifier to response.
This will not impede anything on your firewall commlink since it will be loaded with rating 4 agents and IC where half are scanning for intruders and the other half is busy spoofing your datatrail. Your primary commlink is your hacking tool and can contain 9 programs as well without giving you more than a -1 to response.
Your hacking commlink can in itself be filled with the necessary programs for hacking and a helping agent if someone would actually manage to hack through your firewall.
Now, the book does not state it but I find it odd if one cannot do the following with such a sensitive piece of equipment like a commlink.
1: Alter signal strength (might as well lower this one to 0 and have it offline for awhile)
2: Turn it off (well, why should I invite hackers to pick on it whenever they like)
Having 5 commlinks is just being a bit silly, especially the cost for them.
Another thing you can do is to be evil, or rather annoying. Since basically everything is wireless you can go through your own clothes as nodes, and encrypt each and every one of them, even datachips would have a device rating, but would most likely be “dumb” items with a rating of 1 (se device table SR4 P212).
If you have 10 pieces of clothing with skinlink (socks, shoes, hat, gloves, coat, shirt, pants) it would buy you 33 seconds for them to crack the encryption on each of those pieces since it’s a threshold of 2 (encryption X2 limited by response). Now, that’s just to crack the encryption, it would also take them even longer to hack into the system of the clothing (yes, everything has a value so it would be Firewall/System at 1).
This won’t stop someone but it would by a hacker time, especially if they have also hidden their signal.
I have a hard time believing that any joe citizen would ever try something like this but it would be a good way to create personal chokepoints. For simplicity I would rule 1 set of clothing as 1 item you could encrypt otherwise you could quite easily encrypt 20+ items on your body.
The most evil thing to do would be to use emty Certified credsticks as chokepoints since they too are wireless devices with a rather high firewall, encryption and so on.
Stealth Tags are a good thing to use as a chokepoint as well since it has a Response of 3, which means it can be loaded with an encryption of 6.
This will not impede anything on your firewall commlink since it will be loaded with rating 4 agents and IC where half are scanning for intruders and the other half is busy spoofing your datatrail. Your primary commlink is your hacking tool and can contain 9 programs as well without giving you more than a -1 to response.
Your hacking commlink can in itself be filled with the necessary programs for hacking and a helping agent if someone would actually manage to hack through your firewall.
Now, the book does not state it but I find it odd if one cannot do the following with such a sensitive piece of equipment like a commlink.
1: Alter signal strength (might as well lower this one to 0 and have it offline for awhile)
2: Turn it off (well, why should I invite hackers to pick on it whenever they like)
Having 5 commlinks is just being a bit silly, especially the cost for them.
Another thing you can do is to be evil, or rather annoying. Since basically everything is wireless you can go through your own clothes as nodes, and encrypt each and every one of them, even datachips would have a device rating, but would most likely be “dumb” items with a rating of 1 (se device table SR4 P212).
If you have 10 pieces of clothing with skinlink (socks, shoes, hat, gloves, coat, shirt, pants) it would buy you 33 seconds for them to crack the encryption on each of those pieces since it’s a threshold of 2 (encryption X2 limited by response). Now, that’s just to crack the encryption, it would also take them even longer to hack into the system of the clothing (yes, everything has a value so it would be Firewall/System at 1).
This won’t stop someone but it would by a hacker time, especially if they have also hidden their signal.
I have a hard time believing that any joe citizen would ever try something like this but it would be a good way to create personal chokepoints. For simplicity I would rule 1 set of clothing as 1 item you could encrypt otherwise you could quite easily encrypt 20+ items on your body.
The most evil thing to do would be to use emty Certified credsticks as chokepoints since they too are wireless devices with a rather high firewall, encryption and so on.
Stealth Tags are a good thing to use as a chokepoint as well since it has a Response of 3, which means it can be loaded with an encryption of 6.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| Not really. You neither have to access them nor do you have to let them establish communication with you for them to play Simon Says. Agents can operate autonomously, so they only need to be subscribed to their own commlink. They're perfectly capable of reacting to what other icons do, without having to subscribe to them. |
An agent mimicing another agent is not "coordination". You don't get any bonuses for that, but feel free to release dozens of autonomous programs into the matrix and tell them to hack a corp mainframe all at the same time.
