Wasabi
Sep 12 2005, 04:49 PM
He-Man can hack a commlink and then unsubscribe the poor sap carrying it and then subscribe himself. His own commlink and the target commlink must both be within each other's signal range.
Once the target commlink is hacked He-Man uploads his hacking programs and uses the target commlink to hack into building security which is within the target commlink's range but not his own personal commlink's signal range.
He-Man now has 1 global PAN (so he can be hacked and traced normally) but his range is now based on the signal rating of *either* commlink.
This seems valid to me, am I missing anything? The only thing I can think of is that a commlink subscribing a second commlink would violate the only-one-firewall rule, which possibly would require unloading the firewall on the target commlink (its a program, after all) and then hacking in using his personal commlink's firewall as the PAN firewall.
Legit or not?
apple
Sep 12 2005, 04:53 PM
It seems legit.
SYL
Dashifen
Sep 12 2005, 04:58 PM
Has a good beat, I can dance to it. Applications of the technique may need to be carefully prepared in advance, and the wallpaper or paint or whatever it was that reduced wireless signals within a building could put a big crutch in pulling this one off. Plus, if you dump the original person from their commlink, wouldn't they notice? And, I'd definately apply the +6 for admin access to the commlink (as it's an everday device and thus only has amin access).
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 12 2005, 05:05 PM
Keep in mind that the hacked commlink will usually have a smaller Response rating, though - so limiting the usage of all Programs.
RunnerPaul
Sep 12 2005, 05:33 PM
Conceptually, I like the feel of this. Very much reminds me of the present day technique of pwning some poor n00b's computer and turning it into a zombie box to launch your nefarious schemes from.
Though these days, it's usually hundreds of poorly secured boxes getting co-opted all at once by a virus or other malware, and then the whole colection of pwned machines being used for a distributed attack.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 12 2005, 05:38 PM
..that would be inserting Agents into named systems, and subscribing them as one... sweet.
Talking about repeaters... yet I missed a single device just boosting signal strenght.
Shouldn't it be possible though, to just use a comlink a booster station?
(This becoms relevant to users of implanted commlinks, as their signal rating should be limited to 2)
Lindt
Sep 12 2005, 05:54 PM
But suddenly the idea of hacking 200 people acros the city and creating your own WAN seems wicked entertaining.
kigmatzomat
Sep 12 2005, 07:33 PM
Could also work as a decoy; give the troll a spare comm to carry around just for use as a relay. You can stash an Agent program on the spare instructed to crash the system or shut down all communication in the case of a breach. Maybe add a biomonitor to the link so if you passout it'll be able to shut things down. Should you get dropped by BlackOut/Hammer, any security that tries to access your Comm will have a nasty surprise.
And the reason I give it to the troll is in case they get a GPS fix on it via triangulation or breaking into it.
mfb
Sep 12 2005, 07:51 PM
99% of the time, the signal rating of your commlink isn't going to matter. that's the whole point of mesh networking; everybody in the mesh acts as a mini-repeater as your packets get routed to where you want them to go. there's no real need to even unsubscribe the main user (and if you do, he'll just reset his commlink and boot you anyway), you can already accomplish the same level of anonymity just by spoofing your datatrail. it's a neat, clever way to do something that's already possible through much simpler means.
Slacker
Sep 12 2005, 07:55 PM
QUOTE (Lindt) |
But suddenly the idea of hacking 200 people acros the city and creating your own WAN seems wicked entertaining. |
QUOTE (*SR4 p. 212 last paragraph of Linking and Subscribing) |
In game terms, your persona maintains a subscription list of nodes that you are accessing and that are allowed to establish communication with you. The subscription list may be unlimited in size, but the number of nodes, agents or drones that a persona may actively subscribe to (access) at any one time is limited to the persona's System x 2 |
That means you won't be accessing anywhere close to 200 people.
Dashifen
Sep 12 2005, 08:01 PM
Not without 20 of your closest friends
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 12 2005, 08:02 PM
Yes, you can - you can subscribe multiple Agents or Drones as one Subsription...
mfb
Sep 12 2005, 08:02 PM
actually, you could create a seperate-from-the-Matrix mesh network comprised solely of the commlinks you've hacked. just subscribe them to other commlinks you've hacked, which subscribe to yet others, which eventually you have subscribed.
granted, though, this network will take about six seconds to fall apart. that's about how long it takes to do a perception check to notice your commlink's on the fritz, and then reset it.
