p. 4 Under Skinning "...makes it seems..." should be "...makes it seem...". Also "...making cheaply fabricated less distasteful..." seems to be missing an noun in there (or perhaps "making the cheaply fabricated less distasteful"). p. 5 Under Virtual Reality "...cut off and" seems to have been cut off. p. 6 Under Servers "may provides modifiers" should be "may provide modifiers". p. 6 Under Apps, "...that are run are your own..." should be "...that are run on your own...". p. 7 Under Mesh Terminology, the text for Operating Systems should probably be "The software that runs on a hardware device". p. 7 Under Other Links, there is an extra close quote after environments. p. 8 Under Authentication and Encryption "...and protected data..." should be "...and protect data..." (or perhaps "...and keep protected data...". p. 11 Under Scan Infomorph "it's public" should be "its public". Similarly, "it's mesh ID" should be "its mesh ID". p. 12 Under ALIs "...listed om p. XX" should be "...listed on p. XX". p. 14 Under Home Device "...but you reside on your home vice" should be "...but you reside on your home device". p. 14 Under Home Device, it sounds like you can't run an infomorph on a mote, but in the next section on Inadequate Devices, it sounds like you can (after deleting the resident ALI). p. 14 Under Distributed Infomorphs "Mesh networks makes this easy" should be "Mesh networks make this easy". p. 14 Under Distributed Infomorphs "You also acquire a degree of vulnerability..." doesn't really match the rest of the sentence. Perhaps it was intended to be "invulnerability"? p. 15 Under Meshware, the complexity for App-Lock, Auto-Erase, Copylock are all [Mod] here, but [Min] in the Gear chapter. E-Veil is [Mod/R] here and [Min/R] in the Gear chapter. p. 15 Under E-Veil it may be worth clarifying what happens with this opposed test (perhaps expanding the description on p. 11). I would assume that if the Infosec test succeeds, and the Program test succeeds by more, the scanner detects the rest of the data, but not the protected apps. If the Infosec test fails, the scanner doesn't get any data. If the Infosec test succeeds by more (possibly because Program test failed), the hidden apps are discovered. p. 18 Under Tracking by Biometrics "...Perceive If eyeballing)" should be "...Perceive (if eyeballing)". p. 18 Under Researching Public Mesh Presence "These can provide extent data" should probably be "These can provide extensive data" (possibly "extant", but awkward) p. 18 Under Tracking Ongoing Mesh Activity "...to aquiring a far..." should be "...to aquire a far...". p. 19 Under Burner Mesh Ids "...then erased, switched out..." should probably be "...then erased or switched out..." (possibly "then erased and switched out"). p. 20 Under Hacking "eponymous" isn't the right word. Perhaps "Software is a classic example of a..."? p. 21 Under Hidden (from the previous page) The phrase "ghost in the machine" does not mean hidden. It refers to the mind in mind-body dualism. In EP, this "ghost" is called the ego, while the "machine" is the morph. p. 21 Under Hidden (from the previous page) "...efforts to subvert the system" could use a reference to System Subversion on p. 26 p. 21 Under Spotted "Spotted automatically trigger..." should be "Spotted automatically triggers...". p. 23 Under Security Design "Muses typically acts..." should be "Muses typically act..." (or "A muse typically acts..."). p. 23 Under Simple Hacking "If your privileges, don't allow it..." should not have the first comma. p. 23 Under Simple Hacking, there's some problem with the last bullet point "...modify rolls!incapacitated..." (already mentioned by CordialUltimate2) p. 27 Under Sniff Traffic "...wireless tracking" should be "...wireless traffic". p. 28 Under Mesh Damage and Armor "Critical successes mean armor is ignored" - Both Actions and Combat and Game Mechanics have critical successes on an attack doing double damage. It seems like it would better to make the Mesh mechanic consistent with those. p. 28 Under Mesh Damage and Armor, there's some references to armor here, but I'm not aware of any listed source for mesh armor. p. 29 Under Damage and Infomorph Riders "i.e., falling into..." should be "e.g., falling into...". p. 30 Under Mindhack Ego "...psychosurgery takes times..." should be "...psychosurgery takes time...". p. 33 Under Admin/Cheat Actions "pre-occupied" should just be "preoccupied". p. 34 Under Ripping Sensors, the Ripper isn't included in Gear or Actions and Combat documents. The EM grenade should be called an EMP grenade to match the entry on p. 12 of Actions and Combat. p. 34 Under Clearing Sensors "Nanoswarms must be cleared with disassembler swarms". I assume this is a Spy Swarm, but based on the Gear chapter, I would expect these to be cleared by either the Guardian Swarm, or by an EMP attack. p. 35 Under Caught in the Act "bottom-run reputation" should probably be "bottom-rung reputation". Wound thresholds have an strange interaction with Distributed Infomorphs. If you take a DUR 50 morph (WT 10) and spread it across 5 devices, each of them now has a DUR of 10, and a WT of 2. At this point, you can hit each of them with 8 points of damage, leaving the morph with 20 wounds. If spread acrosss 10 devices, that's DUR 5 and WT of 1 on each. If each takes 4 damage, that's 40 wounds. Perhaps in the case of a distributed infomorph, the WT should continue to be based on the total DUR to avoid such silliness. This is mentioned on p. 14 and p. 28. Hacking tests are opposed tests, which don't generally have hard rules for what happens when both parties tie or fail. It's reasonable to assume a deadlock any time there's a tie (though it's unclear when this should trigger an alert). In the case of a double failure, should we be treating it as a deadlock or let the higher roll win? My personal preference is one of the following:

• Nothing happens - no alert, and the action has no effect
• The action fails, and an alert is triggered if the defender's roll was higher than the attacker's.

There's a minor issue of when the Trying Again rule takes effect. Obviously, I don't expect this to take effect in combat (if you shoot and miss, your next shot doesn't take a penalty). Perhaps it's intended to apply in the case of hacking, though. There's some merit to repeated attempts having less chance of success in that context. If that's the case, ideally the deadlock or no effect results wouldn't trigger the Trying Again rule.

Maybe some info on how to create ALIs? I would love to know if I can upgrade my muse with security package.

Grim G wrote:

2) How much time is spent spoofing and sniffing? It says it requires a "hacking test", but the only hacking tests with a time frame are the intrusions. Am I to assume that I can bruit-force spoof?

Spoofing and sniffing are real, actual world techniques akin to "I pretend to be another" (spoofing) and "I overhear your conversation" (sniffing). So, it's not that you need to expend time to prepare those to execute, but the right moment to click the "execute" icon of a carefully pre-constructed (or bought, or stolen, or given) script. So for spoofing you need to get the "ID" you want to pretend to be (intrusion, retrieval, forgery), and then you do the "here are my papers" (execution, the target system asks for your ID and the test represents you having applied the stuff right). For sniffing, you simply roll for "straining your (digital) ears", so it's not that you need time to do so, you spend the time while sniffing (and a success means you catch something, while a success better than your target's means nobody connected to the "line" realizes somebody else is listening, and a botch identifies you or your position, for example).

I think that basically meant: spoofing is 1 action of you have right credentials and sniffing is however much time your GM thinks it takes to intercept the signal you want.