The Computers skill !

[Enter]

So last night we had our very first actual session with my group. Yay!
What suprised me the most was my total lack of understanding for the role of the Computers skill in the premise of the game.

A load of questions came around the table.

Can I hack the Observer or Patrol robot ? - I ruled that given the said robots are not drone but preprogrammed unless you bash their skull and plug-in such thing is impossible.

Then I wondered how this robots takes commands from its superiors ?
A communications system can be hacked but then a DC 21 [15+ 1.5x4CR] computers check way to easy.

Should I create a template of a computer with security levels, fake shells, firewalls etc?

Should I make it an opposed check and add the computers skill level of the drone ?

Apart from that further issues came up when the Technomancer tried to check if the credstick given to them for payment had a transmitter so they can track them down.

Is that a computers or a physical science test given that initially he had to check for frequency broadcasting.

Can he do that with his datajack or proper computer with some sort of starfindersque wifi analyzer MK2?

Can you hack a credstick or if not why? [Given a regular credstick can be loaded and unloaded(?)

Most of those questions are part of the world building but I would love some input on the above and some discussion on the issue in general.

[Malk_Content]

I'm making a habit to stat up anything that could be hacked. Doesn't take that long, especially as for the most part its a matter of "pick Tier and Countermeasures" maybe 20s per computer. Tier is important not just for DC of checks but also how long those checks take. If a player wants to do something faster then it gets harder.

For the credstick thing I'd say there are a bunch of ways they could do it. They could use Computers to attempt to analyze outgoing connections. Physical Science to detect for frequencies or Engineering to see if the stick had been tampered with.

[Tacticslion]

dot

[The Goat Lord]

I feel like answers to several of these questions will be answered in later publications. For example, hacking technological constructs is one of those design spaces that feels appropriate for abilities found in a class/archetype.

For my games, I allow the hacking of robots if the robot's CR is so low as to offer no exp, or the robot is not designed for combat whatsoever. However, I would still reward exp for overcoming challenges. Basically, if the robot is simply set dressing or an aspect of the environment, then I allow it. I choose one of the lower DCs listed in the Computers skill and go from there, assigning modifiers based on the function/design/purpose of the robot. Example: the PCs in my homebrew needed to sneak into a Stewards station (Absalom Station police, basically) to steal an item from an evidence locker. There were service drones hovering through the building distributing PDAs, coffee, and other whatnots. The mechanic PC remote hacked a drone to cause a distraction. Had I said no to hacking it then we would have missed out on a memorable moment.

Now, hacking a gargantuan or colossal robot, like a transformer, I would allow a hack if the PCs were able to climb it (Shadow of the Colossus style) and physically jack into it. Pick a computer tier, countermeasures, and other features suitable for the robot's CR.

For credsticks, I feel like hacking to exploit the credits within should not be allowed, but I imagine it would be like hacking a stick of RAM. Possible, but what are you going to get? I say allow hacking it if only to show data such as recent transactions, routing numbers, and other data that could be used to further a plot.

[John Napier 698]

I agree with Goat Lord about the Credsticks. You should easily be able to view the transaction history and the current balance, but adding and deducting credits are far more difficult. Credstick terminals, and the credsticks themselves, will have sophisticated ultra-secret encryption algorithms built into the circuitry themselves. To reverse engineer the algorithms will take a scanning electron microscope and some impressive (DC 40+) Electronics rolls. And then, they'll have to translate the electronic circuitry into the logic functions of a computer program, again DC 40+ computer rolls. Such an activity will take years of in-game time.

[Matt2VK]

I actually view the regular credstick more as the paper dollars we use now. Anyone can use them and you need to be careful of pick pockets.

Remember, these credsticks have to interface with multiple devices on multiple planets. Simple is better and easier to use.

Now one use or specialty credsticks might have a security code and the required DC to hack that is up to the gm.

[Lane_S]

I would assume Cred Sticks are nearly unhackable, the economic effect would be severe. Even hacking the transaction records would probably count as a Tier 5 computer with the alarm countermeasure that activates when read by a credit terminal.

To hack a cred stick you would probably have to hack a transaction terminal first. Security is most likely based on a physical or arcane key. Physical keys could be a molecular structure that when both terminal and stick keys are subject to a certain radiation causes a resonance used to decrypt passwords. Alternately they could use an Aracane Mark as a decryption key.

