Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: tzeentch666@*********.net (Tzeentch)
Subject: Wireless Networking
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 12:31:05 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
The concerns about deckers hacking your smartlink seem a bit overstated. Yes, SR4 did go a
bit off the wireless deep end in some respects, but it specifically points out some of the
possible associated problems (for example, the sidebars on p. SR224, 304). I may be have
blocked it from my mind, but I don't really see where it says that cyberlimbs and such can
just be grabbed from your control; p. SR330 notes cyberware has wireless functionality,
but it seems odd to say a hacker can make you punch yourself - although I would *highly*
suspect that is EXACTLY what the writers actually intended (to give hackers more to do, if
nothing else).

-- Run in hidden mode. Unless they know what to look for specifically (what that means is
open to interpretation) they need to do an Electronics Warfare+Scan (15+, 1 Combat Turn)
Extended Test.

-- Worried about some technomancer jimmying with your precious 'ware? Then turn off its
wireless capabilities. If it's a smartlink all you lose is the ability to activate the gun
remotely or recieve video imagery from your guncam. Which, when you think about it, is
about as useless as teeth on a chicken anyways. See pp. 311-312 for the smartgun system
description and the marginal use that wireless gives you. Use a skinlink (p. SR318) or
invest in a datajack for criminies sake :)

-- Hacking your cyberware in combat is only a major issue if a) you are broadcasting
publically, which only the tools in the opening fiction piece seem to think is a good ide,
b) the hacker has several combat turns to hack in with their +6 threshold number, or
c)your commlink Firewall is crap, in which case you deserve it.

-- If a hacker uses Crash Program/OS (p. SR223) as far as I can tell this mainly targets
your commlink. So big whup if that crashes. Unless you are totally relying on the wireless
feed to your 'ware this won't do anything. Smartlinks are not a software program, although
I suppose you could Crash Program (p. SR223 but a quick hack attempt has +6 threshold and
its an extended test -- and crashing your smartlink would just make it restart (no time
given).

-- Ok, so a hacker gets admin access to your commlink and somehow spoofs DNI signals to
your cyberarm and treats you to a case of self-asskicking. What to do?! Turning off your
wireless link is a simple action (p. SR304). How this exactly supposed to play out with
the rules for shutting down nodes is not clear to me. A good security precaution would
seem to be turning off your wireless link every few Combat Turns to screw over any
extended hacking attempts.

-- Worried about those pesky technomancers somehow magically (excuse me, cybermantically)
turning your wireless back on to hack it? Well foil those pesky mages, I mean otaku, I
mean technomancers by removing the wireless bits entirely (p. SR304).

-- As a note, it was possible to take over people's cyberware and punch them in the face
with it in CP2020 (with the release of Guide to the Net and the idea of micronets (read,
PANs).

Still digesting some of the new decking changes, so please let me know (with page
references if possible) if there are specifics I'm missing.
Message no. 2
From: raymacey@*****.com (Ray Macey)
Subject: Wireless Networking
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 05:53:01 +1000
On 10/4/05, Tzeentch <tzeentch666@*********.net> wrote:
> The concerns about deckers hacking your smartlink seem a bit overstated. Yes, SR4 did
> go a bit off the wireless deep end in some respects, but it specifically points out
some of
> the possible associated problems (for example, the sidebars on p. SR224, 304). I may
be
> have blocked it from my mind, but I don't really see where it says that cyberlimbs
and
> such can just be grabbed from your control;

It can't. The most you can do is "issue commands" to the cyberlimb,
and I doubt many limbs have a "punch user in the face" command. They
are likely to have a "shutdown for maintenence" command though.

If a hacker was really creative, I'd let him use the edit command and
feed in a pre created simsense/DNI feed to make an arm do something
against the users will, but it would need to be pre-created IMO. On
the fly editing is not capable of that kind of gross manipulation.

> -- Run in hidden mode. Unless they know what to look for specifically (what that
means is
> open to interpretation) they need to do an Electronics Warfare+Scan (15+, 1 Combat
> Turn) Extended Test.

