Related
First off, I want to apologize if this information is either or both regurgitated and irrelevant.
I was looking for information on eMMC, and there really isn't much, and I found an old article that describes how data reliance works with eMMC. At least a cursory look.
One of the features of Reliance (and Reliance Nitro) file system is that it never overwrites live data. It will always use free space on disk or in case there is no space, it will give “disk full” error back to the application. Reliance also has a special transaction mode called “Application-controlled”. In this case, Reliance only conducts a transaction point when asked by the application.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Full article here. Information about integration with embedded linux, here.
What struck me was the "Application-controlled" part. It would explain the technology that is undoing changes to /system when the system kills the temp root. I wonder if its possible for temp root to trigger the "commit" function of reliance once some small changes have been made...
Hope this is of some use.
CyWhitfield said:
First off, I want to apologize if this information is either or both regurgitated and irrelevant.
I was looking for information on eMMC, and there really isn't much, and I found an old article that describes how data reliance works with eMMC. At least a cursory look.
Full article here. Information about integration with embedded linux, here.
What struck me was the "Application-controlled" part. It would explain the technology that is undoing changes to /system when the system kills the temp root. I wonder if its possible for temp root to trigger the "commit" function of reliance once some small changes have been made...
Hope this is of some use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just an FYI, system is an EXT4 FS. This would require not only a custom kernel, but a lot of one offs in the way it's dealing with data. From what I've seen, this isn't what they are using.
But that's a very good find, I am looking into some of the information. Never heard of this before.
Thanks for the info. I would love to find out more about how this memory technology works. More articles are welcome!
Isn't that basically just wear leveling?
Is your name Ben? Or are you perhaps searching on this because of a post that Ben made on HTC? His claim was that even with an unlocked bootloader, that the eMMC could still be locked and prevent us from getting root. This seems far fetched to me.
edufur said:
Is your name Ben? Or are you perhaps searching on this because of a post that Ben made on HTC? His claim was that even with an unlocked bootloader, that the eMMC could still be locked and prevent us from getting root. This seems far fetched to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In all reality, I'm thinking this is the eventuality. Sprint knows that with root access we can circumvent the WiFi tether that they want to charge you for. They would never be OK with that.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Just an FYI, system is an EXT4 FS. This would require not only a custom kernel, but a lot of one offs in the way it's dealing with data. From what I've seen, this isn't what they are using.
But that's a very good find, I am looking into some of the information. Never heard of this before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Given that you have taken a much closer look at the inner workings than I have, I will defer to your observation with a caveat
According to wiki eMMC supports something called Reliable Write. This suggests that the reversion capability is a part of the eMMC standard. Reliance sounds more and more like a commercial implementation of this function decoupled from a specific media type. After looking it over again, nowhere in the article about Reliance is eMMC mentioned.
Isn't that basically just wear leveling?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wear leveling is a byproduct of what reliable write is doing. The difference is the ability to defer commitment of file system changes, so that a failed system update wont brick the device.
I do not know if changes made to the device are immediate and revertable (i.e., if eMMC is not told to commit a write, the changes just "go away" when its remounted). Nor do I know if reversions can be made on the fly, as we are experiencing when temp root gets deactivation.
There really isn't much information out there about this that is easy to find.
Is your name Ben? Or are you perhaps searching on this because of a post that Ben made on HTC? His claim was that even with an unlocked bootloader, that the eMMC could still be locked and prevent us from getting root. This seems far fetched to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Neither. eMMC isn't "locked" per se. HTC is using some mechanism that will revert the contents of /system to a prior state when some unknown condition is met. I do not mean to suggest that this is being done through "reliable write" or "Reliance", since it has already been pointed out by someone much more knowledgable on the subject than I that a standard EXT4 file system is being used. I honestly have no idea. I found this information somewhat by accident, and thought that if it could prove useful I should share it here.
Something is dynamically protecting the contents of /system. Once the phone is rooted, I have no doubt that this "something" will be rendered quite impotent. If it were not possible to do so in the first place, OTAs wouldn't work
Sprint knows that with root access we can circumvent the WiFi tether that they want to charge you for. They would never be OK with that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first part of your statement is true, Sprint knows full well that we can circumvent their attempts to charge us for WiFi tethering with root access. They have known this for years. They also know that in reality there is no way they can completely prevent someone from tethering their phone in one way or another. Even without root access. Ref: PDANet.
In my opinion, this protection of the eMMC contents was designed to reduce support costs from failed OTA updates bricking phones, and perhaps as protection against malware that can attain root, not unlike what Temp Root does.