The balance register of a cred stick is probably protected by multiple layers of encryption each with a wipe, alarm and false shell feature. Failing any one hacking test stores the balance amount in a false register, activates a security feature into the terminal and physically destroys the balance register. It then allows you to continue hacking. Once you think security has been full breached it allows you to modify the false register. The terminal used to hack the cred stick will show the false value. The terminal security feature will prevent an alarm from registering on this cred stick but will set an alarm code on any other cred sticks inserted. This code alerts other terminals of a breach, including time and place, so even if the hacked terminal was isolated the alarm will eventually reach authorities. If the hacked stick is inserted in another terminal the destroyed register is noticed and sets off a silent alarm but still shows the balance in the false register. The terminal then presents false errors to delay the owner. Codes like "Loss of communications, please re insert cred stick to continue", "Unable to save transaction, please exchange at a Cred Stick Vendor". In any event the original balance on the stick is lost and any attempted transactions fail but still deducted from false balance.

Plot Hooks:

The PCs have been paid using a compromised cred stick. Not only have the lost the payment but any attempt to use it will alert authorities and they will come under investigation. Do the party cooperate with police or go after the employer themselves.

Someone is circulating bad cred sticks. Local law enforcement is unable to deal with it. Merchants are loosing business from the delays. Even criminals are upset because nobody will exchange sticks without a terminal.

[Metaphysician]

On the matter of hacking security robots, I'd make two suggestions/comments:

1. Depending on how the bots are setup, it may be impossible to hack them remotely. A bot could be coded to accept orders via ordinary communication, in person or by message, rather than via computer code. IOW, they effectively require and receive "verbal" orders rather than control codes. 'Hacking' them would require spoofing the correct authorities, and in essence would be social challenges rather than hacking, no different than provide fake ID or a disguised persona to a live police officer.

2. If you can electronically hack a security robot, don't focus on the bot itself. Focus on the computer system controlling/deploying the bots. This would vary depending on circumstances: a nice restaurant with a single bouncer bot might only have a Tier 1 or 2 security system in charge. OTOH, the central security network controlling public patrol bots in Absalom Station is probably a Tier 10 system.

( In either case, the right spell or class ability or item might bypass this and allow direct hacking, but they would presumably also provide the appropriate rules. )

[Ciaran Barnes]

In regards to hacking a robot, I would bring up the notion of bypassing an entire combat with a single skill check. In certain cases you can do it with a well timed Diplomacy, Bluff, or Intimidate check. Or if the entire group is good at Stealth. The point is that is can be done, but situationally. As the GM it is up to you to decide within the context of the story if something can or should be able to be bypassed with a single role. You can’t talk your way out of every single fight. Sometimes the monster really wants to eat the characters and is unswayed by fancy words. Maybe there are additional security systems in place that make a single skill check just not enough. It would require multiple characters doing multiple things to bypass the fight. Think of the heist films where different people are in different locations to pull the job off. It’s your call, and in some cases fighting the security robot just isn’t very important and in such cases I would let the characters use Computers to bypass it.

In regards to the cred stick I would allow them to do their test with either skill, if they are trying to be clever about it. If your player rolls a d20 and says “I hack the cred stick. Is there a tracer on it?” then that is too little effort in my opinion. Personally I would only put something like that on a cred stick if it were an important plot element. For the sake of simplicity, I would leave cred sticks like gold pieces. Money and nothing more. Unless your group enjoys the prospect of cred sticks having security measures and the paranoia that may accompany that. :)

The computers skill is still new and I think many groups will come up with many approaches in the first year of this game. Just play around with it.

[Malk_Content]

I imagine anything with the word "security" in its title is at least going to have a Firewall, meaning 2 checks minimum to get in. These checks take a number of full round actions EACH equal to the tier of the computer (ignoring the beauty of the exocortex mechanic that is.) By the time a character has done that the fight is probably already over so I think its not even as strong as a well placed social roll.

[Zombie Lord]

BLOCKCHAIN. ;-)

Tell the PCs if they can explain blockchain without referencing google, you'll let them try a computers check to hack something that doesn't have well defined game mechanics to hack. (epic DC)

Alternatively, an attempt could draw attention of professional cyber security watchdogs that fight back by counterhacking the PC's computer.

[Juniperkitsu]

I think it's important to remember that the term "Computer" means something specific in the Starfinder world, and does not refer to all of the myriad technological devices that may run computations.