Page 225 says "Finding a wireless node in hidden mode (see p. 211),
however, is more challenging. Even if you know what you're looking
for, you must still succeed in an Electronic Warfare + Scan (4) Test.
If you're just scanning for hidden nodes in general, or
trying to pick the hidden nodes out from the non-hidden one, make the
same Extended Test noted above but with a much higher threshold: 15+."

I think that is fairly clear that if you are trying to target the
commlink belonging to the street sam across the street, you only need
a threshold of 4. If you can't see a street sam, but figure there
might be one around, you can scan for a hidden node in general and
then once you get your 15 hits, you discover the commlink of the
streetsam lying in ambush

> -- Hacking your cyberware in combat is only a major issue if a) you are broadcasting
> publically, which only the tools in the opening fiction piece seem to think is a good
ide,

No it's not. Even if it's hidden, you can still be hacked without
/too/ much extra difficulty

> b) the hacker has several combat turns to hack in with their +6 threshold number, or
> c)your commlink Firewall is crap, in which case you deserve it.

Basically spot on :)

> -- If a hacker uses Crash Program/OS (p. SR223) as far as I can tell this mainly
targets
> your commlink. So big whup if that crashes. Unless you are totally relying on the
wireless
> feed to your 'ware this won't do anything. Smartlinks are not a software program,
although
> I suppose you could Crash Program (p. SR223 but a quick hack attempt has +6 threshold
> and its an extended test -- and crashing your smartlink would just make it restart
(no
> time given).

Note that it can crash an OS as well, which means basically any bit of
electronic equipment is open to being crashed, and that includes
smartlinks. Cyberware has a device rating of 3, which gives you a
threshold of 6 to crash the smartlink specifically. The smartlink
then requires 3 combat turns to reboot (device rating/system rating of
3)

I'm assuming that you don't need to hack the smartlink as a seperate
device because it is subscribed to your commlink, an thus part of your
PAN. The rules on page 212 /could/ be read so as to suggest that you
need to hack the commlink before you can then go on to hack the
smartlink, but that's not my interperatation

> A good security precaution
> would seem to be turning off your wireless link every few Combat Turns to screw over
any
> extended hacking attempts.

Any self respecting hacker could write a program to automate that
process for you I imagine :)

--
http://cyron.id.au
Message no. 3
From: tzeentch666@*********.net (Tzeentch)
Subject: Wireless Networking
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 19:25:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Ray Macey" <raymacey@*****.com>
[Hacking Cyberlimbs]
>It can't. The most you can do is "issue commands" to the cyberlimb,
>and I doubt many limbs have a "punch user in the face" command. They
>are likely to have a "shutdown for maintenence" command though.

-- I'm dubious that cyberlimbs have an excess of DNI commands they can be given, simply
from a safety and ease-of-use standpoint. Makes more sense that something like shutting
down your cyberlimb requires some physical intervention.
-- I'm pretty confident that it was an idea floating around in playtest (which I was not
involved in BTW) that you could grab cyberlimbs from user control by spoofing DNI commands
(move servo A 50 degrees, force 10, SMACK!) Otherwise why go to all this rigamarole by
making sure its understood that even inert cyberware has tags and wireless connectivity?
This is probably something to be shaken out for Unwired.

[Limb Control]
>If a hacker was really creative, I'd let him use the edit command and
>feed in a pre created simsense/DNI feed to make an arm do something
>against the users will, but it would need to be pre-created IMO. On
>the fly editing is not capable of that kind of gross manipulation.

-- If you're willing to allow cyberware hacking, then it's only a baby step to allowing
that sort of editing. A hacker can get into a system and have root access within 18
seconds in many cases. That's some serious speed and abstraction of capability.