I am not as paranoid as some here and refuse to accept that this was done specifically to thwart efforts to root the phone. The vast (and i mean VAST) majority of people who buy this phone will never even consider rooting the devices. This same majority has a subset of people that are easily stupid enough to screw up an OTA update or download and install malware.
I will take it a step further and opine that the only reason HTC is unlocking the bootloader is because we are such a minority AND that by tinkering with an unlocked device, we are actually helping HTC improve their product. They would rather have a more appealing facebook page than worry about losing a minuscule fraction of wifi tethering income.m Moreover, take a good look at where Sprint stands in the market, and what they have done recently to improve their position. They are doing a lot of really cool things, and have taken impressive steps to improve customer service and corporate image. That they would allow this bashing of HTC to continue unabated over a handful of tethering dollars is unlikely.
I appreciate your canter, very informative. A thanks will come your way.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Does pdanet allow wireless tether? I didn't think it did.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Nutzy said:
Does pdanet allow wireless tether? I didn't think it did.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't act as a hotspot, no.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Nutzy said:
I appreciate your canter, very informative. A thanks will come your way.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Much appreciated!
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
So, I would be interested in hearing more thoughts on this. Is the eMMC independent of the OS? In other words, would a custom ROM have to obey and work with the eMMC? Or could a custom ROM be made to either disable the eMMC or make it do what we want?
edufur said:
So, I would be interested in hearing more thoughts on this. Is the eMMC independent of the OS? In other words, would a custom ROM have to obey and work with the eMMC? Or could a custom ROM be made to either disable the eMMC or make it do what we want?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you're misunderstanding this. The eMMC is the memory inside the device that everything is stored on. It replaced the old NAND chips in older devices.
The OS is stored & runs off of eMMC memory, it's not independent. If you were to 'turn off' the eMMC the device would do nothing. A lot of the security features available on the chip itself probably aren't in use. HTC has been using their own form of write protection since early last year, even on the NAND based Evo 4G. I'd stake a bet they're using the same system here, and we just need to find a way to flash the ENG bootloader like we did last year to get around it.
I agree with you. reliance is setup to ward against "unauthorized" changes to the /system partitions. i believe the developer community takes way too deep a look at each action made by a corporation (htc) and view them as "big brother", when infact most changes are actually approved, reviewed, and committed by someone in accounting with no technical skills whatsoever. these people are forced to look at the bigger scheme of things and make a decision about it (after working for sprint for almost 2 years now...i can tell you how many decisions are literally made by someone who has no idea what the heck he is making decisions on).
instead of looking at them "trying to stop the development community from unlocking wireless tether" look at them as a CEO (who most of the time has no technical knowledge) and a PR rep (who really only cares about how their company is viewed) and using this kind of encryption is only there to "safeguard" their devices against attacks.
one would think the secret to perm rooting the device is triggering the reliance write function so it commits the changes instead of reloading them. if /system doesnt get changed unless theres an OTA of some sorts....theres more than likely a hash table that reliance would check against to verify...so an OTA would need to write to that table first, then make the changes....
more than likely some other noob has already said something along those lines and been flamed for it as well...just throwing it out there....
newkidd said:
.........
one would think the secret to perm rooting the device is triggering the reliance write function so it commits the changes instead of reloading them. if /system doesnt get changed unless theres an OTA of some sorts....theres more than likely a hash table that reliance would check against to verify...so an OTA would need to write to that table first, then make the changes....
........
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that stuck out in bold to me..... hmmmmmm
I probably was overlooking what eMMC was, however based on the links the user gave, I later learned a little more about its potential. It would appear that HTC is doing something along the lines of the operations expressed in the link. And if they are not fully replicating efforts, it would be a shame. I like the concept of wear leveling and efficient read/writes. It would be my hope that we could integrate all those functions within a custom rom.
I found a page on the Micron site on eMMC. In the tech notes section there are informational downloads for just one chip. Specifically, the Qualcomm QSC6695
You have to register to download them. A process I have already started. Their site claims it takes a half hour to register a new account.
Once I have the PDFs, I will attach them to the OP.
I don't know if this is the chip the evo 3d is using, but if it is these may prove beneficial to have.
EDIT: Nevermind. i'd have to sign an NDA first.
EDIT: Although, this looks interesting.
Geniusdog254 said:
A lot of the security features available on the chip itself probably aren't in use. HTC has been using their own form of write protection since early last year, even on the NAND based Evo 4G. I'd stake a bet they're using the same system here, and we just need to find a way to flash the ENG bootloader like we did last year to get around it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps, but a hint at the design really tells me that it would only make sense to offload this protection to the eMMC. Posted a link just a minute ago with the eMMC "enablement" model in PDF form. Interesting read...