Sure, a technological construct is capable of running computations -- but it is a construct; not a "computer" it does not use or follow the rules for computers and countermeasures. Yes, you can use your personal comlink to crunch numbers, manage your calendar, and surf the infonet -- but it's not a "computer" it's a comlink.

The computers skill is used to access computers and their linked systems; not to disrupt technological devices. Is this difference silly and pedantic? yes, probably. But based on RAW, I would not allow my players to use the computers skill to gain unauthorized access to any system or device that wasn't specifically a "computer".

As a person who loves to play a decker in Shadowrun, and was very excited at the idea of a exo-cortex mechanic, it is certainly a shift, but there's no reason from my understanding of the RAW that a character would ever be able to hack or disrupt a technological device or creature with the computers skill. In fact, if you could, it would render the already niche "Discharge" spell worthless.

[Parliamagne]

In my campaign, credsticks have no intrinsic value. They are bits of plastic and silicon worth nothing. The only thing that gives them value is that they are an encrypted reference to transaction held in escrow at the central bank.

Here's how it works:

A person with money sometimes wants portable, transferable currency. So he has the bank take some of the value of his money and puts in on credsticks. This could be 10 credstick at 100 credits each, for a total of 1000 credits in value that is removed from his bank account.

This money is then placed in an escrow account held by the bank. The money doesn't actually go onto the credsticks. All they contain is a reference to the money that was part of the original transaction and is being held in escrow.

The holder of the credstick can demand that the money be transferred to another account. In most cases this would be a merchant, and he would plug the credstick into a credit terminal and transfer funds to his account. These funds would go from the central bank escrow to the merchant's account.

So, the credstick itself is just a highly encrypted reference to a transaction. Hacking the credstick itself doesn't do you any good unless you can hack the central bank at the same time so that you know the encryption scheme and encryption keys and have the detail of a larger value transaction than the one currently referenced by the credstick. The most likely scenario in hacking a credstick is to unlink it from the original escrow transaction and destroy its value.

[Enter]

@Juniperkitsu

I love how you tackle the issue of scope. However the game already dictates that remote systems are controlled by a computer.

Therefore a gap of knowledge exist in how exactly an observer or Patrol Robot works.

The way I read it in the Archive the two samples above seem to be quite autonomous. But details on how their owners communicate them their wishes is left a bit vague.

The question of middle-man-ing the communication could come up even when meddling with normal people. I can "hack" the security guard at my local mall if manage to communicate with him ["Bob we need you down at the lobby" or whatever]. I think this is something @metaphysician notes at his second paragraph.

@Zombie Lord, Parliamagne

I like that and seems familiar, I think. So a credstick is just there to hold a hash?

Questions:
A) Does it has some sort of intergrated circuit that can denominate lesser amounts of this hash by it self [thus creating a new hash] or
B) Should it first connect to a network and by having this hash you can input how much credits to spend

examples:

A)Iomedea wants to buy a hot-dog from a kiosk down in Botscraps. He is giving her credstick the guy at the kiosk connects it with his credstick and Iomedea types the amount to be paid.

B)Iomedea provides the credstick and the guy at the kiosk has a device pretty much like a real life POS terminal

Further questions for A case:
How does one know how much money a credstick has without contacting the bank ?

Going even further:

A) I m looking for some cool examples for things one could do with the computers skill and the relative DC [please try keep it low like DC 40 tops]

B) Description of a scene with all the relative details that someone hacks something going round by round

C) DC for root access is 33+4xTier [so a comm unit that has a 0 tier computer needs 33, I m imagining people contacting hackers in craiglist to jailbrake their iphone here and may I add rather good ones with at least +13 to even try and without provoking the lockout mechanism if you fail by 5 a +27!!!] what is the narrative and the world building consequences of this ?

Awesome feedback you all!

[Malk_Content]

Parliamagne wrote:

In my campaign, credsticks have no intrinsic value. They are bits of plastic and silicon worth nothing. The only thing that gives them value is that they are an encrypted reference to transaction held in escrow at the central bank.

Doesn't that make the whole "criminal and underground enterprises use credsticks for anonymous transactions" kind of impossible? Wouldn't you then have to make some sort of physical currency for those transactions?

[Metaphysician]

Hmm, here's a hypothesis: credsticks do carry encryption on themselves. However, whats encrypted is not the transaction, but rather, the equivalent of a serial number. A 1000 credit stick contains one thousand encrypted numbers on it, which are basically the serial numbers of one thousand one-credit denomination currency units. When you transfer money from credstick to credstick, you copy over one of those numbers.

