If it is open information that a unit that is in a Camo marker state is in fact a hacker. Can you hack them in marker state? I would say no as per the rules for camo effect. p 70 of the 1.8 rules book. "Enemies cannot declare Attacks against a trooper in the Camouflaged state without previously Discovering that trooper, or declaring Intuitive Attack."
Neither the hackable characteristic nor the possession of a hacking device is public information for camo markers. You are also correct in your assumption, you cannot declare hacking attack vs a camo marker.
Guys I have one question. If i isolated enemy hacker his HD divace is disabled. It's mean enemy hacker now don't legal target for my killer hacker ?
If you are equipped with (or acquire due to scavenging, or some other means) a hacking device, you become a hacker. If you have your hacking device disabled, you don't stop being a hacker.
What I meant by my first line was that a trooper came out of camo. All its info became open. Then the unit recamo'd. Thanks again!
Same scenario even if they were previously revealed at some point. As a player, you now know what to expect from that marker though!
How can I prove it to my opponent he wants read rules not forums (( but I agree with and that my position to.)
So, what you are saying is that when a unit goes back into marker state, technically, the information becomes private again?
Yes, but as good sportsmanship, I'd personally let my opponent consult the information or ask any question on that trooper as if it was public. Just so they don't have to physically note all the details and to keep the game flowing.
There is an example of a Scavenger becoming a hacker in the Wiki, bottom green box. http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Scavenger As for still being targeted by hacking programs as a Hacker when the device is disabled, there's no explicit rule that says you can or cannot that I can see. The practical upshot of that is that your disabled hacking device does NOT protect you from being hacked, as you have not lost the automatic and obligatory skill 'Hacker', as far as I can see. More to the point of your immediate problem, you could invite your opponent to indicate the rule that allows them to avoid being attacked by hacking programs.
Yes. Your troops on the table have lost track of the camo'd unit, including via hacking/WiFi/Bluetooth/whatever.
Now, is there a lore description of how camo will cloak your spot on the network from other entities on the network aka hackers?
Yes and no. It can be technological in nature (colour changing fabrics, sound dampening, IR dampening) or it can be purely skill based (dude in a Ghillie suit sat really still) or everything in between, it'll depend on the trooper in question. Ariadna Scout? Purely skill based, they're literal ghillies in the mist. Uhlan TAG? That's going to be technological Camouflage, essentially an inferior thermoptic camo
Now they says if Hacking device is broken how enemy hacker can hack? This is not magic.. they use "logic" and missed rules. We need FAQ update with answer))
As described, your opponent wants you to provide rules to support a position, while using logical argument to support another. Probably you should both use the same method of deciding how to play the situation! It looks like the rules support hacking a 'disabled' hacker. I'd agree with your opponents logic, I can't see why someone with a broken hacking device would be any more susceptible to Brain Blast than any other trooper. I could have perhaps made an argument that the piece of the hacking device that is 'disabled' does not include vulnerable cybernetic modifications or equipment worn - say some kind of implant or visor that the attacks are made through. But even with that kind of argument it falls down as to why I can't simply drop or shut down the gear, particularly if it's 'scavenged' or found in a panoply.
It's some pretty high level gaming logic at work here, but keep in mind that hacking devices aren't separate devices from your brain the way we think of computers. No, please don't ask how Scavenging a Hacking Device works in game on a battlefield, that makes no sense at all. Maybe this will be changed next edition, maybe it won't. We'll see. For now, though, Disabled means the device isn't able to transmit coherently, not that you can't convince it to throw a meta-physical nuke directly into the brain of the hacker.
You cant hack them...buuuuut.... here come cybermines which are not exploding on non-hackable things ... such a nice game, where everything has an exclusions and special cases...yeey!