CyWhitfield said:
I found a page on the Micron site on eMMC. In the tech notes section there are informational downloads for just one chip. Specifically, the Qualcomm QSC6695
You have to register to download them. A process I have already started. Their site claims it takes a half hour to register a new account.
Once I have the PDFs, I will attach them to the OP.
I don't know if this is the chip the evo 3d is using, but if it is these may prove beneficial to have.
EDIT: Nevermind. i'd have to sign an NDA first.
EDIT: Although, this looks interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
VERY interesting link & read for sure
CyWhitfield said:
The first part of your statement is true, Sprint knows full well that we can circumvent their attempts to charge us for WiFi tethering with root access. They have known this for years. They also know that in reality there is no way they can completely prevent someone from tethering their phone in one way or another. Even without root access. Ref: PDANet.
In my opinion, this protection of the eMMC contents was designed to reduce support costs from failed OTA updates bricking phones, and perhaps as protection against malware that can attain root, not unlike what Temp Root does.
I am not as paranoid as some here and refuse to accept that this was done specifically to thwart efforts to root the phone. The vast (and i mean VAST) majority of people who buy this phone will never even consider rooting the devices. This same majority has a subset of people that are easily stupid enough to screw up an OTA update or download and install malware.
I will take it a step further and opine that the only reason HTC is unlocking the bootloader is because we are such a minority AND that by tinkering with an unlocked device, we are actually helping HTC improve their product. They would rather have a more appealing facebook page than worry about losing a minuscule fraction of wifi tethering income.m Moreover, take a good look at where Sprint stands in the market, and what they have done recently to improve their position. They are doing a lot of really cool things, and have taken impressive steps to improve customer service and corporate image. That they would allow this bashing of HTC to continue unabated over a handful of tethering dollars is unlikely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely agree with all of that. Other carriers have taken many steps to try to prevent wireless tethering. They've asked google to filter certain apps from the market from their customers, they've sent out letters to their customers who they suspect of tethering, they've used ECM's to try to stop it.
But Sprint...they've been remarkably silent on that front. Hell they don't even seem to plan on putting any usage caps in place. In my opinion, I suspect that Sprint wants to be different from the other carriers. They can't outright allow tethering because people would go nuts with it and it would saturate their network. Instead they have this approach of telling you that you can't do it without paying extra, but they look the other way when you do.
I don't know if I fully agree on why HTC locks the phone so tight though. I mean they really went out of their way to make sure nobody touches it. There could have been far more simple countermeasures in place to prevent malware yet still be open to somebody who has physical access to the phone.
It can't be that Sprint insisted on it being that way, otherwise Sprint would have insisted that the Nexus S be fully locked, so I don't believe that this is a carrier issue at all, at least not as far as the Evo 3D is concerned.
One of my suspicions is that HTC may make a profit off of having certain apps installed, much in the way that PC OEM's get paid to preload different apps (e.g. norton.) It could be that they want to make sure that you can't remove them. However that profit they make off of these apps may be significantly offset by having a really negative facebook page, hence the decision to unlock.
Hard to say really.
I received the below e-mail today. I did not appreciate being contacted out of the blue via e-mail; if you feel the need to contact me, use XDA's tagging feature. With that said, I thought I'd reply in public with my thoughts on the matter, hoping to drive a constructive conversation about Verizon Wireless' restrictions for devices on their network. My initial response is in post 2.
Please, think through your responses before posting. Make sure they ADD to the conversation.
What do you think of having everyone from XDA and the CM community using the DINC 4G LTE file Better Business Bureau complaints against verizon? It made a business decision not to give us updates, and has deliberately removed the DINC 4g from the HTC Unlock program. They shouldn't be allowed to abandon the platform and to remove unlocking ability that was there.
BBB asks them to respond within 14 days. [edit: link removed]
or have you already tried this route?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will leave it up to the writer of the e-mail if he/she would like to make himself/herself known here.
Can you point to a single advertisement by either HTC or Verizon that the Droid Incredible 4G LTE would ever be included in HTCDev's unlocked bootloader program? Even HTC's generic advertisements include disclaimers that some devices may not be included due to various restrictions (the most obvious being carrier refusal). HTC can justify the ability to unlock the bootloader pre-public availability as a means to let developers directly related to software development and quality assurance alter the ROM before release. To a handful of end users who get the device in the early days of release, they get to sneak in and use the unlocker under the "Other devices" category of the program. I suspect we owe HTC a thank you for dragging their feet for a week before disabling the unlock ability for this (and several other) device(s). There is no legitimate complaint that can be filed towards Verizon concerning this matter since they never advertised this as an available feature.