Hopefully, your agents are all running stealth, but that means that they can't even see each other without breaking Simon's stealth program.
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| An agent mimicing another agent is not "coordination". You don't get any bonuses for that, but feel free to release dozens of autonomous programs into the matrix and tell them to hack a corp mainframe all at the same time. Hopefully, your agents are all running stealth, but that means that they can't even see each other without breaking Simon's stealth program. |
With that logic one could say that you as a hacker wouldn't be able to see your own uploaded agents.
A rating 4 agent ain't stupid, and you could without a problem give them FOF recognition instructions so that they would see each other. Being in stealth means that you are hidden from the NODE not from EVERYTHING and EVERYONE. It would be a pain in the ass if you would have to make an Analyze test just to find your own agents roaming a specific node.
An agent is neither a stupid program or a wiz hacker, but if you have several agents with different programs it does stand to reason that they should be able to work together to hack a system.
---
The main problem with uploading agents comes with the actual rules for them.
Agents can carry programs, Agents ARE program. Thus, agents can carry other agents. Here’s the problem though.
1: Can an agent carry a program loaded agent? I see a gamebreaker here since that would mean that a rating 4 agent could carry 4 agents with 4 programs each which in turn could carry another agent each and so on…
Let’s assume that they can only carry a TOTAL of 4 programs, and not an army of layered agents. Carrying another agent with 4 programs loaded should count against its response.
2: IF they carry another agent, how would it upload it? Would it upload 1 program at a time TO the agent? Agent uploads agent and then it continues to upload Stealth, Attack and Armour to it. Or does it upload an agent with the entire load of programs at once?
I would say that if loaded in a characters persona, the character upload agent AND its payload at once. If an agent want to upload a program by itself to the node it is active on then it would have to upload one program at a time, transferring a copy of it to the new agent.
| QUOTE |
Now, the book does not state it but I find it odd if one cannot do the following with such a sensitive piece of equipment like a commlink. 1: Alter signal strength (might as well lower this one to 0 and have it offline for awhile) 2: Turn it off (well, why should I invite hackers to pick on it whenever they like) |
You probably can, but they're not standard actions, and thus not covered in the main rules.
Reducing signal is something very few people, even runners, would really want to do. You generally just lose flexibility. Keep in mind that, with the inetrconnectedness of the Matrix, you only need to be within range of any node for someone to track you down.
As far as shutting down a commlink, given the tech in 2070, they probably don't actually have accessible batteries. Even today's PDA use miniscule battery power; a commlink probably just powers itself on your bioelectric field, even if it's external. An internal commlink, obviously, won't give you any way to physically shut it down. As I said, you can probably build in a killswitch, but it won't be easy and it's advanced enough to be supplement fodder rather than main rules.
| QUOTE |
Another thing you can do is to be evil, or rather annoying. Since basically everything is wireless you can go through your own clothes as nodes, and encrypt each and every one of them, even datachips would have a device rating, but would most likely be “dumb” items with a rating of 1 (se device table SR4 P212). If you have 10 pieces of clothing with skinlink (socks, shoes, hat, gloves, coat, shirt, pants) it would buy you 33 seconds for them to crack the encryption on each of those pieces since it’s a threshold of 2 (encryption X2 limited by response). Now, that’s just to crack the encryption, it would also take them even longer to hack into the system of the clothing (yes, everything has a value so it would be Firewall/System at 1). |
Ah, no. When you run even one program on something with a System Rating of 1, you drop the Response by 1--in this case, to zero. System is limited to no more than Response, so you've just crashed your OS.
That's not to say you can't Encrypt signals between your commlink and your clothes; you can and should. You do so by running Encrypt on the commlink, though, and not on every piece of clothing. You then slave your clothing to your commlink and Edit the subscriber list so that it won't accept incoming calls from anywhere outside your PAN.
| QUOTE |
The most evil thing to do would be to use emty Certified credsticks as chokepoints since they too are wireless devices with a rather high firewall, encryption and so on. |
Cred sticks aren't wireless devices. Your SIN and such info are stored with high encryption on your commlink, not your credstick.
