[voydangel]

so the dice pool penalty of 3/6 for commands only applies to spoofing though right?

[FastJack]

Right. For hacking, it's a +3/+6 to the threshold instead.

[Ultra Violence]

An old topic but so useful for me (as a new GM to shadowrun 4th edition.)

One question that is grinding my mind at the moment and it's this.

To hack o. The fly you either need to be in mutual signal range of the device that the node your attempting to hack corresponds to, or you must already have a subscription with that node. (if I'm reading it correctly.)

And you can subscribe to a node by either being In mutual signal range or by networking to it via the matrix.

My question is this. How do you network to something via the matrix (I hope that question makes sense)?

I ask because I have a player (technomancer) who doesn't bother going on runs with the rest of the team but instead deals with hacking from the safety of a coffee shop 8 mile away etc and just subscribes at public level access to the node and then hacks on the fly. I keep feeling like I am missing something because it seems to simple.

Also, would a building have a node or is it just the devices within it.

Again, as an example, my technomanced will constantly ask about hacking into the main node for a building and to my mind that isn't how it works.

[Ten-Hex]

In FastJack's spoofing example, shouldn't the second spoof attempt been at a -2 penalty to the dice pool? The hacker would be retrying a failed opposed test, so the second spoof dice pool would be hacking 5 + spoof 4 + edge 3 -3 for security ID -2 for retrying a failed test = 7 dice (reroll 6's).


(Sorry, not to be nitpicky... I spend most of my day auditing and correcting numbers. )

[FastJack]

In FastJack's spoofing example, shouldn't the second spoof attempt been at a -2 penalty to the dice pool? The hacker would be retrying a failed opposed test, so the second spoof dice pool would be hacking 5 + spoof 4 + edge 3 -3 for security ID -2 for retrying a failed test = 7 dice (reroll 6's).


(Sorry, not to be nitpicky... I spend most of my day auditing and correcting numbers. )

Good question. I always house-ruled that the -2 modifier is only on normal Threshold tests since Opposed tests are between two separate dice pools, which would technically make both pools diminishing with each test. So, if we use the -2 mod on my example, the second attempt would be a -2 to both the Hacker and the System, since technically they are both retrying the same test. Which is why I normally don't put the -2 modifier on Opposed Tests.

[Ten-Hex]

Good question. I always house-ruled that the -2 modifier is only on normal Threshold tests since Opposed tests are between two separate dice pools, which would technically make both pools diminishing with each test. So, if we use the -2 mod on my example, the second attempt would be a -2 to both the Hacker and the System, since technically they are both retrying the same test. Which is why I normally don't put the -2 modifier on Opposed Tests.

Interesting interpretation of that rule... I never looked at it that way before, but I can see where you get that interpretation. I've always read this:

A character may attempt a task she has previously failed, but each successive attempt incurs a –2 dice pool modifier.

as only applying to the failing character for Opposed tests. Both parties may be rerolling the test, but only one fits the criterion of having previously failed in the immediate past. I based that off the example in the "Trying Again" section where they apply the modifier to someone failing to summon a spirit (an Opposed test).

Of course, I don't apply the -2 penalty to opposed tests in combat so I may be applying my interpretation in an inconsistant manner. Maybe it's because I think of the target's Pilot/System+Firewall roll as setting a sort of "virtual threshhold" that the spoofer needs to exceed. I know threshholds don't technically apply to Opposed tests, but my meatbrain bias has trouble treating an OS with the same rules as someone dodging a bullet.

[Dakka]

To answer the original Thread Necromancer's question it is entirely possible for the hacker to do most of his work for a run from a coffee shop 8 miles away.  Or the trunk/rigger pod of the escape vehicle.  Or his apartment which he never leaves.  The reason for this is EVERY wireless device, and they practically permeate every section of the 6th world, acts as a wireless router sending traffic on its way to it's destination.  It is possible to encounter matrix dead zones that don't have enough wireless devices in the area to reach back to the hacker, but that should be pretty uncommon especially in cities.  Every once in a while tho the team falls off the network and the hacker should panic.

Depending on the building, the building itself is unlikely to be a node, but somewhere inside it is a Nexi that has the buildings public access matrix node on it, and it's entirely possible the iconography of said node is shaped to look like the building, or it's lobby.  The Signal strength is such that for the not very technical minded the building may as well be the node, but it does run on hardware inside the building.

[Sichr]

Nice to found this topic. I have also the question. How the: Intercept wireless traffic works? Should I use Sniffer to get proper frequency, then decrypt, if needed, and then edit the signal? Or this is good only for "taping" the signal= listening to it?

[Dakka]

Hacking + Sniffer to eavesdrop (complex action), then you use Electronic Warfare + Decrypt if it's encrypted (extended test, threshold 2x Encryption, 1 Turn).  You now have access to the traffic, whatever it is.  To edit the traffic you use Computer + Edit (complex action) at whatever threshold the GM deems appropriate for what you are trying to do.  To do any of this you need to be fairly close to one end or the other end of the traffic, as it routes down whatever route it takes to reach its destination it would become too scattered to tap easily.

[Sichr]

Eavesdropping is also Electronic Warfare, not Hacking. But. In the rules there is written that you are then able to Record, copy or Forward the traffic. That is why Im not sure if there is possibility to Edit (comp+Edit) the trafic, for instance, replacing the security camera stream with innocent loop previously recorded from it. It would be great if it is possible...well Im not sure about this.

[FastJack]

Eavesdropping is also Electronic Warfare, not Hacking. But. In the rules there is written that you are then able to Record, copy or Forward the traffic. That is why Im not sure if there is possibility to Edit (comp+Edit) the trafic, for instance, replacing the security camera stream with innocent loop previously recorded from it. It would be great if it is possible...well Im not sure about this.

That's pretty much what the Edit program is there for.

[Dakka]

That should be entirely possible for any traffic you have access to.  Inserting fake traffic is different from editing the traffic and sending it on its way.  Creating a loop that hides your activity from a camera would be an edit test.  Making it look like someone ELSE is responsible for the break in would be an opposed test Hacking + Sniffer vs Firewall + System of the receiving node.

[Sichr]

I see no logic in that argument.
I should record the stream
then I shoul edit it in my comlink
Then I should intercept the traffic again and use edited loop.

[Sichr]

No hacking used, just Electronic warfare and Computer skill. Hacking you use if you want to change the record that is already present in the database of security node, not before it gets there.
IMHO

[FastJack]

Straight from the SR4A:

Edit (Computer)
Edit is a combination word processor, graphic design tool, and video/animation editor. You can use it to create and alter files of any media type: text, graphics, video, trideo, simsense, etc. Edit sees common usage in the corporate world, but hackers use it for their own subversive ends. Use Edit with the Edit action.