On the topic of abandoning the platform, software-wise, the last available software update for the Incredible 4G still works with reasonable stability and all advertised features are enabled. It is natural for technology devices to age and need replacement; a balance has to be struck between user content or disdain and extent of support. Verizon has apparently deemed there will be very little blowback by prematurely ending software updates. Considering the number of users I see in the XDA forum section for this phone, I'd guess they're right. About the only sticking point that could be leveraged to force a software update out of Verizon is if there are security vulnerabilities that are either being actively exploited or pose a real threat of being exploited in the near future.
Succinctly, we are at the mercy of Verizon's "generosity" concerning extended functionality of, and software updates for, the phones on their network. With these thoughts, I believe we can only ask them to help us out... with reason, anger, begging, or whatever tactic you find most influential. I don't think we can force their hand.
Your thoughts XDAers?
I agree with mdmower. Having come from the OG Droid, I had zero expectation for HTC or Verizon to let me unlock the phone. While I did not expect this phone to be the left-handed, red-haired step-child twice removed orphan of Verizon, it is a great phone with a 4" screen. The size is good (still prefer OG Droid) and the processor and internet speeds are great. I personally am quite content with this phone. We have been blessed with some extremely talented developers and supporters who have
Developed a method to unlock despite HTC/Verizon
Developed two methods for s-off:
DirtyRacun - IMHO, unlimited.io did a great job
FacePalm - Haven't tried, but looks great
Two great recoveries:
Official CWM Recovery, Plus PhilZ
TWRP Recovery
Developed an Incredible Rock Solid Sense ROM in ViperLTE
Developed a solid, official CyanogenMod ROM .
There are probably more, but those are just off of the top of my head. I am also still seeing great ongoing development work for ROMs for this phone. Sure, this phone doesn't have the plethora of ROMs that the OG Droid, Dinc2, Rezound, or [insert model here], but what we do have is solid.
I'm not exactly sure what Verizon owes us. We have a great phone with a great 4GLTE network (at least in my area). It should also be noted that Verizon actually put out an OTA for the OG Dinc around 2+ years after its release with "Improvements and fixes". I would expect the same for this phone as well. I too believe that threats, anger, etc. will not do anything more than generate ill will.
Just my $0.03.
P.S. Why do we still care if there is an "official" bootloader unlock? As mentioned above, we have a proved method to unlock bootloader and/or gain s-off. Even HTC's site says that unlocking bootloader through their "official" site may void your warranty.
HTC Dev said:
Please understand that you will not be able to return your device to the original state and going forward your device may not be held covered under the warranty for all claims resulting from the unlocking of the bootloader. HTC bears no responsibility if your device is no longer usable afterwards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only thing to take away from this is to avoid Verizon and HTC. They may not owe us anything more than we received, but they are clearly sub-par companies compared to others. Unfortunately, I can't ditch Verizon just now because I'm on a shared plan, but I will never buy an HTC phone again.
junkmail9 said:
I agree with mdmower. Having come from the OG Droid, I had zero expectation for HTC or Verizon to let me unlock the phone....
P.S. Why do we still care if there is an "official" bootloader unlock?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to clarify, I'm not content with the support Verizon has offered for this phone, I just realize that we cannot expect them to continue support. I am still not sure about the best avenues of communication with Verizon Wireless, so in a feeble attempt to get their attention, I write a short #openletter on G+.
A far as the official bootloader unlock, it is a little important. An example is the recently advertised CM installer (by the way, I do not have any insider knowledge about CM Inc.). The installer will almost surely be available only to devices with legitimate unlock ability. While the fireball is pretty much "a bit"-out-of-luck even if it did get official unlock, due to the inability to flash the boot partition while in recovery, at some point users need to convince Verizon Wireless to allow unlocked bootloaders for phones on their network. This is especially relevant to the many, many users who are wise enough to not tinker with their phones because of lack of knowledge. They deserve the opportunity to safely replace the legacy operating system on their phone, and this will only be possible if the carrier and manufacturer allow it.
