Hello everyone.

Recently, someone pointed out that I am hereGamesThe assistant uses an 'device_faker' implementationModel camouflagebut the related modifications to the source code were not made public in time. This approach is indeed inappropriate, and it also leaves the original author andOpen sourceThe community and users following this matter have caused distress and distrust. Here, I sincerely apologize to everyone.

The failure to open up sources in a timely manner was mainly due to concerns from two sides.

On one hand, there was a recent dispute over secondary editing, concealing sources, and misinformation, and ultimately, the responsibility and doubts fell on me. These experiences made me overly sensitive to similar issues, so I adopted an overly closed protection approach to my code and relied on developmentToolsEnhanced program encryption.

On the other hand, when the game assistant obtains the device model template, it needs to connect to my server. I was concerned that after making the implementation public, the server interface might be maliciously called, traffic fell, or even attacked, so I did not disclose the relevant code in time.

But after reflection, I realized that these concerns should not be used as reasons for failing to fulfill open source obligations. Open source code and server security should be handled separately. Server interfaces should be protected through authentication, rate limiting, and access control, rather than withholding open-source parts for server security reasons. No matter what considerations were made at the time, I made the final decision, and I should bear the responsibility.

Ultimately, this issue stemmed from my weak awareness of open source and insufficient attention to open source licenses, attribution requirements, and community rules. At that time, I was only thinking about borrowing it AI, aiming to quickly implement the required functions based on existing open-source code, without seriously considering the rights of the original authors and the subsequent impact. AI is just an auxiliary tool; it cannot take responsibility for me, nor can it be an excuse to ignore open source obligations.

Currently, I have published the related source code for device disguise on GitHub:

[Link] GitHub – qq207000604…

At the same time, I have proactively contacted the original author to communicate and apologize for the delayed open-source issue, and have provided corresponding financial compensation. Thank you to the original author for being willing to communicate with me, and also to everyone who pointed out the problem and encouraged me to face and rectify this matter.

From now on, when using open source projects, I will confirm in advance and strictly comply with the relevant licenses, clearly indicating the original project, original author, and code source, retaining necessary copyright and licensing information, and respecting the labor achievements of every developer and contributor.

In addition, I also want to apologize to the cool friends who were hurt by my extreme remarks. At the time, I didn't know the full story, and because of the previous second reform controversy, I was overly sensitive, and under emotional influence, he made inappropriate remarks. No matter what state I was in at the time, overly harsh language was my fault, and I shouldn't have responded too harshly without knowing the full situation.

Open source is not just about uploading code; it also means respecting licenses, respecting original authors, and maintaining proper transparency with the community. This issue exposed my shortcomings in this area, and I will seriously learn from this and correct it through concrete actions.

Once again, I apologize to the creators and contributors of 'device_faker', the cool friends who were hurt by my words, and all the users who followed this matter. Thank you all for your criticism, reminders, and supervision.