So, what keeps someone from just making counterfeit money? A couple possibilities. One is that it uses quantum encryption, and trying to have two copies of the same number just doesn't work and creates obvious errors the moment someone tries to plug a copied number into an actual bank computer ( or anything hooked up to such ). Another is the credit card number defense; there may be quadrillions of credits in the economy, but the number issued is only a vanishingly small and non-predictable subset of a *much* larger numerical range. Even if you have the exact encryption algorithm to make a fake number, its virtually certain that any random base you pick will be an invalid one, detectable as soon as it hits a bank. Combine that with some more basic elements of the encryption, like some kind of easy assymetric test to make sure a credit number is actually using the proper encryption, and you should be good to go.

Note, you still could, in theory, make counterfeit credsticks, if you *really* wanted to. There is no absolute protection from that, short of some kind of literal miracle from Abadar. However, if the practicality of doing any kind of counterfeiting is sufficiently hard, then it becomes mostly a non-issue. No one is going to waste time on elaborate counterfeiting schemes if the effort spent on some other illegal enterprise would provide much greater profit. If you really want to create credits from thin air, better to just do financial fraud instead ( ie, "real" credits paid out from the credit line of a non-existent business, with the money gone before the bank realizes the business vanished ).

[Captain Temπ Ænaut Fugit]

To build upon what Metaphysician said...

Then throngs of check-proofing computers would immediately freeze regional transactions and post digital 'wanted posters'. What started as a great hacking scheme would snowball into a global angry-mob manhunt.

On the flip side, since a credstick can be handed to a person, it can be stolen/traded/money-launderd without triggering a computer lockout.

All-in-all, this makes it infinitely safer/easier to just steal the stick than to hack it.

[Hazrond]

A much easier method would be to hack the display to display the incorrect amount of credits instead. Basically the equivalent of printing a 100 dollar bill on printer paper, sure it will be detected if ya take it to a bank but no dude on the street will necessarily notice (especially without the Computers skill in the Credstick example) until it is far too late.

[Metaphysician]

Oh, sure, that's totally possible. It just is comparatively petty crime, that runs the risk of drawing greater heat than an equivalent theft. Any smart criminal is generally going to want to avoid risking the attention of Abadarian inquisitors just to scam someone out of a few thousand credits. There's probably a better way to do your heist.

( Which, of course, leaves all the *dumb* criminals who don't think this through. Which means if a smart criminal PC finds they actually *do* need to spoof the display on cred sticks, they have some leeway. There's enough stupid criminals doing stupid criminal tricks that the Church of Abadar doesn't even try and pursue all of them, just the ones that draw more attention. )

[Nixitur]

Juniperkitsu wrote:

Sure, a technological construct is capable of running computations -- but it is a construct; not a "computer" it does not use or follow the rules for computers and countermeasures.

I'm wondering what the deal is with "Hardened AI", then. Because the Mechanic's drone is a technological construct and that upgrade seems to imply that people could hack it. But there's no DC given to hack things that aren't strictly computers, so that's... kind of odd.

[Ravingdork]

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

[Yakman]

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

[Nixitur]

Yakman wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

Given how massive the hacking DCs get, that's an entirely reasonable bonus.

[Yakman]

Nixitur wrote:

Yakman wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

Given how massive the hacking DCs get, that's an entirely reasonable bonus.

the bonus is reasonable BUT it can be easily abused if the DM starts allowing all kinds of wireless hacking.

[Nixitur]

Yakman wrote:

Nixitur wrote:

Yakman wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

Given how massive the hacking DCs get, that's an entirely reasonable bonus.

the bonus is reasonable BUT it can be easily abused if the DM starts allowing all kinds of wireless hacking.

That's only for the Mechanic, mind. And going by the description, that skill is literally only for capital-C Computers. Not comm units, not technological constructs, not vehicles. And that strikes me as a bit limiting; it's as if Disable Device in Pathfinder was just for locks and nothing else.

Judging from the Hardened AI Drone upgrade, the Computers skill had at some point probably much broader uses. And I think most GMs would allow reasonable things such as using it on a comm unit. Certainly not weapons or creatures, that's what Overload and Override are for.

[Ravingdork]

Aren't comm units considered tier 0 or tier 1 computers? Pretty sure that's stated somewhere in the text.

[baggageboy]

Tier 0 computers, it's in the comm unit description.