The open letter seems pointless, besides maybe allowing other people to see and take note that Verizon ignores certain customers. As far as our phone though, no point really. Anyone you reach through G+, Facebook, Twitter, Verizon's customer service contacts, etc. will have no real power to do anything. They just give the typical "sorry, we're doing our best" garbage. The message never reaches anyone important enough to actually do anything. The only way a message may get to them is if the user base is very large, but even if we all wrote to them everyday it wouldn't help. Not enough people for them to care. As you said, we're at their mercy. Just have to wait.
mdmower said:
A far as the official bootloader unlock, it is a little important. An example is the recently advertised CM installer (by the way, I do not have any insider knowledge about CM Inc.). The installer will almost surely be available only to devices with legitimate unlock ability. While the fireball is pretty much "a bit"-out-of-luck even if it did get official unlock, due to the inability to flash the boot partition while in recovery, at some point users need to convince Verizon Wireless to allow unlocked bootloaders for phones on their network. This is especially relevant to the many, many users who are wise enough to not tinker with their phones because of lack of knowledge. They deserve the opportunity to safely replace the legacy operating system on their phone, and this will only be possible if the carrier and manufacturer allow it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is an excellent point I had not considered. I was not thinking about the larger issue, (nor am I savvy with the upcoming CM installer). Unfortunately, I have run into a few companies that have seriously dummied down their products because, as one tech support person told me, "some users may have a problem with the advanced features so we removed them." While I can try and understand that point, it was really frustrating because some advanced features I had come to rely on were removed in the product upgrade. Simply because some people could not comprehend how to use it properly? Is Verizon trying to protect us from ourselves, dummy down the phones for "the uneducated masses," or simply trying to force their customers to live with Verizon-installed bloatware?
Okay I have My own say to this.!
Okay so I left AT&T network when I owned the HTC Inspire 4g and moved on to Verizon because there service was better in my area and I purchased the HTC Droid Incredible 4G LTE as my first phone with Verizon, I came to like the phone because it was fast, snappy, and good on battery....... But I constantly waited for update to jellybean ( Sense 4+ ) which in reality would make the device more efficient and smoother than it was on Ice Cream Sandwich... And finally I heard the news that we were going to get an update to jellybean in the beginning of 2013.. But after so much time of waiting I finally gave up hope and said ***k the device and went back to AT&T...... and bought the HTC One XL because it recieved updates to sense 5. The device is like an older sibling to the inc4g with close to the same specs. I sold the Incredible 4g because I hated the lack of support for this device... The only good thing going for it was CM10 and the amazing sense kernel. This community deserves more than what has been given to them so far... So my question is why Verizon drop support for us.???? If this community received jelly bean j defiantly would sell my XL and come back to this community......
This is my only my concern.
Sincerely,
24ky
Sent from my HTC One XL using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Here is a weird thought. let your money do the talking. leave Verizon. if enough of us leave we dont need to "change their minds". i brought this up in an HTC elevate detection not to long ago ( also how come htc bent over backwards because verizon wanted the bootload unlock for the ONE removed). instead of open letters or angry tweets and emails, just take your money to someone that appreciates you as a customer? put your money into a company that understands the development community and is willing to support you. how do you think verizon got so good? the used to listen to their customers. now that they are self sustaining they dont need to listen to us anymore. but i bet if their wallet was hit the would. they would bring back unlimited data, remove the block of google wallet, ect....
You wouldn't take your car to a mechanic that does great work but also makes you spend $$ money on things that don't need to be fixed.
my $.02
synisterwolf said:
Here is a weird thought. let your money do the talking. leave Verizon. if enough of us leave we dont need to "change their minds" i brought this up in an HTC elevate detection not to long ago. instead of open letters or angry tweets, just take your money to someone that appreciates you as a customer? put your money into a company that understands the development community and is willing to support you.
You wouldn't take your car to a mechanic that does great work but also makes you spend $$ money on things that don't need to be fixed.
my $.02
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is my point from before. This is the only thing you can really do. I wish I could dump Verizon right now, but I can't. For now I'll just settle for never buying HTC again.
somerandomname1 said:
This is my point from before. This is the only thing you can really do. I wish I could dump Verizon right now, but I can't. For now I'll just settle for never buying HTC again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this too. maybe if HTC where to step in and help us it would be different.
OP not trying to troll or anything or start a war. i just wanted to get that out their. we do have an option to take our money somewhere else. or at least when this contract is over. ive said it before, i need unlimited data. i dont have wifi anywhere i work and im barely at home so if i have to give up my data plan i will give up my business too. im going to miss there unbeatable coverage but i cant stand to be hit in the balls over and over again with a smile on their face. :/
mdmower said:
I received the below e-mail today. I did not appreciate being contacted out of the blue via e-mail; if you feel the need to contact me, use XDA's tagging feature. With that said, I thought I'd reply in public with my thoughts on the matter, hoping to drive a constructive conversation about Verizon Wireless' restrictions for devices on their network. My initial response is in post 2.
Please, think through your responses before posting. Make sure they ADD to the conversation.
