[ve4grm]

I've seen this come up a lot, and it seems to be widely accepted, but I can't figure it out.

How do you justify slaving all of your gear to the decker's deck for protection, and still being able to use it?

Don't you need to own a piece of gear to slave it? So the decker would own your gun.

But if the decker owns your gun, how do you use all the wireless features of it? Doesn't a smartlink need to be part of your PAN to operate and grant bonuses? I mean, you could probably see through the camera if the decker allowed you access, but smartlink? Doesn't seem plausible.

[Namikaze]

The only actions that seem to require ownership are certain Matrix Actions.  So if you're not going to be doing those actions then you don't need to worry about them.

[Sendaz]

I look at the Deck as acting as being a 'Matrix' fuse for the flow of data to and from the Matrix for the device.  Oversimplified of course, but the image can help.

The user of the device is still connecting to it and using the device for normal actions some of which  can benefit from being connected to the matrix.

So just like having several devices plugged into a powersurge protected powerstrip, you the user can handle the devices, but should the voltage spike the devices are protected by the powerstrip.

[ve4grm]

Sendaz - That makes perfect sense for why you would slave your own gear to your own commlink or deck. That part is fine.

What I'm talking about it slaving your gear to someone else's deck.

The only actions that seem to require ownership are certain Matrix Actions.  So if you're not going to be doing those actions then you don't need to worry about them.

That seems to be the prevailing opinion, but looks to me like a strict reading of the rules without regard to intent or logic.

Let's say I'm a street sammie. My smartgun is owned by and slaved to the decker. My goggles with smartlink are owned by and slaved to the decker. My commlink is my own, and doesn't control anything. I have trodes, so I have DNI.

Somehow, giving a mental command through my commlink, which is not connected to any of these devices, can eject clips, switch modes, or even fire the gun? Do I need marks? How many marks do I need to behave as if I own the gun?

Do I need to perform the "Control Device" action, as you usually need to do to give commands to a device you don't own? I assume so, since you technically use it even for devices you do own. Would the decker's deck try to defend against your orders? Again, I assume so, as it is an outside order coming from a limited-access person. In which case, is it a Sleaze action? Do you need a deck of your own to even attempt this?

If controlling the device is not a Sleaze action, and is freely allowed through some sort of Decker magic, then you haven't increased your defense at all. You've merely changed the process from
.      "hack your commlink" -> "control device"
to
.      "hack your commlink" -> "spoof command"

.

And one final question this raises:

Even if this does all work fine, what about noise? What if I'm a Face, and am currently running a distraction in a downtown Seattle high-rise, while the decker and the rest of the crew are off somewhere east of Redmond doing the main job? Do I get noise penalties for being so far away from the Master deck? Does this apply to my attack rolls, as the Smartgun can't keep up? The gun/deck's matrix defense rolls? Anything else? Seems kind of weird if this is immune to noise.

[Namikaze]

You're digging too deep into the technical details of what works and doesn't work in Shadowrun.  Until we have Data Trails in-hand, we can't really get into that discussion without stepping all over theory and such.  For now, it simply works.

[DeathStrobe]

You don't give up ownership when slaving. You don't even need to let your decker mark you, but it'd probably be smart to let him at least have 1 mark on your stuff so he can see your gear on the Matrix and actually be able to defend it if you are running your stuff silent.

The real question is why would the decker ever want to let you slave your stuff to his deck. Since you are causing security vulnerabilities to his deck. And the answer is, because he needs you to kill things that he himself can not.

[KarmaInferno]

The problem with slaving all the team's gear to the decker's deck is... the decker has a limited number of devices he can slave.

Might want to invest in a midrange Rigger Control Console instead of a commlink for your character. Not for rigging, though it's useful there too, but because it stands up to Matrix attacks better than any commlink. And they're cheaper than cyberdecks. Slave your personal gear to that, instead of the decker's deck, and leave his slots open for stuff that REALLY needs matrix protection.


-k

[Booze]

The anwser is rather simple. MARKs

As decker might own the device, but when you have hardware in your hands, so you operate it manually & you have 3 marks on it there is nothing you can't do with it. It is like a computer in job. I use it, but i don't have the admin rights, so I can't do some things. The MARKs will easily decide about your permissions

[ve4grm]

The anwser is rather simple. MARKs

As decker might own the device, but when you have hardware in your hands, so you operate it manually & you have 3 marks on it there is nothing you can't do with it. It is like a computer in job. I use it, but i don't have the admin rights, so I can't do some things. The MARKs will easily decide about your permissions

Fine, but that still leaves two options:

a) The deck defends against everything you attempt to do, just like it would against a hacker with three marks.

or

b) The deck lets all commands from your SIN/commlink through without question, meaning you haven't really gained any extra security, as someone can just hack your weak commlink and spoof a command from it to the deck/device.

[Booze]

a) Yes
b) Yes

*1 Why? becouse MARKing is grading of ownership. And you can not defent against it. Deck itself defends agains forced gaining MARKs. If you got MARK by 'invite MARK' matrix action, Deck will not antagonize, but when you use Brute Force or Hack on the Fly matrix action, deck will gona use its matrix attributes for defencive tests of the device. And inform the Decker about it.

Of course it will not work if you will gain DNI. Still i want to see decker who jack into streetsams cyber arm...

