T
The Shaman
Guest
So what exactly does the anti-hijack program do?
T
The Shaman
Guest
So what exactly does the anti-hijack program do?
In the original description, among other things, it physically restricts access to the bridge and drive deck; presumably this involves locking iris valves.
In practice, all it really needs to do it lock the computer up... starships (and big craft) are non-operable without their computers... which raises a good question about hijacking a small craft with a computer that's running Anti-Hijack: can you just disconnect the computer and fly away on manual?
There was an excellent article in White Dwarf magazine back in the day describing a more-aggressive security program called "Watchdog": illegal at Imperial starports, it invoked active measures (drive thrust against external targets, high-energy radar blasts, overriding airlock safeties, rapidly modulating the grav plates in the floor, all the usual tricks, *plus* IIRC getting the ship's main weaponry involved) to repel would-be hijackers, effectively turning the whole ship into a warbot to defend itself.
By extension then, Anti-Hijack is presumably a more benign and passive application. After locking up the computer, it could probably also send out an electronic notification of some sort, to alert the owner and/or "the authorities". That ought to be sufficient; let the intruders gain access to the bridge by outwitting the program or forcing the iris valve.... there'll still be a maddening and unavoidable password prompt waiting for them...
In the original description, among other things, it physically restricts access to the bridge and drive deck; presumably this involves locking iris valves.
In practice, all it really needs to do it lock the computer up... starships (and big craft) are non-operable without their computers... which raises a good question about hijacking a small craft with a computer that's running Anti-Hijack: can you just disconnect the computer and fly away on manual?
There was an excellent article in White Dwarf magazine back in the day describing a more-aggressive security program called "Watchdog": illegal at Imperial starports, it invoked active measures (drive thrust against external targets, high-energy radar blasts, overriding airlock safeties, rapidly modulating the grav plates in the floor, all the usual tricks, *plus* IIRC getting the ship's main weaponry involved) to repel would-be hijackers, effectively turning the whole ship into a warbot to defend itself.
By extension then, Anti-Hijack is presumably a more benign and passive application. After locking up the computer, it could probably also send out an electronic notification of some sort, to alert the owner and/or "the authorities". That ought to be sufficient; let the intruders gain access to the bridge by outwitting the program or forcing the iris valve.... there'll still be a maddening and unavoidable password prompt waiting for them...
Consider it to be an umbrella security program, controlling things ranging from door locks, through cameras and internal sensors, to computer access authorizations. It should probably also include things such as a firewall for the ship's main computer and anti-tamper alarms for the door-locks.
In a more high-security setup, I'd imagine that things such as guardbots (I could cobble an LBB8 design if you want) and fixed security turrets (LBB8 as well, I'd guess) would be added. Sure, a good guardbot could easily cost Cr50,000 (even an MCr or two for really high-end designs) or more, but that's nothing compared to the cost of the ship it protects from theft. The Anti-Hijack program will, then, also interact with the bots, and/or include their "master" unit with a dedicated "brain".
In a more high-security setup, I'd imagine that things such as guardbots (I could cobble an LBB8 design if you want) and fixed security turrets (LBB8 as well, I'd guess) would be added. Sure, a good guardbot could easily cost Cr50,000 (even an MCr or two for really high-end designs) or more, but that's nothing compared to the cost of the ship it protects from theft. The Anti-Hijack program will, then, also interact with the bots, and/or include their "master" unit with a dedicated "brain".
Consider it to be an umbrella security program, controlling things ranging from door locks, through cameras and internal sensors, to computer access authorizations. It should probably also include things such as a firewall for the ship's main computer and anti-tamper alarms for the door-locks.
In a more high-security setup, I'd imagine that things such as guardbots (I could cobble an LBB8 design if you want) and fixed security turrets (LBB8 as well, I'd guess) would be added. Sure, a good guardbot could easily cost Cr50,000 (even an MCr or two for really high-end designs) or more, but that's nothing compared to the cost of the ship it protects from theft. The Anti-Hijack program will, then, also interact with the bots, and/or include their "master" unit with a dedicated "brain".
In a more high-security setup, I'd imagine that things such as guardbots (I could cobble an LBB8 design if you want) and fixed security turrets (LBB8 as well, I'd guess) would be added. Sure, a good guardbot could easily cost Cr50,000 (even an MCr or two for really high-end designs) or more, but that's nothing compared to the cost of the ship it protects from theft. The Anti-Hijack program will, then, also interact with the bots, and/or include their "master" unit with a dedicated "brain".
Bear in mind though that armed bots are somewhat frowned upon in Imperial space as per Book 8 and some interpretaions of the Imperial Rules of War (AHL, et alia) which restrict military systems from civilian hands...
I'd prefer a version of the High Security bot program running in a dedicated Master box that would itself interface with the Anti-Hijack program running on the ship's mainframe: no single point of failure, and no direct access to the ship's weaponry. (Note that ship's weaponry cannot *as* *written* be fired autonomously; a "man-in-the-loop" Gunner seems to be required. Robotic Slave Gunners are a suggested substitute... but again, such gizmos might invoke the IRoW...)
Bear in mind though that armed bots are somewhat frowned upon in Imperial space as per Book 8 and some interpretaions of the Imperial Rules of War (AHL, et alia) which restrict military systems from civilian hands...
I'd prefer a version of the High Security bot program running in a dedicated Master box that would itself interface with the Anti-Hijack program running on the ship's mainframe: no single point of failure, and no direct access to the ship's weaponry. (Note that ship's weaponry cannot *as* *written* be fired autonomously; a "man-in-the-loop" Gunner seems to be required. Robotic Slave Gunners are a suggested substitute... but again, such gizmos might invoke the IRoW...)
