Huh - when I did my veracrypt testing in late 2018, it used the filename. This seems like the approach that would cause the least amount of confusion. Otherwise, we'll have a steady stream of users asking this question.
https://www.techsolvency.com/passwords/h...veracrypt/
https://www.techsolvency.com/passwords/h...pt.potfile
If reverting to this behavior is undesirable, maybe a warning shown to the screen for all potfile_disable formats?
https://www.techsolvency.com/passwords/h...veracrypt/
https://www.techsolvency.com/passwords/h...pt.potfile
Code:
hashcat_ripemd160_aes_13711.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_aes-twofish_13712.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_serpent_13711.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_serpent-aes_13712.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_serpent-twofish-aes_13713.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_twofish_13711.vc:hashcat
hashcat_ripemd160_twofish-serpent_13712.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_aes_13751.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_aes-twofish_13752.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_serpent_13751.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_serpent-aes_13752.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_serpent-twofish-aes_13753.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_twofish_13751.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha256_twofish-serpent_13752.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_aes_13721.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_aes-twofish_13722.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_serpent_13721.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_serpent-aes_13722.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_serpent-twofish-aes_13723.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_twofish_13721.vc:hashcat
hashcat_sha512_twofish-serpent_13722.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_aes_13731.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_aes-twofish_13732.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_serpent_13731.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_serpent-aes_13732.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_serpent-twofish-aes_13733.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_twofish_13731.vc:hashcat
hashcat_whirlpool_twofish-serpent_13732.vc:hashcat
hashcat_streebog-512_aes_13771.vc:hashcatIf reverting to this behavior is undesirable, maybe a warning shown to the screen for all potfile_disable formats?
~