Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 16:32:39 +1000
Adam J writes:
>With my interpretation, you need your own account just to log onto
>Shadowland, the only way to get an active account is to prove yourself,
>generally by finding something of value for the sysop or the userbase --
>something I would prefer handled through role-playing...


Gee... and here I thought the best way to prove yourself would be to
_create_ your own account (wasn't there a line in one of the books about how
if you could get onto Shadowland, then you had a right to be there...?).

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 2
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 23:49:13 -0700
At 16:32 12/02/98 +1000, you wrote:

>>With my interpretation, you need your own account just to log onto
>>Shadowland, the only way to get an active account is to prove yourself,
>>generally by finding something of value for the sysop or the userbase --
>>something I would prefer handled through role-playing...

>Gee... and here I thought the best way to prove yourself would be to
>_create_ your own account (wasn't there a line in one of the books about how
>if you could get onto Shadowland, then you had a right to be there...?).

Somethign in Denver, I think. I'll read the appropriate section tonight.
(Yeah, I'm like, studying, or something.)
While creating your own account may be an 'elite' way to prove you deserve
access, I don't imagine Shadowland would appreciate it -- after all, who
says you're going to use it properly? Of course, if you *did* tell them,
and they fixed the hole you exploited, you would probably be granted a
legit account for helping them out.

It almost sounds to much like real life.

-Adam
-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ AdamJ@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
The Shadowrun Archive Co-Maintainer: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun
Message no. 3
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 16:57:49 +1000
>>Gee... and here I thought the best way to prove yourself would be to
>>_create_ your own account (wasn't there a line in one of the books about
how
>>if you could get onto Shadowland, then you had a right to be there...?).
>
>Somethign in Denver, I think. I'll read the appropriate section tonight.
>(Yeah, I'm like, studying, or something.)
>While creating your own account may be an 'elite' way to prove you deserve
>access, I don't imagine Shadowland would appreciate it -- after all, who
>says you're going to use it properly? Of course, if you *did* tell them,
>and they fixed the hole you exploited, you would probably be granted a
>legit account for helping them out.


Umm... that's not quite what I meant. What I meant was that to get into
Shadowland, you'd probably have to use some sort of back door, or other
decker "trick". Nothing too fancy, just enough to filter out the lamers...

If you hacked a REAL account on Shadowland (not just a general user
account), then they'd be annoyed. Mind you, the Neon Antichrist from NAGRL
got a job by doing that... :)

>It almost sounds to much like real life.

It does, doesn't it? "I sentence you to 5 years jail, suspended, a fine of
$50,000, and a job that will pay that much in the first five weeks with the
company you hacked into."


--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 4
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 05:24:26 -0700
At 16:57 12/02/98 +1000, you wrote:

>>While creating your own account may be an 'elite' way to prove you deserve
>>access, I don't imagine Shadowland would appreciate it -- after all, who
>>says you're going to use it properly? Of course, if you *did* tell them,
>>and they fixed the hole you exploited, you would probably be granted a
>>legit account for helping them out.
>
>Umm... that's not quite what I meant. What I meant was that to get into
>Shadowland, you'd probably have to use some sort of back door, or other
>decker "trick". Nothing too fancy, just enough to filter out the lamers...

Inherent problem with this -- the "tricks" edventually filter down to the
lamers. Not exactly the same, but similar, is that little Windows OOB bug,
that caused so many blue screens last year. (If you have no idea what I'm
talking about, just nod your head.)

Obviously, it started out with one person finding a little exploit in MS's
code, then writing a program to exploit it -- after releasing the source, a
few dozen clones showed up, and everyone began to search for similar
exploits. Teardrop, SSPing, Smurf, etc.

Bring this theory into SR -- Node #1 has a hidden dataline to Node #2,
which if you enter and wait in for 5 minutes, another dataline will open to
Node #3, which grants you access to Shadowland. That's fine and dandy,
until some dork finds it out, tells all his lamer friends, posts it to
205x's equivalent of #hackers and www.IKanHackSoCanU4Dummies.com, and seven
thousand kiddies flood the node, crashing it, and pissing off the
Shadowland sysops.

The only way I could see this working is if the 'test' is changed Very
frequently, upwards of one time a day. Which means the sysops have to
spend time designing it, testing it, and patching it up after creating the
next one.

I like the idea of the decker having to do something of general worth for
the Shadowland community better..

