31st March 2014
"....shall not itself nor permits or facilitate its employees, agents or any third party to copy, publicly display, transmit, decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer or make any adaptation or modification of the Software. The Licensee shall not remove or permit to be removed any copyright notice on the Software and (if applicable) the License terms nor any statement of ownership which may be affixed thereto."
Now, show me only one software license from a commercial plug-in development house which doesn't mention this point in great clarity!
PS: I don't care about Auganizer. But I care about the integrity of my software on other ppl's machines. From my perspective, you are recommending something that could be understood as a "light-weight" hacking and manipulation tool. This can be very, very problematic in certain countries such as Germany (and probably more) where it is clearly forbidden to offer tools aimed to manipulate other people's software.
About code-signing: In my world, both the contents of a ".component" and the package itself are signed. Any later manipulation of the plist breaks this signature (a local copy doesn't make it better). This is all what these signatures are about, they guarantee that the software is in original state. This IS user security, no matter if you care or not.
I agree this is the DAW's job. But the plist is clearly other people's territory!