I will leave it up to the writer of the e-mail if he/she would like to make himself/herself known here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My 2 cents on this from bitter experience. You will get zilch. You will waste precious amounts of your life trying hard to convince a rigid management who can care so little they'd be happy to break your phone to pieces and hand you another from their stockpile of dinc4g's just to get rid of them ASAP. I've gone through the whole lot with BBB complaints etc. for the Droid X2 by Motorola. haha, wasted my life there. And the countless pleadings to release the ICS ROM that HTC clearly developed for the Dinc2 (Incredible S, international variant got the ICS update) only to get on the Verizon chopping block and get its head unceremoniously severed, taught me one thing and that is we as consumers have knowingly chosen this path, that will give us limited to no flexibility on customization to stay on VZW and we have to "deal" with it.
With all good intentions, I request all to keep your expectations rock bottom. You have better chances of going to the moon on a future Russian spacecraft than convincing Verizon as to why this may be a good idea.
Sincerely,
A disgruntled Droid™ user.
here has been my android experience. started on og inc oct 2010 first droid phone considered ''high-end'' at the time (8 mp camera saaaaay whaaaat??!) then dinc2 great phone but compared to the galaxy S II and the galaxy nexus at the time it was a ''mid range" phone. now with the inc4g it is very ''mid range'' compared to what is out now. the galaxy notes and s4's and the 50 different htc One(s). if you want many different roms to flash to fix your ''addiction'' go nexus or one of the mainstream phones. you will find 100 different "Unofficial CM10.X" roms with "user tweaks" and "kernel tweaks" that in all actuality are nothing more then a reposync from source. yeah they might have a few different mods but they are usually so similar that you will not/could not tell the difference. like someone mentioned earlier I would rather have a few solid roms. a good sense (viper) or if you're an aosp guy like me there's cm. I think anybody who saw the specs of this phone (incredible 4g) and thought, "hey this is going to be the next BIG THING." I'm sorry to tell you that you were mistaken. xda dev support of a phone is only as good as the devs that own the device, and in our case we have a very small amount of active devs.
So I am the a-hole that emailed mdmower. I apologize profusely. When I saw your first post, I almost slunk away in shame, never to show my face here again. I am not even being a little bit facetious. You do great work for a community of people and I abused (what obviously is) an important rule. And I'm really sorry.
In an attempt to redeem myself just a little bit, let me point out one thing that you might not know:
mdmower said:
Can you point to a single advertisement by either HTC or Verizon that the Droid Incredible 4G LTE would ever be included in HTCDev's unlocked bootloader program? Even HTC's generic advertisements include disclaimers that some devices may not be included due to various restrictions (the most obvious being carrier refusal) [SNIP] There is no legitimate complaint that can be filed towards Verizon concerning this matter since they never advertised this as an available feature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, some states may have more favorable law here. First and foremost, many states have an unfair/deceptive business practices law that are distinct from the false advertising law. Example: New York has GBL Section 349 (trade practices), and 350 (Advertising). These are consumer-oriented statutes and so they have some bite.
On this point, while Verizon has never said they would provide us with Jelly Bean, there are some nice facts here like how many people were locked into 2 year contracts on a phone that Verizon stopped updating during their two year period. I've seen suggestions that Verizon is pulling this with older phones in order to force upgrades, and if true, that would be the basis for a claim. But here, I think the HTCDev unlock is actually pretty damning. We should be entitled to take discovery into the real reasons why Verizon forced HTC to remove the phone from the program. Given the repeated warnings about waiver of warranty, and the presence of other VZW phones in the program, it's hard to believe it's a support issue.
Finally -- of note is that the ACLU has filed an FTC complaint on this subject earlier this year. Unfortunately I cannot post the link since I just registered for this post (long time lurker) but it's the 2nd hit for "april FTC complaint android" (see pages 6-9) Their basis is the potential for security flaws which go unfixed. The relief they are requesting is pretty broad. I'm actually surprised that there haven't been follow-on civil suits already.
Anyway, I am really sorry again. I'm going to crawl back under the rock I came from now.
If it's any comfort: my punishment is that my D4INC is a flicker model.
PrimePalaver said:
If it's any comfort: my punishment is that my D4INC is a flicker model.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha burn! Just kidding... it's cool.
So I found myself looking around at different smartphone related articles like I always do when I stumbled across one in particular that had me scared! The article was talking about Samsung and Google bringing Knox to android L. We all know how much of a problem Knox has been to us here at the dev community.