I'm also not sure why you think that Encrypting signals from your clothing forces someone to go through them, unless you're talking about this in conjunction with reducing the Signal on your commlink.
| QUOTE (Dranem) |
| Having your custom persona trapped on a foreign host to be decripted, analysed and any personal information it may contain open to security is a very bad thing indeed... might as well just give them a self-addressed envelope for all it's worth. [edit] Not to mention the need to acquire/code a new persona - any decker worth half their rep would not recover a compromised persona... who knows what kind of data bombs and tracers would be interlaced into the code program. |
Buh WHA???
I do desperately hope that you're badly misinterpreting the rules.
~J
| QUOTE (Azathfeld) |
| Cred sticks aren't wireless devices. Your SIN and such info are stored with high encryption on your commlink, not your credstick. I'm also not sure why you think that Encrypting signals from your clothing forces someone to go through them, unless you're talking about this in conjunction with reducing the Signal on your commlink. |
1. The CERTIFIED CREDSTICK (Page 322 SR4) is the equivalent of cash and cost 25Y. IF one should believe the generic device table it has a a device rating of 6, this means it has matrix attributes of 6 in Firewall, response, system and signal. Now, i can understand response and encryption, but not signal.
Since basically ALL electronic devices in SR4 are wireless or accessable through a skinlink you can use a credstick as a NODE - the same goes with clothing, who also can be electronic devices through the examples in teh book since you can upload music to your clothing.
Clothing would be rating 1 devices, which means you can run rating 1 programs.
As for my tiered network example perhaps i should explain. If i have 10 nodes and use my commlink to go from 1-10 in a LEGAL fashion (I have all the access codes to my own gear) this mean that anyone who wants access to my commlink has to hack each and every one of my 10 nodes before getting to TRY to hack my commlink.
---
They cannot skip the chain and attack directly, this is how most corporations defend their own computer systems through several tiered nodes. This example is how you can have the same thing on a much smaller scale.
In theory they might try to hack your certified credstick/clothing/walkman if they are within signal range but that is easily prevented by using a skinlink so that they no longer emits a signal.
Yes, you still hack through the commlink but have a onion layer of nodes between you and those seeking you.
The response issue isn't quite clear but there is something wrong if you cannot even use 1 legal little edit program on your Meta Link Commlink without it crashing.
Someone said it reduced Response TESTS which would be a lot more logical, but that has yet to be clarified, and if one calculates from teh NEW Reponse value or from the original one.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
1. The CERTIFIED CREDSTICK (Page 322 SR4) is the equivalent of cash and cost 25Y. IF one should believe the generic device table it has a a device rating of 6, this means it has matrix attributes of 6 in Firewall, response, system and signal. Now, i can understand response and encryption, but not signal. Since basically ALL electronic devices in SR4 are wireless or accessable through a skinlink you can use a credstick as a NODE - the same goes with clothing, who also can be electronic devices through the examples in teh book since you can upload music to your clothing. |
Okay, fair enough. I don't think credsticks are actually meant to broadcast a signal for 10km, but that's at the very least an oversight, and you certainly can run massive encryption programs on your credstick by the RAW.
| QUOTE |
Clothing would be rating 1 devices, which means you can run rating 1 programs. |
But if you do, your number of active programs = System, which reduces Response by 1. System is limited to no more than Response, so, again, you crash the clothes. Much like a modern-day iPod, System 1 devices, without signifciant modification, can only use their built-in features.
| QUOTE |
| As for my tiered network example perhaps i should explain. If i have 10 nodes and use my commlink to go from 1-10 in a LEGAL fashion (I have all the access codes to my own gear) this mean that anyone who wants access to my commlink has to hack each and every one of my 10 nodes before getting to TRY to hack my commlink. |
Ah, I see. Well, as mentioned above, you can't actually run programs on your clothes--although upgraded System 2 clothes are certainly possible. However, all someone actually has to do, as long as all the nodes are wireless, is analyze the traffic, identify the node right before your clothes, then break the signal encryption and spoof commands to it, commands like "add me to your subscriber list".
| QUOTE |
They cannot skip the chain and attack directly, this is how most corporations defend their own computer systems through several tiered nodes. This example is how you can have the same thing on a much smaller scale. |
Most corps have non-wireless portions of their network, otherwise this architecture only changes the method of attack.
