12-08-2015, 12:57 AM
I am, but you knew that.
The problem with packaging hashcat right now, as dropdead and I were discussing, is that hashcat doesn't exactly adhere to the FHS. Basically the hashcat directory is a working directory, and that's rather contradictory to the FHS.
Ideally before we go down the road of Linux packaging, we would re-organize the file structure, such that binaries are in /usr/bin; kernels, rule files, etc. are in /usr/share/hashcat; and user files (pot, restore, induct) are in the user's home directory, e.g. ~/.hashcat).
Otherwise, we basically just have to stuff everything in /usr/share/hashcat and have the user run from that directory as root.
The problem with packaging hashcat right now, as dropdead and I were discussing, is that hashcat doesn't exactly adhere to the FHS. Basically the hashcat directory is a working directory, and that's rather contradictory to the FHS.
Ideally before we go down the road of Linux packaging, we would re-organize the file structure, such that binaries are in /usr/bin; kernels, rule files, etc. are in /usr/share/hashcat; and user files (pot, restore, induct) are in the user's home directory, e.g. ~/.hashcat).
Otherwise, we basically just have to stuff everything in /usr/share/hashcat and have the user run from that directory as root.