The technical summary provides a lot of detail. I don’t think Apple would omit remote update functionality from it if such capability existed, especially since database poisoning is a real risk to this type of program. I’m comfortable with interpreting the lack of evidence as evidence of absence of such a mechanism. Explicit clarification would certainly help though, but my original point stands: there is positive evidence in the docs which the FUD tweets don’t engage with.

In particular, I’m referencing the figure which says that the database of CSAM hashes is “Blinded and embedded” into the client device. That does not sound like an asset the system remotely updates.