| QUOTE |
The response issue isn't quite clear but there is something wrong if you cannot even use 1 legal little edit program on your Meta Link Commlink without it crashing |
Presumably, if you've got a Meta Link, you only use it for very basic features, like broadcasting your SIN.
| QUOTE |
Someone said it reduced Response TESTS which would be a lot more logical, but that has yet to be clarified, and if one calculates from teh NEW Reponse value or from the original one. |
Whatever "someone" said, the RAW says that your Response itself is reduced. I agree, a clarification would be nice, so that running 9 programs on a Response 5 comm doesn't crash it--more than 5 reduces Response by 1, to 4, which makes 9 double your System, so -2, and now your System is 3, -3, for zero.
Frankly, though, running more than one or two programs over System ought to have a significant effect. It's a rule badly in need of an FAQ, however.
| QUOTE (The Jopp) |
The main problem with uploading agents comes with the actual rules for them. Agents can carry programs, Agents ARE program. Thus, agents can carry other agents. Here’s the problem though. 1: Can an agent carry a program loaded agent? I see a gamebreaker here since that would mean that a rating 4 agent could carry 4 agents with 4 programs each which in turn could carry another agent each and so on… Let’s assume that they can only carry a TOTAL of 4 programs, and not an army of layered agents. Carrying another agent with 4 programs loaded should count against its response. 2: IF they carry another agent, how would it upload it? Would it upload 1 program at a time TO the agent? Agent uploads agent and then it continues to upload Stealth, Attack and Armour to it. Or does it upload an agent with the entire load of programs at once? I would say that if loaded in a characters persona, the character upload agent AND its payload at once. If an agent want to upload a program by itself to the node it is active on then it would have to upload one program at a time, transferring a copy of it to the new agent. |
If an agent can carry other agents, shouldn't it work the same way that it does for a decker if for no other reason then simplicity. I would rather see a rule that states agents cannot carry agents at all, then special rules for agents on how they carry other agents.
Another interesting question would be whether an agent even can load other agents on a node or if they must remain loaded on the agent. ... Actually that introduces an interesting train of though; pardon my digression here:
There are actually two entities that we call agents. There is the Agent(program) which is the pilot program plus it's loaded programs, that when run creates Agent(matrix drone) which is what we interact with.
When a decker loads the Agent(program), a complex action, the Agent(matrix drone) is actually loaded into the hackers active memory (or on the node) and now at the command of the decker. When you load a program on an Agent, you load it into the agent's memory, so wouldn't that mean the Agent actually gets an Agent(matrix drone) and not a copy of the Agent(program). This would mean that the agent has another agent following it and its commands. If it could upload an agent to a node, it would merely be placing the Agent(matrix drone) that it currently has on the node and could only do that once (since it doesn't have the Agent(program) it could not load a new Agent(matrix drone) into memory.
Of course I could just be misunderstanding things.
| QUOTE |
With that logic one could say that you as a hacker wouldn't be able to see your own uploaded agents. |
You can, so long as they're subscribed to you, and thus you're able to communicate with them and bypass their Stealth. Cain is trying to wiggle around the subscriber rules by loading autonomous agents and telling them to coordinate actions without their actually talking to one another.
| QUOTE |
| 1: Can an agent carry a program loaded agent? I see a gamebreaker here since that would mean that a rating 4 agent could carry 4 agents with 4 programs each which in turn could carry another agent each and so on… Let’s assume that they can only carry a TOTAL of 4 programs, and not an army of layered agents. Carrying another agent with 4 programs loaded should count against its response. |
The actual response is that it shouldn't be able to carry other agents. You just can't fit an agent program inside of another agent program. Simple enough, and since we have to make a ruling outside of RAW, anyway, I think that's the one to go with.
| QUOTE |
| 2: IF they carry another agent, how would it upload it? Would it upload 1 program at a time TO the agent? Agent uploads agent and then it continues to upload Stealth, Attack and Armour to it. Or does it upload an agent with the entire load of programs at once? |
An independent agent must have any programs it's carrying already active (p. 228). You load them when you offload it onto a node.