[LordRiffington]

Metaphysician wrote:

Oh, sure, that's totally possible. It just is comparatively petty crime, that runs the risk of drawing greater heat than an equivalent theft. Any smart criminal is generally going to want to avoid risking the attention of Abadarian inquisitors just to scam someone out of a few thousand credits. There's probably a better way to do your heist.

( Which, of course, leaves all the *dumb* criminals who don't think this through. Which means if a smart criminal PC finds they actually *do* need to spoof the display on cred sticks, they have some leeway. There's enough stupid criminals doing stupid criminal tricks that the Church of Abadar doesn't even try and pursue all of them, just the ones that draw more attention. )

And the dumb criminals aren't going to go to the authorities about it, because, well, criminals.

I'd totally fail to discourage players from pulling this kind of stunt on a criminal group. When the group does find out...that's when the fun begins.

[Ciaran Barnes]

Yakman wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

That is doable at 3rd level, but if you haven’t noticed it yet in SF a lot of things are insight bonuses. Pay attention to bonus types so you don’t double or triple dip.

[Nixitur]

Ciaran Barnes wrote:

Yakman wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've also found it odd that mechanics can somehow wirelessly hack devices that aren't wireless.

the computers skill is easily overwhelming. DMs should be wary of player abuse. In our game, my technomancer and my fellow mechanic have a 12 in this skill at 3rd level.

That is doable at 3rd level, but if you haven’t noticed it yet in SF a lot of things are insight bonuses. Pay attention to bonus types so you don’t double or triple dip.

Including Skill Focus which is a surprising change that is gonna trip up Pathfinder veterans for quite a while. It's especially weird for Operatives who get Skill Focus in their specialization skills at level 1 which gets completely eaten up by Operative's Edge at level 7.

Although they get the ability to always take 10 on Focused skills in exchange which is pretty huge.

[artofcheatery]

Malk_Content wrote:

Parliamagne wrote:

In my campaign, credsticks have no intrinsic value. They are bits of plastic and silicon worth nothing. The only thing that gives them value is that they are an encrypted reference to transaction held in escrow at the central bank.

Doesn't that make the whole "criminal and underground enterprises use credsticks for anonymous transactions" kind of impossible? Wouldn't you then have to make some sort of physical currency for those transactions?

They state there are several type of credsticks, the most common ones are anonymous and can be handed to someone without issue, while you can get ones personally encrypted to you and you can transfer money from credstick to credstick. More security though means that the banks have a much better idea about what you're using your money for.

They also reference a credstick with an unlimited line of credit and that there is some non-credit money on most planets. Pact Worlds have to have Credits as the official currency, but there are others.

[Metaphysician]

Also, UPBs serve as an unofficial secondary currency basically everywhere, since the value of a credit is actually locked to the value of a single UPB.

[Nixitur]

Juniperkitsu wrote:

I think it's important to remember that the term "Computer" means something specific in the Starfinder world, and does not refer to all of the myriad technological devices that may run computations.[...]

Yes, you can use your personal comlink to crunch numbers, manage your calendar, and surf the infonet -- but it's not a "computer" it's a comlink.

The computers skill is used to access computers and their linked systems; not to disrupt technological devices.

I fully agreed with you before, then I looked at the Computers section of the Equipment chapter and the examples it mentions for computers include "a common datapad, a door lock, or a lighting controller". It also states that "Computers control most of the modern tools and conveniences in the universe", again mentioning door locks as an example.

That blows the door wide open on what the Computers skill can be used for. Specifically, there seems to be a huge overlap to the Engineering skill. If I can hack door locks, I could presumably make them open. This would probably even be considered a "basic function" 'cause it's a pretty simple actuator (open or closed). The Computers skill could then be used similarly to Disable Device, except with often lower DCs, which is really weird. Many of the examples under Disable Device would also fall under what Computers can do when even a lock is a computer.
I don't know how I feel about that at all. It seems to make the Computers skill way too powerful.

[Metaphysician]

I think the key difference is, to use the Computers skill you need an actual computer interface. A keypad lock may technically have a computer inside it, but there is no way to actually interact with that computer, except via the intended controls. Thus, cracking it open is Engineering, since its a matter of physically mucking with the electronics rather than hacking code.

Basically, embedded computers can't be usefully targeted by the Computers skill unless they are networked or have general purpose computer interfaces. Both of which, note, should *not* be the case for any devices where security is a concern.