>If you hacked a REAL account on Shadowland (not just a general user
>account), then they'd be annoyed. Mind you, the Neon Antichrist from NAGRL
>got a job by doing that... :)

Has any FASA book even mentioned different access levels to Shadowland?
(Aside from the Companions absolute bullshit about anyone with computer: 2
taking it for a contact?)
I think I've read every major source that regards the Matrix, and haven't
found it.. which of course means I've written my own, which is sitting in
my trusty binder on the kitchen table, which really needs to be transformed
into a laptop computer ;)

>>It almost sounds to much like real life.
>
>It does, doesn't it? "I sentence you to 5 years jail, suspended, a fine of
>$50,000, and a job that will pay that much in the first five weeks with the
>company you hacked into."

Damn. Now I wish I could hack ;)

-Adam
-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ AdamJ@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
The Shadowrun Archive Co-Maintainer: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun
Message no. 5
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 08:51:31 EST
In a message dated 98-02-12 01:49:19 EST, fro@***.AB.CA writes:

> Somethign in Denver, I think. I'll read the appropriate section tonight.
> (Yeah, I'm like, studying, or something.)
> While creating your own account may be an 'elite' way to prove you deserve
> access, I don't imagine Shadowland would appreciate it -- after all, who
> says you're going to use it properly? Of course, if you *did* tell them,
> and they fixed the hole you exploited, you would probably be granted a
> legit account for helping them out.

I remember it in there as well, but don't have the lights up enough to read a
book by at the moment. However, I think that there is part of the matrix
sleazing/deceiving that would be tricky. If a consistent update check was
running on the user/superuser logs, then things would get really tough...

> It almost sounds to much like real life.

Oh now don't go there Adam...

-K
Message no. 6
From: Da Twink Daddy <twinkie@*******.DMSC.K12.AR.US>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:07:46 -0600
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>


<snip: Get into ShadowLand via dumbass lamer tricks.>

>The only way I could see this working is if the 'test' is changed Very
>frequently, upwards of one time a day. Which means the sysops have to
>spend time designing it, testing it, and patching it up after creating the
>next one.
>
>I like the idea of the decker having to do something of general worth for
>the Shadowland community better..


Well, Your way would work adam and probably be better. IIRC ShadowLand's LTG
changes upwards of once a week. Actuall subscribers are gieven the addy of
the next jump in advance. Even if the "backdoor" doesn't change in form
every time they change LTG's you still have a lot of possibliites I mean..
even with a simple 3 node scheme like you have, think of how many combo's of
nodes there are. them, when the SysOps get tired of that old trick they
design a new, different (it does HAVE to be harder but it could be)
backdoor. Now there also another way to do that but, I'm gonna put that in
another post.

>>If you hacked a REAL account on Shadowland (not just a general user
>>account), then they'd be annoyed. Mind you, the Neon Antichrist from NAGRL
>>got a job by doing that... :)


I wou think so, wouldn't you want a hacker that good on YOUR side.

>>>It almost sounds to much like real life.
>>
>>It does, doesn't it? "I sentence you to 5 years jail, suspended, a fine of
>>$50,000, and a job that will pay that much in the first five weeks with
the
>>company you hacked into."
>
>Damn. Now I wish I could hack ;)


I think I'll just go though college and not have the felony on my record...
'course it won't be as COOL as Shadowland, but it will pay well.
Message no. 7
From: Da Twink Daddy <twinkie@*******.DMSC.K12.AR.US>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:54:52 -0600
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>


>Justin Miland writes:
>>Hi, all. Just a question for all of you out there on a matter of opinion.
>>If a decker was going to access a public database (say, SeaSource,
provided
>by
>>Renraku), do you think they would need to do any system operations/fight
>>IC/etc. just to gain a few small answers from the database? My guess is
>no,


Okay, here's how it works to my understanding, If you deck in from a
illegally. That is buy not using a passcode, using an access utility (or
whatever). You have to test for anyhting you attempt to do, you are an
unknown entity and will be treated as such. However, if you login via a
passcode (planted or not) this passocde is good for certain actions in
certain systems, if you perform any actions beyond these you must make a
test. Otherwise you don't, it just works.

Optional: If any user attempts to perform an action which requires a test
(unauthorized) and fails, that user instantly has all privaledges revoked.
(All actions become unauthorized) This is to reflect that corps know
datasteals can come from the inside and that passcode can be planted.

>>Or, even more difficult: What about
>>Shadowland? Does it take IC/System ops/etc. to browse/read/post on
>>Shadowland, or is that only necessary if they try to hack the system


>Yes and no... The way I've always pictured Shadowland is that there's one
>system (low security) which lets you browse, make comments, etc, and
another
>(much higher security) system which you'd have to crack if you want to
>remove a file.