Edit: yea,... so you will need to slave your commlink to his deck as well. Still hardware conection will bypass such protection. Thou I'm not sure about it [AFB], as for sure it works on hosts

[ve4grm]

a) Yes
b) Yes

*1 Why? becouse MARKing is grading of ownership. And you can not defent against it. Deck itself defends agains forced gaining MARKs. If you got MARK by 'invite MARK' matrix action, Deck will not antagonize, but when you use Brute Force or Hack on the Fly matrix action, deck will gona use its matrix attributes for defencive tests of the device. And inform the Decker about it.

The deck also defends against Control Device tests made by people with marks. Ejecting a smartgun clip is a Control Device action that requires one mark (free action), and is defended against, for example.

You can probably define certain users as being able to do things. So the Sammie would be able to reload, use the smartgun, etc without the deck defending against it. Fine. But that leaves you open to Spoof Command, when someone hacks the Sammie's weak commlink. If a command is successfully spoofed, it looks exactly like a legit command from that device.

Slaving the commlink to the deck is... tricky. There have been discussions about daisy-chaining decks and commlinks before, and I'm pretty sure it's not allowed.

[Booze]

a) Yes
b) Yes

*1 Why? becouse MARKing is grading of ownership. And you can not defent against it. Deck itself defends agains forced gaining MARKs. If you got MARK by 'invite MARK' matrix action, Deck will not antagonize, but when you use Brute Force or Hack on the Fly matrix action, deck will gona use its matrix attributes for defencive tests of the device. And inform the Decker about it.

The deck also defends against Control Device tests made by people with marks. Ejecting a smartgun clip is a Control Device action that requires one mark (free action), and is defended against, for example.

One MARK is just not enought for full access I guess. Seriouslly is defendet agains. I'm AFB, but still it would bother me. How the RAW looks like exacly?

You can probably define certain users as being able to do things. So the Sammie would be able to reload, use the smartgun, etc without the deck defending against it. Fine. But that leaves you open to Spoof Command, when someone hacks the Sammie's weak commlink. If a command is successfully spoofed, it looks exactly like a legit command from that device.

Yes of course

[/quote]Slaving the commlink to the deck is... tricky. There have been discussions about daisy-chaining decks and commlinks before, and I'm pretty sure it's not allowed.
[/quote]
I'm not about daisy-chain at the moment. It would be an exploit. Just slave all your PAN/WAN to deck, and then MARK all your affects from your commlink. If You would lose connection with deck... all would function on stand alone function, or you could just quickly slave all of them and create brand new PAN/WAN.

How about that?

[Xenon]

Where does it say you need to be the owner of both the slave and the master?

[Top Dog]

<...>

Might want to invest in a midrange Rigger Control Console instead of a commlink for your character. Not for rigging, though it's useful there too, but because it stands up to Matrix attacks better than any commlink. And they're cheaper than cyberdecks. Slave your personal gear to that, instead of the decker's deck, and leave his slots open for stuff that REALLY needs matrix protection.

I was looking into this for a character of mine (remaking an SR4 character into SR5 soon - I sunk a lot of money into my commlink in SR4 and wanted to emulate that).

A midrange RCC wouldn't do it. Fairlight Calibans are only 8k, and 14 availability isn't that big a deal. That has a firewall of 7. RCC's tend to be data-processing heavy (which you wouldn't really care about that much) and so only the high-end RCC's can compete with the Caliban.
Of course, if you do, you get much better protection, after you add some cyberprograms. So if you have a lot of spare nuyen, it's a superior option. But mid-range RCC's won't do, even with programs, so it'll set you back a lot of money.

[Backgammon]

a) Yes
b) Yes

*1 Why? becouse MARKing is grading of ownership. And you can not defent against it. Deck itself defends agains forced gaining MARKs. If you got MARK by 'invite MARK' matrix action, Deck will not antagonize, but when you use Brute Force or Hack on the Fly matrix action, deck will gona use its matrix attributes for defencive tests of the device. And inform the Decker about it.

The deck also defends against Control Device tests made by people with marks. Ejecting a smartgun clip is a Control Device action that requires one mark (free action), and is defended against, for example.

You can probably define certain users as being able to do things. So the Sammie would be able to reload, use the smartgun, etc without the deck defending against it. Fine. But that leaves you open to Spoof Command, when someone hacks the Sammie's weak commlink. If a command is successfully spoofed, it looks exactly like a legit command from that device.

Slaving the commlink to the deck is... tricky. There have been discussions about daisy-chaining decks and commlinks before, and I'm pretty sure it's not allowed.

No, no, you're on the right trail.

If you Slave all your equipement, than that's cool, those devices gain added protection if directly targetted. This is Good.

However, if you don't slave your commlink, then someone can hack into it and, from there, launch Spoof commands to your gear.

This isn't a terrible option, since hacking your commlink is typically harder than gear. Your gear becomes better protected from assaults like Spikes which is a pertty common way for hackers to attack you. Getting into the commlink and then sending out Spoofs is longer, so it becomes a certain form of defence. Plus, if noticed, the hacker could simply temporarily blacklist the commlink (a FAR better option than getting something bricked), or the Sammy can use his fingers to reboot his commlink. Bye bye hacker. All in all, by slaving your gear but not your commlink, you DO gain quite a bit more protection.

It's true the rules are a bit unclear about slaving commlinks themselves, though. I figure you can slave them to the Deck same as any other device. What you can't do is daisy chain slaving. So if your commlink is slaved, it cannot have slaved devices of its own (or, seen another way, everything becomes slaved to the Deck directly, so you better make sure the deck has enough slots).