RunnerPaul
Sep 12 2005, 08:04 PM
QUOTE (Slacker @ Sep 12 2005, 02:55 PM) |
QUOTE (*SR4 p. 212 last paragraph of Linking and Subscribing) | In game terms, your persona maintains a subscription list of nodes that you are accessing and that are allowed to establish communication with you. The subscription list may be unlimited in size, but the number of nodes, agents or drones that a persona may actively subscribe to (access) at any one time is limited to the persona's System x 2 |
That means you won't be accessing anywhere close to 200 people.
|
Ah, but if you can only access System x 2 other comlinks, couldn't those comlinks also access that comlink's System x 2? Besides, we've seen examples in the past where limitations on how many things you can have on your subscriber network were bypassed; Deus had many more remote drones than would normally be allowed, springs to mind.
As for the comlink's owner noticing that something's wrong with their comlink, couldn't you set up some sort of Virtual Machine that made it look like everything was ok, just running slower?
Dashifen
Sep 12 2005, 08:09 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Yes, you can - you can subscribe multiple Agents or Drones as one Subsription... |
But you have to command them all to do the same thing. If you wanted those agents or drones to be doing different tasks, then it's 1 to 1 for subscriptions to drone/agent.
RunnerPaul
Sep 12 2005, 08:27 PM
QUOTE (Dashifen) |
But you have to command them all to do the same thing. If you wanted those agents or drones to be doing different tasks, then it's 1 to 1 for subscriptions to drone/agent. |
Depending on what you wanted to use a large network of hijacked comlinks for, this might not be a problem.
Dashifen
Sep 12 2005, 08:27 PM
Good point
Kesh
Sep 12 2005, 09:16 PM
My big problem is that, once you unsubscribe the poor sap, he's going to be wondering why his AR glasses just went dead, he's not recieving messages, etc. and reboot the system. Meaning you'd have a minute or two to use the hacked unit before you're booted off again.
Wasabi
Sep 12 2005, 10:21 PM
So it most valid for a team of shadowrunners who are geographically seperated. Sort of a leap-frog thing.
Elldren
Sep 12 2005, 11:23 PM
Hooray! Zombie-bot DDOS attack networks of the future!
RunnerPaul
Sep 13 2005, 12:23 AM
QUOTE (Kesh) |
My big problem is that, once you unsubscribe the poor sap, he's going to be wondering why his AR glasses just went dead, he's not recieving messages, etc. and reboot the system. Meaning you'd have a minute or two to use the hacked unit before you're booted off again. |
Again, I ask, wouldn't it be possible to set up a Virtual Machine that duplicates the functions that the comlink was providing for its legitimate user, but with a diminished processing capcity? Sure the guy might notice that his response has gone sluggish, but it'd be less obvious than a total loss of functionality.
kigmatzomat
Sep 13 2005, 02:11 AM
I think the easier thing to do is not do anything to alert the user. The zombie-spam bots work just fine for the idiot Comcast user who wants to get email and surf the web for porn. It may be a tad bit slower at times but he won't really be able to tell that it's not the sites he's visiting.
From my read of the rules, the use of a Comm's standard functions cause no load. Meaning you can have your AR glasses, headphones, gloves, and walk around IM-ing, listening to "the radio", etc without running a single System-draining application. Hackers will have full use of the CPU for their own nefarious needs. At the very worst, they'll be at Response-1.
hahnsoo
Sep 13 2005, 02:14 AM
QUOTE (Kesh) |
My big problem is that, once you unsubscribe the poor sap, he's going to be wondering why his AR glasses just went dead, he's not recieving messages, etc. and reboot the system. Meaning you'd have a minute or two to use the hacked unit before you're booted off again. |
I can imagine a scenario where the runners knock out a scientist/guard/lackey and then the hacker does exactly what is stated above. The commlink would still be on (perhaps not if it was a cyber-commlink, but you'd select a target with a non-cyber one anyway), and the hacker can masquerade as the lackey's commlink that way in secured internal systems. If it gets traced, it goes back to the lackey (dumped into a convenient closet somewhere).
mfb
Sep 13 2005, 04:22 AM
meh. easier to just copy his account info onto your commlink. unless they've got some kind of special hardware built in, the network won't be able to differentiate.
hahnsoo
Sep 13 2005, 04:25 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
meh. easier to just copy his account info onto your commlink. unless they've got some kind of special hardware built in, the network won't be able to differentiate. |
Well, spoofing a datatrail only adds +1 per hit to the threshold on a trace. Using his commlink to do operations just makes it so that if they do trace you, it will go back to the dupe's location instead of you and your team's.
