What that sounds like to me is you would consider dozens of individual and potentially malicious packages to be benign, but when brought under one umbrella it i

What that sounds like to me is you would consider dozens of individual and potentially malicious packages to be benign, but when brought under one umbrella it is considered to be malicious? Every feature I've read that is included in that software suite has a good use case with zero malicious intent, and often times can be very useful to white hat hackers and system administrators and security analysts alike. I still don't believe it is fault of the author that black hat hackers are pirating and abusing a useful software suite, especially when it isn't being advertised exclusively towards them and the author has in many ways attempted to mitigate or limit harmful uses and users. Like a gun manufacturer who offers weapons as believer in home defense and the right to bear arms, only to have criminals steal merchandise and use it to rob a bank. Or the guy who invented dynamite which has great uses such as tunneling through mountains only to have it used for derailing and looting trains. You can kill a man with a pencil; that doesn't mean a 20-pack of pencils was produced with malicious intent. Dangerous use cases don't necessarily mean that is their purpose. I agree it is a difficult line to tread, and, in my opinion it really boils down to his involvement in the criminal activity itself.