I was Like this line of thought and agree with it. However I would do a
three tier system. If someone logs on (legal or illegal) they are in the
first VM (See: VR2) probably some wuss green system that only really allows
read-only. Once a "higher action" is preformed (even somethign like a
comment), if they are legal they are bumped though to the next VM and Orange
(or Red) that isn't a pushover. If they are illegal redo the access test
using the rating of the 2nd level. If it fails... do as a normal VM, the
decker can "make" his tests vs the Green system and probably succeed but,
his actions won't actually do anything. He'll think they did (seeing his
comment appear) but, none else will and if he closes the file and then opens
it again, he'll notice that his comment isn't there anymore and neither is
the message <deleted by SysOp>. Anyway, then if "SysOp" level operations
are
performed access is tested against the highest level host (a Red [or Violet]
that is kick-your-ass-and-fry-your-brain deadly.) If legal (a real SysOp)
bumped up to next security clearance and everythin works fine. If illegal do
the secret access check again against the highest security (no pushover this
is serious stuff here). Deal with this illegal stuff as before, actions seem
to work but don't. This should give a fairly realistic view of Shadowland,
esp. when you add in my moving LTG scheme from the other post.
Message no. 8
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 13:40:54 -0500
Much stuff about accessing Shadowland snipped...

Isn't there a mention in the Shadowrun Companion that, for game rules,
finding Shadowland is a measure of Etiquette: Matrix? That for the
published rules anyway, the ability to get to Shadowland has a lot more to
do with who you know, what sites you know about, and Shadowland procedures.
Sure, some twonk may be a wiz with his Fairlight deck, but if he doesn't
know anything about the decker community, he may not even know Shadowland
exists! Look at today; if I don't know a site's URL, if I don't know where
to look for it (like I'm a schmuck who thinks Yahoo! is a real search
engine or something) and if I don't know anyone who's been there, how the
heck am I supposed to get there? Doesn't matter if I have access to a
fraggin' Cray supercomputer!

Given the stated fact that Shadowland is constantly changing addresses and
passwords, this makes sense to me. It's a moving target; if you don't know
where it is, you can't hit it (unlike the almost every other system, like
the megacorps, which have to stay in one spot so employees, et al, can
access it).

Everyone sees the Etiquette skill in their own way, and if you want to rule
that Matrix Etiquette and decking skill are somehow tied together (in order
to use the previously posted means of backdoors, code breaking and so on),
then fine. No problem. No argument from me.

Since I'm at work, could someone confirm this, with page number, from the
Companion?

Later,

Erik J.
known a long time ago in a e-mail account far, far away, as...
list.member.grumpy
Message no. 9
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries)
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998 08:54:37 +1000
Adam J writes:
>Bring this theory into SR -- Node #1 has a hidden dataline to Node #2,
>which if you enter and wait in for 5 minutes, another dataline will open to
>Node #3, which grants you access to Shadowland. That's fine and dandy,
>until some dork finds it out, tells all his lamer friends, posts it to
>205x's equivalent of #hackers and www.IKanHackSoCanU4Dummies.com, and seven
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
For the interested parties, no, this domain name does not exist... yet. :)

>thousand kiddies flood the node, crashing it, and pissing off the
>Shadowland sysops.


In one of the sourcebooks (can't remember which, admittedly) this happened.

>The only way I could see this working is if the 'test' is changed Very
>frequently, upwards of one time a day. Which means the sysops have to
>spend time designing it, testing it, and patching it up after creating the
>next one.


The access nodes change regularly. The basic tricks of the trade to get in
probably change less frequently, allowing for better testing, but the
entrance route does change. Node #1 gets replaced by Node #9, node #2 hops
over to Node #53, and Node #3 is swapped with Node #1024.

>I like the idea of the decker having to do something of general worth for
>the Shadowland community better..
>
>>If you hacked a REAL account on Shadowland (not just a general user
>>account), then they'd be annoyed. Mind you, the Neon Antichrist from NAGRL
>>got a job by doing that... :)
>
>Has any FASA book even mentioned different access levels to Shadowland?
>(Aside from the Companions absolute bullshit about anyone with computer: 2
>taking it for a contact?)
>I think I've read every major source that regards the Matrix, and haven't
>found it.. which of course means I've written my own, which is sitting in
>my trusty binder on the kitchen table, which really needs to be transformed
>into a laptop computer ;)


Well... you can edit comments, etc, but not the source material. So there's
differing levels of access. Presumably sysadmins have different access
levels than normal users. But no, it's not formally laid out anywhere.

When you do transfer that trusty binder, let us know... should be
interesting. :) As for my own purposes... I hardly ever have deckers in the
group these days (too much time and effort spent on one player... one day
I'll do an all decker group, and let rip), but when I did, "accounts" on
Shadowland just meant they were notified when the access nodes were
shifting, and so on.

(Does taking Shadowland as a Contact mean you don't need to make the
Etiquette (Matrix) tests to find it?)

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Shadowland (was Re: Matrix Queries), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!