T
The Shaman
Guest
The part of the program description that reads, ". . .constantly monitors conditions within the starship. . ." is interesting: how does the program know when a "hijack situation" occurs? Is the program activated by a crewmember, or is there an interesting behavioral monitoring component to the software that allows it to detect hijackers by their actions?
Like most of you, I've treated it as sealing all iris valves and locking out all bridge and engineering control panels subject to a command override while providing a computer firewall, with the program activated by a command word.
Like most of you, I've treated it as sealing all iris valves and locking out all bridge and engineering control panels subject to a command override while providing a computer firewall, with the program activated by a command word.
T
The Shaman
Guest
The part of the program description that reads, ". . .constantly monitors conditions within the starship. . ." is interesting: how does the program know when a "hijack situation" occurs? Is the program activated by a crewmember, or is there an interesting behavioral monitoring component to the software that allows it to detect hijackers by their actions?
Like most of you, I've treated it as sealing all iris valves and locking out all bridge and engineering control panels subject to a command override while providing a computer firewall, with the program activated by a command word.
Like most of you, I've treated it as sealing all iris valves and locking out all bridge and engineering control panels subject to a command override while providing a computer firewall, with the program activated by a command word.
There are numerous possibilities.
Audio monitoring would be very informative: in addition to responding to obvious things like gunfire or heavy impacts or forcing the door to the ship's locker, raised voices and/or fast footfalls in a non-alert situation would be suspicious. Likewise, we can presume a simple voice-activated lockdown feature, as well as periodic watchclock-style password prompts (every X minutes of use, or after Y minutes of inactivity). Even typing styles & rhythms could be monitored for changes between authorized and unauthorized users, and weight sensors in seats and deck plating could track different individuals' movements into sensitive areas.
(Plus all the normal stuff like loss of air pressure, unauthorized airlock cycling, manual deactivation of the grav plating, and the like will also be reported to the Anti-Hijack program.)
The other component would be an escalating response: suspicious movements might trigger a log entry and a fresh password prompt, while a direct computer-hacking attempt or a spoken panic phrase would trigger full lockdown. Note that the system will also include false passwords, so that crewmembers being coerced can still trigger a lockdown while pretending to override the system...
A military vessel might even have additional barriers to unlocking -- simultaneous entry of the correct (and different) passwords from terminals on the bridge and in the engine room, for example...
(Mainframe security is neither foolproof nor simple, but it *is* an order of magnitude less complex and more robust than network security.)
There are numerous possibilities.
Audio monitoring would be very informative: in addition to responding to obvious things like gunfire or heavy impacts or forcing the door to the ship's locker, raised voices and/or fast footfalls in a non-alert situation would be suspicious. Likewise, we can presume a simple voice-activated lockdown feature, as well as periodic watchclock-style password prompts (every X minutes of use, or after Y minutes of inactivity). Even typing styles & rhythms could be monitored for changes between authorized and unauthorized users, and weight sensors in seats and deck plating could track different individuals' movements into sensitive areas.
(Plus all the normal stuff like loss of air pressure, unauthorized airlock cycling, manual deactivation of the grav plating, and the like will also be reported to the Anti-Hijack program.)
The other component would be an escalating response: suspicious movements might trigger a log entry and a fresh password prompt, while a direct computer-hacking attempt or a spoken panic phrase would trigger full lockdown. Note that the system will also include false passwords, so that crewmembers being coerced can still trigger a lockdown while pretending to override the system...
A military vessel might even have additional barriers to unlocking -- simultaneous entry of the correct (and different) passwords from terminals on the bridge and in the engine room, for example...
(Mainframe security is neither foolproof nor simple, but it *is* an order of magnitude less complex and more robust than network security.)
T
The Shaman
Guest
Ah, now this is the kind of stuff I was hoping for - some intriguing possibilities here.
T
The Shaman
Guest
Ah, now this is the kind of stuff I was hoping for - some intriguing possibilities here.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Check out DGP's Starship Operator's Manual. There's a whole section devoted to it.
-S4
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Check out DGP's Starship Operator's Manual. There's a whole section devoted to it.
-S4
The algorithm might flow thusly:
1. The High Passenger in stateroom 4 weighted 70kg in 1G upon boarding, and has 840kg in 1G of baggage in his stateroom.
2. Five seconds ago, a biped weighing 225kg in 1G exited stateroom 4 and is now proceeding at 2m/s towards the drive room.
3. Lock all iris valves in the engineering bulkhead and notify the officer of the watch.
and so on...
The algorithm might flow thusly:
1. The High Passenger in stateroom 4 weighted 70kg in 1G upon boarding, and has 840kg in 1G of baggage in his stateroom.
2. Five seconds ago, a biped weighing 225kg in 1G exited stateroom 4 and is now proceeding at 2m/s towards the drive room.
3. Lock all iris valves in the engineering bulkhead and notify the officer of the watch.
and so on...
T
The Shaman
Guest
Sure, I'll just run down to the hobby shop and pick up a copy!
(If only it were that simple. . .)
Care to offer us a quick'n'dirty summary?
Yes. That's the sort of thing I envision when I think of Anti-Hijack.
T
The Shaman
Guest
Sure, I'll just run down to the hobby shop and pick up a copy!
(If only it were that simple. . .)
Care to offer us a quick'n'dirty summary?
Yes. That's the sort of thing I envision when I think of Anti-Hijack.
Similar threads
