Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Hashcat Failure Due to Processor Check #742

Open
MalwareMechanic opened this issue Nov 10, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Hashcat Failure Due to Processor Check #742

MalwareMechanic opened this issue Nov 10, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
🌀 COMMANDO-VM A package or future to be used by COMMANDO VM ❔ discussion Further discussion is needed

Comments

@MalwareMechanic
Copy link
Collaborator

The hashcat package will fail if the system's processor is not "GenuineIntel", see below:

# Check if the manufacturer is Intel
if ($processor.Manufacturer -eq "GenuineIntel") {
Write-Output "Intel processor detected for hashcat."
} else {
Write-Output "Non-Intel processor detected. Hashcat will not work"
throw "Non-Intel processor detected."
}

However, the GitHub actions to test installation may use non-GenuineIntel processors and the package will fail. Since we cannot guarantee the processor type during the test installation, I propose we complete the installation and raise a warning to the user that their system does not support this tool due to a non-GenuineIntel processor.

This allows the test suite to recognize a successful installation and will reduce confusion as to why the package is failing.

@mandiant/commando-vm thoughts since this is mainly a Commando VM tool?

@MalwareMechanic MalwareMechanic added ❔ discussion Further discussion is needed 🌀 COMMANDO-VM A package or future to be used by COMMANDO VM labels Nov 10, 2023
@day1player
Copy link
Contributor

linking #653

@day1player
Copy link
Contributor

I think the documentation may have changed since we last worked on this package. I'm ok with this as the requirements to run have apparently changed

@MalwareMechanic
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I'm thinking it through some more. I'm not sure we should preform a check -- simply install and let the user find out afterwards when they execute it that it fails. My thought process is that even if we generate a warning, the user will likely not see it (esp. in headless mode).

@mandiant/commando-vm thoughts?

@day1player
Copy link
Contributor

@Menn1s thoughts on this one?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🌀 COMMANDO-VM A package or future to be used by COMMANDO VM ❔ discussion Further discussion is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants