Congratulations to the team!
The unfortunate position I'm in, having relinquished control of this portion of the project, is that anything I say is going to seem like I'm naysaying the people moving forward. It will seem like bitterness coming from the old guard. I'm not naysaying nor bitter and I wish them the best. However, I do care about people getting suspended and banned, so I'm going to say this and then I'll leave it alone.
That line that Redbot has in bold is something I asked him to add I don't think it's strong enough. This build unequivocally misses things that should have been caught before pushing a build to users. And it chooses to do nothing about those either because they don't see it, they're not sure how, or they haven't put time into it yet. Whatever the reason, I think the wording "there are some signs" is much too light and I would not use this build on any account you care about.
I understand this puts me at odds with others working on this and that some will think I've lost the right to say anything given that I'm not working on it myself. I'll also not press the issue. But it's a pretty important issue that feels like it's a bit glossed over, so I'm mentioning it. Do with that information what you will.
That said, it's not at all up to me what people choose to release or how people use stuff on their account. I just think disclosures are important so people can make informed decisions.
[Edit: Redbot's previously bolded message has since been enlarged. That does change the context of the above but I leave it in its original form]
The only comment I'm going to make on this, and then I'll drop it:
Anyone using MQ must knowingly accept the risk of a ban. It goes with the territory. That said, the following strikes me as a dick move, and I think that's because of the way it reads in a forum post:
"This build unequivocally misses things that should have been caught."
Have you actually performed the reverse engineering on this build yourself and compared it against our work? On what basis are you stating things were missed? You said "unequivocally"-- that's a strong word. It means without doubt, without question. So what, specifically, was missed?
You can't walk up, slap your dick on the table, declare something is wrong, and then offer zero proof. That wouldn't be accepted in any professional setting, any peer review, any code audit -- anywhere. If you're going to make a claim that bold, defend it. Name the specific detections. Show the offsets. Point to the signatures. Something.
Otherwise what you've actually done is post a vague, unsubstantiated warning that undermines the work of the people who stepped up when you stepped back -- while giving yourself just enough plausible deniability to say you were "just looking out for people." That's not disclosure. That's FUD.
If you have real findings, share them privately with the team or post them here. That would actually help people make informed decisions. A hand-wavey "trust me, it's bad" from someone who admittedly isn't doing the work helps nobody.
I respect all the work you've all done in the past but it's pretty evident based on conversations that you all have talked yourself into a decision and that's fine i really don't care but you've said your piece either contribute or move on