Anyways have a look for yourself here
skeezer308 said:
So I found myself looking around at different smartphone related articles like I always do when I stumbled across one in particular that had me scared! The article was talking about Samsung and Google bringing Knox to android L. We all know how much of a problem Knox has been to us here at the dev community.
Anyways have a look for yourself here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hate to break it to you, but knox or no knox it will likely be a step up in security.
Why wouldn't it be?
Call it what ever you want, just make sure you start shopping for a dev edition.
Yes this was reported when they released the L preview because it's the first time they've included Samsung code into AOSP.
Every release of android will be a step up in security, I'm just going to move on from Verizon if it gets to the point where no boot loader can be unlocked.
joshm.1219 said:
Yes this was reported when they released the L preview because it's the first time they've included Samsung code into AOSP.
Every release of android will be a step up in security, I'm just going to move on from Verizon if it gets to the point where no boot loader can be unlocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The bottom line is that flexibility and customization will always interfere with security and both, fortunately and unfortunately, the latter is one that is of major concern to corporations.
Some of the arguments and measures are over the top but for the most part it part of technology maturing. Rooting a phone for most people here is harmless and enables a purpose, but it also opens the door to circumvent security and encrypted materials from our devices.
It seems Samsung and Verizon are open to creating a "developer" version to allow for justified valid reasons to root and customize, but the more personal and business purposes merge the more security becomes more important over flexibility.
I am not saying this makes it good or that you should like it. But it something that inevitably will continue to progress making it more difficult for complete control of your device.
Capitalism is based on profitability and adoption and if you get large corporation to endorse you methods then you have a huge revenue channel, right, wrong or indifferent.
Hopefully an innovation will come along that will enable the right balance, but only time will tell.
Personally I have recently decided to join BYOD at my work and consequently had to unroot my device, and I have to admit that I miss some aspects, but not enough to give up the convenience of having all I need in ONE device.
Just my $0.02
Well the part that had me concerned was knowing how locked down Samsung devices have become, especially on Verizon and ATT networks. I may be wrong but I think part of the reason we still haven't been able to find an exploit to unlock the bootloader is because of the tightening grips of Knox. Now don't get me wrong I understand that there is a need for security, especially in business with BYOD. I was half scared they were attempting to lock down android to that extent as a whole. As I read further into the article I had learned that some of the Knox feature I was fearing wear hard ware implemented. I think this part from the article pretty much sums it up.
"Even though Samsung is sharing many of the Knox functions with Google on Android L, they will still offer a superior security solution on Samsung devices. This is due to several features requiring deep hardware integration that can only be managed directly by Samsung. As listed on the Samsung Knox blog, the following will remain specific to Samsung:
TrustZone-based Integrity Measurement Architecture (TIMA)
Real-time Kernel Protection
Client Certificate Management (CCM)
Trusted Boot-based Key store
Remote attestation
Trusted Boot
Biometric authentication
KNOX Smart Card Support"
skeezer308 said:
Well the part that had me concerned was knowing how locked down Samsung devices have become, especially on Verizon and ATT networks. I may be wrong but I think part of the reason we still haven't been able to find an exploit to unlock the bootloader is because of the tightening grips of Knox. Now don't get me wrong I understand that there is a need for security, especially in business with BYOD. I was half scared they were attempting to lock down android to that extent as a whole. As I read further into the article I had learned that some of the Knox feature I was fearing wear hard ware implemented. I think this part from the article pretty much sums it up.
"Even though Samsung is sharing many of the Knox functions with Google on Android L, they will still offer a superior security solution on Samsung devices. This is due to several features requiring deep hardware integration that can only be managed directly by Samsung. As listed on the Samsung Knox blog, the following will remain specific to Samsung:
TrustZone-based Integrity Measurement Architecture (TIMA)
Real-time Kernel Protection
Client Certificate Management (CCM)
Trusted Boot-based Key store
Remote attestation
Trusted Boot
Biometric authentication
KNOX Smart Card Support"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a BIG difference between locked bootloaders and Knox...the bootloader is a proprietary part of the firmware, not the OS...Knox is integrated in the OS....neither have anything to do with the other. Please venture into the T-Mobile, Sprint and International S4 forums to see the effects of Knox. If you do not want a locked bootloader switch to a carrier that does not do it or phones that do not have it. I understand Verizon has even blocked the use of HTCDev on their newer HTC devices and updates. These carriers locking the bootloaders do so to have the most secure phones and be able to go after the military and commercial contracts. So again, do not think Knox has anything to do with the lock down of AT&T and Verizon....that is all between the carrier and Samsung.
m3Jorge said:
The bottom line is that flexibility and customization will always interfere with security and both, fortunately and unfortunately, the latter is one that is of major concern to corporations.
