Removing Support for Third Party Closed Source Modules


#755

My response is the same as @Scriptos for this one. Why punish everyone for the actions of the few? I myself used private modules in a genuine way, and I am not going to waste my time proving it to you.

And do you think this would change by making the code public? If people figure out a popular admin script has backdoors, they delete it, then what? Every other admin is backdoored as well. Wait for another one to be made? I don’t think so. They’ll continue using it in hopes that something else will be made, or, they can make their own.

Not really. I myself have had a lot of uses with private modules. Genuine ones at that.

Suggest? What?!?!?! I am suggesting that people should put up with backdoors!?? Woah! I do not remember making that suggestion! I simply suggest that people should opt in to using private modules. They will be informed that they will be running code they cannot see, and they should only accept if they know it is non malicious. So, Terabyte services. Great example of why this would be a great option. It would also benefit me, a genuine user of private modules. I’m sure many others would benefit as well.


#756

The problem is, the original post doesn’t exactly explain all the different arguments that we keep repeating on this thread. I would create my own thread and include many of the arguments that I see here, but I’m afraid that they’d just merge the two due to requesting the same basic idea.

By the way, I want to apologize if it seems like I’m singling you out or if it appears as if I hold anger towards you. I only keep replying to you specifically right now since you appear to be one of the more active posters at this moment.


#757

I urge you to make a new thread with the points made in the comments here. At the very least, add it as a comment to the existing one. If they merge it, they merge it, the opinions will still be heard. Nothing gets accomplished by running in circles and arguing different opinions in a category that’s not meant for it.


#758

Yes, and this is a forum. A post is created, and we have the ability to reply to it. What do you want us to do, reply “ok.” with every new announcement?


#759

Use the proper channels to improve the site. #platform-feedback exists for all things bug reports, feature requests, and everything in between. Like I’ve said above, there seems to be a 2 month old post in feature requests about this that doesn’t have much support/traction and that’s it. All of the ideas and arguments made here should really go in a feature request to be heard.


#760

I’d say because this is a forum and there is a reply button, and we can reply with things relative to the announcement.


#761

And that’s fair. I’m just stating that your replys containing good ideas, opinions, and valid arguments may fall of deaf ears (blind eyes?).

The proper way and the guarenteed way to get your voice heard with changes you want to see is to use the feature requests.


#762

Well I would hope that the engineers at Roblox, or whoever passes our ideas along to them, are able to look at the replies to their own announcements.


#763

Took your advise and created a new thread. I probably won’t be replying on this one anymore, since I’ve stated most of my arguments on that one.


#764

Roblox is removing a major feature that thousands of people rely on. You cannot expect people to not debate their opinions about the change here.


#765

I apologize if I’ve been overly hostile to people defending private modules. I left some of my newer thoughts on a separate thread about this topic.


#766

I’m having a hard time finding the original quote due to the sheer amount of repeated words in this thread … c’mon people can’t we read a bit before replying? The excess extra may cause Roblox to stop listening :confused:

HOWEVER … It has been stated it is fine to debate our opinions on announcement threads as engineers do utilize the information to guage how the community will respond, as long as it’s responsible and kept on topic. I’ll quote the original post as soon as I can find it with … All 700+ posts …

Beyond this, I don’t disagree removing private modules is a good idea with how they’ve been abused, and I overall think it’s the best choice. What I’m personally upset about is no alternative. If they made this announcement stating they’d be removing third party support while focusing on an immediate alternative, I’d at least be content knowing it’d be coming sooner than later despite the fact that they possess a shear amount of statistics showing they probably should have started on this earlier. This is why I’m disappointed in ROBLOX and their leadership. They didn’t look at every use case as best as possible, and only took action when it became malicious and began affecting the majority of the population, which is the small percentage of top devs. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a big problem for everyone and is why I want an alternative, but the timing for this and when the impact began is … Kinda significant.

Anywho, I’m going to stop posting here so much as I’ve stated my opinion multiple times and now it’s getting repetitive. We’ll learn what’ll happen today, and I’ll focus my attention toward feature requests. Do hope they’ve changed the course of action with announcing they’ll be working on an alternative asap at least before flipping the switch.


#767

I am still confused as to why they haven’t disabled the ability to require closed-source modules yet… When is this happening?


#768

After they provide a viable alternative?

The impacted player estimates they have should be highly accurate as compared to our estimates which were always the lowest estimate possible. I would speculate that the actual number of developers unwilling to give up their IP and thus the down stream affected player count has given pause enough to re-evaluate shipping this without an alternative.


#769

Instead of speculating like that, how about we wait for an official response from staff.


#770

I don’t think you’ve been hostile at all, in my opinion. It’s just this change is one of the most drastic changes roblox has done, if not the most. There should’ve been an alternative given when the announcement was made that they are removing it entirely, but there wasn’t.


#771

It’s a good chunk of the way into day 4 after it should have happened. I would love to see an official response. One way or the other I would prefer to know what is going on.


#772

Originally I was against this feature, but seeing how prevalent the abuse is I am now for it. Packages promise to be everything modules were and more. I look forward to their release.

My 2c.


#773

I support this update, as Roblox is protecting users/Developers from the new malicious backdoors. I am glad that Roblox decided to provide an change instead of completely destroying this feature. Developers who are making modules shouldn’t be scared to show their code for Source Modules. This is a good step Roblox is taking, I just hope the next thing they do is the enter password feature when a different IP is found, to prevent cookie logging.


#774

At best I saw a ‘maybe’ type of response along with ‘late 2019’ at the earliest. I believe this was associated with packages, but was never confirmed. If they have confirmed that a replacement is coming, please link it as I would love to see that.

Protection of intellectual property and security related concerns are the chief motivators for keeping source code private.