mfb
Sep 13 2005, 06:54 AM
the datatrail doesn't stop at that commlink. if they've got a trace running, they'll notice the link to your commlink.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 13 2005, 07:32 AM
QUOTE (hahnsoo) |
Well, spoofing a datatrail only adds +1 per hit to the threshold on a trace. |
Oddly, this only can be done when a trace is just running...
hahnsoo
Sep 13 2005, 07:51 AM
QUOTE (mfb) |
the datatrail doesn't stop at that commlink. if they've got a trace running, they'll notice the link to your commlink. |
That's only if they successfully hack into the commlink that they are tracing, assuming you are using the dupe's commlink persona to do your dirty work (and thus, that commlink's OS). Remember, Trace only tracks a persona icon back to its original source, using that persona's datatrail. Once they've traced your dupe's persona that you are controlling, they can attempt to hack the dupe's commlink, and gain access to any connections that the commlink is connected to, including your commlink. However, the initial response would probably be sending the troops in to the physical location of the persona's originating commlink, which would still be the dupe's commlink.
This won't work if you are using your own persona and own OS (originating from your own commlink), and I know there are GMs whose heads are probably imploding right now. But this would be similar to the rules for uploading Agents into another node rather than running it off of your persona, as Agents aren't linked back to you unless they are loaded from your persona. Heck, alternatively, you can even spoof your datatrail to match someone else's Access ID (a simple Hacking + Spoof (2) test) to do pretty much the same thing, and you don't even have to hack their commlink. When the heat goes down, just switch off your commlink or go into Hidden mode. When they search for the particular Access ID you've spoofed, they'll get your dupe.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 13 2005, 11:05 AM
QUOTE (Dashifen) |
Good point |
Especially if you keep in mind the reduction of Response by running Programs:
If you command those hundred of Frames to log/hack into a certain system, all at once...
mfb
Sep 13 2005, 03:16 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
Oddly, this only can be done when a trace is just running... |
are you sure? that seems silly.
QUOTE (hahnsoo) |
That's only if they successfully hack into the commlink that they are tracing, assuming you are using the dupe's commlink persona to do your dirty work (and thus, that commlink's OS). |
hm. i suppose. it still seems like a very limited-use trick, given
a) how easy it would be for the owner of the hacked commlink to just reboot;
b) how unlikely it is that the commlink you've hacked will have sufficient system and response to run your programs;
c) how long it will take, given (a), to upload your programs.
hacking commlinks can be pretty handy, though, especially in cybercombat (if you can escape cybercombat for a few passes). for instance, you can load an IC frame onto their system, forcing them into cybercombat in multiple nodes, which really sucks for them. you can delete their programs. you can go for the throat and force a reboot.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 13 2005, 03:31 PM
QUOTE (mfb) |
are you sure? that seems silly. |
Kinda. *shrugs*
It is defined as feeding false infos to the trace... the Stealth Program works as a precaution, though, reducing their dicepool.
Elldren
Sep 13 2005, 04:39 PM
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig) |
QUOTE (mfb) | are you sure? that seems silly. |
Kinda. *shrugs*
It is defined as feeding false infos to the trace... the Stealth Program works as a precaution, though, reducing their dicepool.
|
But the trace wouldn't necessarily have to be running yet. Since the trace isn't actively requesting info from the hacker's commlink (Well, at least not until he's completely fragged it isn't), feeding false info to the program would consist mostly of leaving false info in the places the trace program would be looking for it.
hahnsoo
Sep 13 2005, 06:33 PM
QUOTE (mfb) |
hm. i suppose. it still seems like a very limited-use trick, given
a) how easy it would be for the owner of the hacked commlink to just reboot; |
Yup, which is why I said you should knock the dupe out first.
QUOTE |
b) how unlikely it is that the commlink you've hacked will have sufficient system and response to run your programs; c) how long it will take, given (a), to upload your programs. |
Probably. But it would only take a Complex Action at the most (maybe one Complex Action per program, to be fair) to do it. It's something that you do if you have time on your hands to prepare and want to be all clever and shit. Not something you are doing when you are going for speed and in a pressure situation.
Rotbart van Dainig
Sep 13 2005, 06:40 PM
When run on an system with insufficient Response/System, Programs just are reduced in Rating - they run nonetheless.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.