The answer to the agent-within-the-agent is, again, ridiculous without ruling that they can't carry copies of themselves around.
| QUOTE |
| I would say that if loaded in a characters persona, the character upload agent AND its payload at once. If an agent want to upload a program by itself to the node it is active on then it would have to upload one program at a time, transferring a copy of it to the new agent. |
Agents, again, when acting independently, don't load programs onto the node, they load them onto themselves.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| But if they're on a commlink, they can go anywhere a decker can. |
..and leave the commlink.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| If you're keeping them as part of your program load, they can still move about the Matrix. |
..with your Persona only, which is tied to the commlink you are controlling directly.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| And if you use them to launch massive teamwork hacking tests, you'll get admin access every time; this allows you to penetrate to the next node, and bring them through. |
..just the response of that node will limit them, as they just left their commlinks.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| Lather, rinse, repeat. |
Given the rules, it's just "rinse."
| QUOTE |
| An agent mimicing another agent is not "coordination". |
If drones can be preprogrammed to launch a coordinated attack, agents can be preprogrammed to do the same thing. Heck, if multiple deckers can do it, the multiple agents can as well-- and you definitely do not have to be subscribed to an icon to communicate with it.
| QUOTE |
| Hopefully, your agents are all running stealth, but that means that they can't even see each other without breaking Simon's stealth program. |
Stealth hides a personal from Firewall, Analyze, and Track, not all forms of matrix perception (p 227). You can still see, and communicate with, an icon under Stealth, without having to make any sort of roll at all. Agents are more than intelligent enough to know the difference between friendly icons and nonfriendly ones, and a Stealth program won't interfere with that at all.
| QUOTE |
| Ah, no. When you run even one program on something with a System Rating of 1, you drop the Response by 1--in this case, to zero. System is limited to no more than Response, so you've just crashed your OS. That's not to say you can't Encrypt signals between your commlink and your clothes; you can and should. You do so by running Encrypt on the commlink, though, and not on every piece of clothing. |
You're right, but the system doesn't totally crash-- it still gets its full Firewall rating. That will slow down any invading decker significantly.
| QUOTE |
| Well, as mentioned above, you can't actually run programs on your clothes--although upgraded System 2 clothes are certainly possible. However, all someone actually has to do, as long as all the nodes are wireless, is analyze the traffic, identify the node right before your clothes, then break the signal encryption and spoof commands to it, commands like "add me to your subscriber list". |
Actually, the dirty trick would be to only have the "outside" item with a free slot on the subscription list. A rating 1 device can only be actively subscribed to 2 items at a time, which means that it can't be hacked by items off that list. That means that each piece past the first would be tied up, linking to the piece before and after it. Since all the subsciption slots are tied up, you can't break into the network in the first place, unless you go through the "front door".
| QUOTE | ||
But if they're on a commlink, they can go anywhere a decker can.
|
But they haven't left their commlink. They still count against its program load.
| QUOTE |
If drones can be preprogrammed to launch a coordinated attack, agents can be preprogrammed to do the same thing. Heck, if multiple deckers can do it, the multiple agents can as well-- and you definitely do not have to be subscribed to an icon to communicate with it. |
Any drones used in a coordinated attack should be part of the rigger's network, and thus subscribed to one another, and thus able to communicate.
| QUOTE |
and you definitely do not have to be subscribed to an icon to communicate with it. |
Saying a thing doesn't make it so.
| QUOTE |
| Stealth hides a personal from Firewall, Analyze, and Track, not all forms of matrix perception (p 227). You can still see, and communicate with, an icon under Stealth, without having to make any sort of roll at all. Agents are more than intelligent enough to know the difference between friendly icons and nonfriendly ones, and a Stealth program won't interfere with that at all. |
That's exactly what a Stealth program does. It "obfuscates activities", it "erases system tracks" and it "mimic[s] authorized traffic". You can perceive an icon that's using Stealth, but it appears to be an authorized icon within the local system, rather than what it is.
