Aliases for CrackMapExec commands

Request for aliases for CrackMapExec commands:- cme and cmedb.

name:      crackmapexec
summary:   A swiss army knife for pentesting networks
publisher: -
license:   GPL-3.0-or-later
description: |
  CrackMapExec (a.k.a CME) is a post-exploitation tool that helps automate assessing the security of
  large Active Directory networks. Built with stealth in mind, CME follows the concept of "Living
  off the Land": abusing built-in Active Directory features/protocols to achieve it's functionality
  and allowing it to evade most endpoint protection/IDS/IPS solutions.
  CME makes heavy use of the **impacket** library (developed by **@asolino**) for working with
  network protocols and performing a variety of post-exploitation techniques.
  Although meant to be used primarily for offensive purposes (e.g. red teams, internal pentest), CME
  can be used by blue teams as well to assess account privileges, find possible misconfigurations
  and simulate attack scenarios.
  **CrackMapExec** is developed by **@byt3bl33d3r** and **@mpgn**
  Installation: `snap install --edge crackmapexec`
  User's Manual:-
  - crackmapexec.cme
  - crackmapexec.cmedb
  - crackmapexec
snap-id:      sCj74gWrRHGxHTTUb9utKK5w3PfAlDNu
tracking:     latest/edge
refresh-date: today at 20:59 IST
  latest/stable:    –                                       
  latest/candidate: v5.3.0-54-g21b5adb 2022-09-29 (9) 105MB -
  latest/beta:      v5.3.0-54-g21b5adb 2022-09-29 (9) 105MB -
  latest/edge:      v5.3.0-54-g21b5adb 2022-09-26 (6) 105MB -

Apologies for missing this request. cme conflicts with a different package of the same name in Ubuntu - - but I don’t expect this to be an issue in practice as these two packages seem quite different in scope.

cmedb has no conflicts that I can find.

+1 from me for both of these.

I would also say +1 for cmedb, but not sure about cme. I’d like to keep a 100% record of providing non-ambiguous aliases, so perhaps cmex?

Hi @phoenix,

Does cmex works as an alternative alias?

No, it doesn’t. CrackMapExec is a lot more popular package than the almost obscure - nobody ever heard of - repo package named cme. Just because a less popular repo package exists earlier than CrackMapExec cme command doesn’t mean the name is reserved!

The repo package cme source repo:-

The CrackMapExec source repo:-

@Igor Please compare and count the stars.

Sarcasm aside, do what you guys think is right.

@phoenix Actually, the fact something exists before something else does matter. Think of someone making another tool with cme as the prefix and then asking us to grant them that - which would conflict with your software. That would not be fair to you.

We want to find the best result here. Could you suggest something that would work for you?

@phoenix ping,

Can you provide the requested information?

@phoenix - ping, this request cannot proceed without the requested information

Take a look at this answer. Also look at @alexmurray’s answer as it’s suggestive that my request is okay.

So you just need to convince a second reviewer…

This is correct, but on the other side advocacy (@Igor) asked if you could suggest an alternative that could work and we have not heard back from you yet about it.

@ogra convince a second reviewer, eh? FYI, I’m doing this so that the Linux community doesn’t have to deal with the complications of installing packages. Neither I’m getting paid nor am I getting any recognition/appreciation for this from the community. On the other hand, Snapcraft got more popular because of us developers and it’s the job of the “reviewers” to make this whole process developer friendly. Honestly, I’d love to chat with you guys if this were a technical discussion, but it is not and I’m feeling like I’m wasting my time here.

Btw, I’m really surprised that after working hard to develop a snap, to make Snapcraft popular, developers had to go through this BS every time.

Now I’m 100% convinced that you guys are trying to waste my time. Just cancel this request already. I’ll let the original maintainer of the project deal with this once he takes over.

yes, that is the process, you need two reviewers that agree and sorry for the sarcasm that shined through in my comment but you started arguing with all the reviewers that asked for input here instead of trying to constructively find a solution with them …

no it is not, many of them are community members, they do not get paid for this either and their “job” is to review something by the rules we have … one of these rules is that two of them need to be in agreement, one of the rules is that no aliases should be granted if there are conflicts and a solution should be found through a constructive discussion …

Are you out of your mind? When did I argue with anybody? Please don’t create drama here.

If I’d have gave my constructive answer, then it’d have made those reviewers look like idiots, including that Lady.

well, you are creating drama with such an attitude, i’m just trying to help … point is that the name is taken already, no matter how popular or unpopular the package in the archive is, pointing to download stats or “stars” as you argued above will not change that fact …

… you can have any other alias if it does not conflict and igor actually asked you very friendly if you can come up with a constructive suggestion after explaining the point that it actualy matters if a package already owns a name …

so can you come up with a different suggestion or should the reviewers simply wipe the request from their queue ?

Reminder to all forum participants to please follow the communication guidelines as outlined in

Closing this thread as the OP has marked it as solved.

1 Like