[Hidden Nodes]
>I think that is fairly clear that if you are trying to target the
>commlink belonging to the street sam across the street, you only need
>a threshold of 4. If you can't see a street sam, but figure there
>might be one around, you can scan for a hidden node in general and
>then once you get your 15 hits, you discover the commlink of the
>streetsam lying in ambush

-- I took this to mean that you had some more information then just "there's a sammy
around here with a network", like you knew his network name or some other identifying
information. Simply scanning for hidden nodes around you could turn up dozens, even
thousands of connections from various devices.
-- The book is pretty vague in parts about how the mechanics play out :_

[Hidden Hacking]
>No it's not. Even if it's hidden, you can still be hacked without
>/too/ much extra difficulty

-- It takes considerably longer, which I imagine is an important point where time is nuyen
or blood. SR4 combats do not tend to drag on very long in my current experience, so at the
very least you're keeping their decker occupied trying to hack a *single* persons links
while his buddies do their business. And even if he succeeds it's pretty trivial to make
him start from step 0. You can still be hacked ahead of time, so do what it says in the
book and keep that junk disconnected until you need it.

-- Note that with the current rules there's no real difference between hosts and personal
networks, so your Firewall program will alert you if it detects intruders (this could
provide valuable intelligence -- meaning you may have been compromised in your mission or
a chance to nuke the intruder with some wizzer military IC you have installed).

[CRASHING OS]
>Note that it can crash an OS as well, which means basically any bit of
>electronic equipment is open to being crashed, and that includes
>smartlinks.

-- The rules are extremely vague and contradictory here, as it only takes a Simple Action
to turn an electronic device on or off. Just turn it off then back on again for two Simple
Actions (if we assume that part of the time for recovering from a crash is it sitting
there with a "blue screen" before the monitoring processes do the actual
reboot). As using Crash OS immediately sounds an alert you could save yourself some time
and just turn the device off right then - using the System Reset rules seems a bit daft
for firmware as theres really nothing to save or do housekeeping on before shutdown.

>Cyberware has a device rating of 3, which gives you a
>threshold of 6 to crash the smartlink specifically. The smartlink
>then requires 3 combat turns to reboot (device rating/system rating of
>3)

-- I don't think the reset rules were meant to apply to devices not running programs. Hard
to say though.

>I'm assuming that you don't need to hack the smartlink as a seperate
>device because it is subscribed to your commlink, an thus part of your
>PAN. The rules on page 212 /could/ be read so as to suggest that you
>need to hack the commlink before you can then go on to hack the
>smartlink, but that's not my interperatation

-- The rules and text say that the commlink is the gatekeeper (p. SR211 "Through your
commlink, PANs can be set to operate in three different modes" and p. SR210). I don't
immediately see how you can bypass the commlink entirely and directly hack the cyberware.
-- Even if that was the case you could unsubscribe your cyberware (really, it doesn't help
you much) and voila! Instant security. Of course, that depends on how draconian you want
to apply the linking and subscribing rules (p. SR212). "Nope, can't use your guncam
because you're already subscribed to your bone lacing diagnostics and three remote
nodes"

[Periodically Shutting down your link to prevent hacking]
Any self respecting hacker could write a program to automate that
process for you I imagine :)

-- The idea seems so simple that it might be wise to rule that deckers can use a Free
Action or Simple action to "save their session." As PANs can enter and leave
static zones and other areas I imagine there's something similar to allow quick reconnects
after interference or temporary signal loss.
-- Of course, what to do about the periodically rebooting PANs that change their
commcodes... :)
Message no. 4
From: raymacey@*****.com (Ray Macey)
Subject: Wireless Networking
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 09:53:28 +1000
On 10/4/05, Tzeentch <tzeentch666@*********.net> wrote:
> -- The rules and text say that the commlink is the gatekeeper (p. SR211 "Through
your
> commlink, PANs can be set to operate in three different modes" and p. SR210). I
don't
> immediately see how you can bypass the commlink entirely and directly hack the
> cyberware.

Nah, what I meant in this regard is whether or not hacking the
commlink is enough to use control device etc on the cyberware, or
whether or not you have to hack the commlink then hack the cyberware
itself to control it. Either way you have to come through the
commlink if the cyberware is subscribed to it

--
http://cyron.id.au

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Wireless Networking, 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!