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but all forms of Matrix perception use the Analyze program (p. 217). Matrix perception is "usually limited" to things like "icons of nodes/users you are interacting with", which is the whole point of the subscriber list.
| QUOTE | ||
You're right, but the system doesn't totally crash-- it still gets its full Firewall rating. That will slow down any invading decker significantly. |
It might, but its Encryption program shuts down, which was the point of The Jopp's scheme.
| QUOTE |
| Actually, the dirty trick would be to only have the "outside" item with a free slot on the subscription list. A rating 1 device can only be actively subscribed to 2 items at a time, which means that it can't be hacked by items off that list. That means that each piece past the first would be tied up, linking to the piece before and after it. Since all the subsciption slots are tied up, you can't break into the network in the first place, unless you go through the "front door". |
You don't have to "break in" to the network if everything is set up wirelessly, you just have to analyze the traffic from one of the nodes and Spoof commands to the commlink. Particularly if the outer nodes are not Encrypting their traffic, that's going to be no trouble. If it's not wireless, then sure, but if you're using skinlink you're pretty well not going to be hacked in the first place.
| QUOTE | ||||
But they haven't left their commlink. They still count against its program load. |
You've misread p. 227. When it says that "Agents can also access other nodes independently", that's a separate ability from being able to run as part of your persona. Per the next page, in order to operate independently in the Matrix, and agent has to be offloaded onto a different node, with its own set of active programs. It's one or the other; an agent is either part of your persona, and accompanying you to the nodes you access, or it's offloaded independently, and needs to make or use its own access to travel the matrix.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| But they haven't left their commlink. They still count against its program load. |
If they are acting on their own, they leave and are subject to the processing limits of the Node.
If they are loaded into the Hackers Persona, they stay and are subject to the processing limits of his main commlink.
Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
| QUOTE | ||
Saying a thing doesn't make it so. |
If that were true, you'd never have to worry about Spam Zones, since your active list would be loaded up in seconds. There is nothing suggesting that you have to be subscribed to a persona or icon to communicate with it-- just nodes, agents, and drones. The catch is, agents are autonomous enough to follow along without communicating.
| QUOTE |
| That's exactly what a Stealth program does. It "obfuscates activities", it "erases system tracks" and it "mimic[s] authorized traffic". You can perceive an icon that's using Stealth, but it appears to be an authorized icon within the local system, rather than what it is. |
No. What it does is this: it prevents you from using Track and Analyze, and it interferes with Firewalls. If your icon looks like a twenty-ton death machine, you're not going to look like an authorized user, unless you're playing BOLO XXXI. The assumption is that all deckers will automatically swap out their icons for something appropriate to the run; the same presumably applies to your agents. Stealth does not affect your icon; that's what the Swap Icon free action is all about (p 212).
| QUOTE |
| You don't have to "break in" to the network if everything is set up wirelessly, you just have to analyze the traffic from one of the nodes and Spoof commands to the commlink. Particularly if the outer nodes are not Encrypting their traffic, that's going to be no trouble |
First of all, Spoof only affects Drones, Agents, and datatrails. Second, you still need to make a successful matrix perception test , and the device gets its full Firewall to defend with. Third, your argument is that you need to be subscribed to the device in order to communicate with it. If I'm reading you correctly, then the clothes are perfectly safe, since they can't add anything to their subscription list.
Also, in order to even detect the clothing, if you set it into Hidden mode an enemy will need to make an Electronic Warfare + Scan (15) test. That alone will delay any invading decker by quite a bit.
| QUOTE |
| You've misread p. 227. When it says that "Agents can also access other nodes independently", that's a separate ability from being able to run as part of your persona. Per the next page, in order to operate independently in the Matrix, and agent has to be offloaded onto a different node, with its own set of active programs. |
The problem is, a commlink counts as a node in its own right. If you offload an agent into a different commlink, it can still operate autonomously as part of that commlink's persona.
| QUOTE (Cain) |
| The problem is, a commlink counts as a node in its own right. If you offload an agent into a different commlink, it can still operate autonomously as part of that commlink's persona. |
Just, without being controled by someone, that Persona is a sitting duck.
| QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) | ||
Just, without being controled by someone, that Persona is a sitting duck. |
Except that agents are perfectly intelligent enough to defend themselves, and can operate autonomously of your persona, with or without being offloaded. For example, you can order an agent loaded into your persona to attack while you disarm a data bomb.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.