Talk:Md5deep

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer Security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer SecurityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer SecurityTemplate:WikiProject Computer SecurityComputer Security

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer Security with:

Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information...

Review importance and quality of existing articles
Identify categories related to Computer Security
Tag related articles
Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests)
Identify articles for improvement
Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc.
Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Hashdeep

Looks like 'hashdeep' is now also given out with md5deep. Should it be mentioned here or get a new page? Tabitha.able (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Is it a notable software? `a5b (talk) 22:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly. This task can be easily done with either | (pipe) of find from findutils + any hashing program you want or any other generic file list processor, like those present in almost any GUI and console-mode file manager. Because of that, I also doubt this article should have link from MD5 page either. --Rowaa[SR13] (talk) 12:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By that notion, nearly every *nix application isn't notable because most can be done by piping appropriate commands on the command line. Md5deep was the first program to automatically perform its functions, and is a standard in many IA and computer forensics fields. That, of course, being from my own observation. Rurik (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe it was first (if it was at all) because nobody ever needed to make this a separate program. I, for example, just click Ctrl-G on list of files in FAR Manager for years already select md5sum from list and don't even think about having separate program to replace 2-5 keystrokes. Win32 users may simple use built-in file find functionality and drag-n-drop results to any visual checksum program that supports it. Yes, by this notation many *nix programs are not notable as well, but I don't really care in a sense that I have nothing against description of this program here in Wikipedia, but I would really hate to see it claim to be first to offer function that is for years already used in many other programs, just in a more general form. --Rowaa[SR13] (talk) 17:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even referenced discussion at Debian tracker mentions how completely trivial this piece of software is. Can I, in similar vein, spend this evening creating binaries for calculating 1+1, 2+2, etc. up to 1000 and then add new 1000 glorious pages to Wikipedia describing every of those "programs" I've created? I assume every of those 1000 would be "the first program to automatically perform its functions" as well. --Rowaa[SR13] (talk) 17:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. Whether one person thinks it's notable or not isn't so much the question as whether there exists a large body of people talking about it and using it on a regular basis. Hitting Google Scholar and searching for 'md5deep' reveals that it's referenced by name in dozens of papers in the forensics literature. Further, it's part of the Fedora, OpenSUSE and Debian repositories, so it seems to be broadly considered notable by the people maintaining such things. Within the forensics community, md5deep seems to be one of the standard tools. The authors, Jesse Kornblum and Simson Garfinkel, enjoy fine reputations within the forensics community, at least partially for their work with md5deep. Rob (talk) 06:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YES, MD5deep is most certainly notable! Familiarity with MD5deep was listed in the skill requirements for every job posting for certain dump-related information technology employment opportunities when I checked yesterday, 24 July 2012. This article should NOT be removed! MD5deep remains relevant, and is important to retain if it can be of use to people looking for jobs. (Yes, I understand that anyone looking for a job in that field should already know what MD5deep is, as part of basic schooling or experience. But it is as worthwhile for inclusion in an encyclopedia as types of Pokemon and varieties of My Little Pony. Seems difficult to justify keeping those articles, but removing this one). --FeralOink (talk) 02:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Public Domain" isn't a license. KMeyer (talk) 01:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Application

A subject matter expert should write a small section in the article explaining why this is a tool that is needed. Under what circumstances would it be of value to have an MD5sum of every file in a filesystem? Twredfish (talk) 18:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Project website changing

According to http://jessekornblum.livejournal.com/289050.html the project's website is moving from SourceForge to GitHub at https://github.com/jessek/hashdeep + ZeniffMartineau (talk) 06:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]