> He's not a "hacker" who is doing security research, he's a malware creator selling malware.

There's no reason he can't be both. We can both like him for stopping WannaCry, and dislike him for (if true) marketing/distributing malware based on Kronos.

Although I agree with your general sentiment, I'm confused as to why the security community is chilled by this. The court case should be public, so we'll be able to judge the evidence ourselves.