[Nixitur]

Metaphysician wrote:

I think the key difference is, to use the Computers skill you need an actual computer interface. A keypad lock may technically have a computer inside it, but there is no way to actually interact with that computer, except via the intended controls.

I had thought so too for a while, but you can bypass the need for a user interface entirely by using a hacking kit. That's just a one-time investment of 20 credits. That's listed in both the Skills and the Computers section.

[Metaphysician]

You can bypass the user interface need, but you can't make an embedded computer that does one thing, into a general purpose computer, is my take. There's still no command prompt and no OS to work with, so to speak.

Hacking kits are not so much for 'hacking' non-computer electronics that happen to have microchips in them, and more about hacking computers that aren't designed to actually be interfaced with. Like, say, your in a server room, or accessing data conduits. Your dealing with actual full blown computers, they just are only designed to be accessed in specific ways ( ie, from the control room your not in ). So you provide your own keyboard.

[Nixitur]

Metaphysician wrote:

You can bypass the user interface need, but you can't make an embedded computer that does one thing, into a general purpose computer, is my take. There's still no command prompt and no OS to work with, so to speak.

Hacking kits are not so much for 'hacking' non-computer electronics that happen to have microchips in them, and more about hacking computers that aren't designed to actually be interfaced with.

The thing is, though, that locks are literally considered computers by the rules. And if they're computers, you can interact with them using the Computers skill. Whether there's a command line or anything like that doesn't matter. Not only do neither the Computers section nor the description of the skill make any reference to that, but what you're actually doing is thankfully abstracted away, so you don't need to be a computer whiz to use the Computers skill. And even if you couldn't make a lock do something it's not supposed to, opening up is certainly a thing it's supposed to do.

The difference between computers and non-computer electronics you mention is sensible and basically what Juniperkitsu proposed. It doesn't make any uses of Engineering obsolete and still makes Computers reasonably powerful. But I don't think it's supported by the rules.
The rules make no difference between general-purpose computers and embedded computers. Sure, the GM might rule that something just should not be considered a computer, but if something as limited, simple and obviously not general-purpose as a door lock, a datapad, and a lighting controller are considered computers (tier-1 in all cases, the Computers section literally says so), and thus valid targets for the Computers skill, then they should have a very good reason.

[whew]

Nixitur wrote:

Metaphysician wrote:

You can bypass the user interface need, but you can't make an embedded computer that does one thing, into a general purpose computer, is my take. There's still no command prompt and no OS to work with, so to speak.

Hacking kits are not so much for 'hacking' non-computer electronics that happen to have microchips in them, and more about hacking computers that aren't designed to actually be interfaced with.

The thing is, though, that locks are literally considered computers by the rules. And if they're computers, you can interact with them using the Computers skill. Whether there's a command line or anything like that doesn't matter. Not only do neither the Computers section nor the description of the skill make any reference to that, but what you're actually doing is thankfully abstracted away, so you don't need to be a computer whiz to use the Computers skill. And even if you couldn't make a lock do something it's not supposed to, opening up is certainly a thing it's supposed to do.

The difference between computers and non-computer electronics you mention is sensible and basically what Juniperkitsu proposed. It doesn't make any uses of Engineering obsolete and still makes Computers reasonably powerful. But I don't think it's supported by the rules.
The rules make no difference between general-purpose computers and embedded computers. Sure, the GM might rule that something just should not be considered a computer, but if something as limited, simple and obviously not general-purpose as a door lock, a datapad, and a lighting controller are considered computers (tier-1 in all cases, the Computers section literally says so), and thus valid targets for the Computers skill, then they should have a very good reason.

Very good reason 1: Analog locks exist in the real world.

Very good reason 2: Analog locks cannot be hacked.

Very good reason 3: Analog locks work even when the power is off.

Computer locks also have advantages, such as:

1) You can revoke someone's key without replacing the lock and all of its keys, which is a big advantage for a hotel or any business with a bunch of employees.

2) You can make fancier rules for who (and when) is allowed to open the lock.

[Nixitur]

whew wrote:

Very good reason 1: Analog locks exist in the real world.

Very good reason 2: Analog locks cannot be hacked.

Very good reason 3: Analog locks work even when the power is off.

Point well made and taken! But that still leaves electronic locks and other typical uses of the Engineering skill (like sabotaging or deactivating many electronics with embedded computers) very much doable with the Computers skill and probably with a lower DC.

In those cases, I would probably let the player hack them to accomplish these tasks, but at least have the DC be the same. Anything else is just a bit silly from a balance perspective.