Some of the arguments and measures are over the top but for the most part it part of technology maturing. Rooting a phone for most people here is harmless and enables a purpose, but it also opens the door to circumvent security and encrypted materials from our devices.
It seems Samsung and Verizon are open to creating a "developer" version to allow for justified valid reasons to root and customize, but the more personal and business purposes merge the more security becomes more important over flexibility.
I am not saying this makes it good or that you should like it. But it something that inevitably will continue to progress making it more difficult for complete control of your device.
Capitalism is based on profitability and adoption and if you get large corporation to endorse you methods then you have a huge revenue channel, right, wrong or indifferent.
Hopefully an innovation will come along that will enable the right balance, but only time will tell.
Personally I have recently decided to join BYOD at my work and consequently had to unroot my device, and I have to admit that I miss some aspects, but not enough to give up the convenience of having all I need in ONE device.
Just my $0.02
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know, I don't understand how it would affect anything if they let a user decide if they wanted their bootloader unlocked for every device.
joshm.1219 said:
I don't know, I don't understand how it would affect anything if they let a user decide if they wanted their bootloader unlocked for every device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the users are not always the owners. My work phone is an Apple 5s. But "My" is not really accurate. It's my employer's phone that they give to me to use for work purposes. So I'm the user, but if the owner wants it locked down, that's their prerogative.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
brizey said:
Because the users are not always the owners. My work phone is an Apple 5s. But "My" is not really accurate. It's my employer's phone that they give to me to use for work purposes. So I'm the user, but if the owner wants it locked down, that's their prerogative.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So require owner account access then
I personally think if they did include knox in android L there would still be an option to use fastboot to unlock the device.
xXsquirr3lsXx said:
I personally think if they did include knox in android L there would still be an option to use fastboot to unlock the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This would be correct. Please see OP linked articled to see what is is actually being implemented here.
My rant about At&t and I why I am angry with them about my predicament with my s7.
PLEASE READ DISCLAIMER AT THE BOTTOM AND ALL ASTRICKED ITEMS. READ AT YOUR OWN RISK.
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
I will say how disappointed in at&t I am; it should be illegal to lock phones like this. The last samsung galaxy able to be rooted was the s4 and note 2 (don't quote me on that is was guestimation). But like all the idiots caught up in the buzz of owning the newest device, I got burned by the note 4. Fool me once shame on you, but fool me twice shame on me. I got burned again on the s7, and developers on here have basically given up rooting anything else (since the note 4 crisis there's a large bounty for whomever get the first permaroot) . Maybe if millions of us write to samsung about how at&t is ruining their products, they could do something about this travesty. <b>
Well if could some root required apps to work on my phone I would be much happier. I can't even use the current version of lucky patcher, how stupid is that. <b>
If your phone isn't rooted or have never felt the joy of a rooted phone (it is like endless possibilities all in the palm of your hand), and if you don't know what rooting is, get a clue, (Google it). Beg, barrow, steal one from a guy the next County over, forge one, trade for one, find one, save up for 3 months to buy one on eBay, I don't care how you get a clue, but you need one. The ability to Root our phone should be a fundamental right. (particularly with what went on with Apple and the FBI in California) We buy the phone, pay for it's service, then you treat us like we somehow don't know something has changed. (All the sudden "security updates that happen right after finding root for other devices and then people update their devices and it is gone back to square one.) Who is going to be responsible for all the millions of phones that are going to be trash because of this?
(because now on certain devices it softbricks the phone, sure it roots it, but what good is a rooted phone when you can't use it? (I relate it to something close to ransomware, on a computer, where software hold it (the computer) hostage until you meet the criminal's demands (usually money), so that you can get your computer back, and then sometimes they just leave it in place. (nasty crap fun to get rid of without reinstalling the OS) In this case it holds your phone hostage until you meet at&t's demands of "removing non at&t software", and until such time that the software is removed it remains bricked. If you have this issue, which I have only seen it mentioned a handful of time, and happen to have a Samsung device (with or without warranty) they will fix for free and even pay shipping both ways (now that's how you keep customers happy) I still have this issue as I have not sent my phone in yet and if someone knows how to fix it I would like to know. It goes from the ransom page with the padlock unlocked and warnings from at&t, then it goes to a second page saying that I have a Reactivation Lock in place. I have tried everything stated on the forum about RL, but my case is unique because of my stupid idea of seeing if king root had figured out how to root note 4 at&t sm-N910A version. To answer your question did it work, yes and no. Read the bricking bit above.)
Surely not your loyal customers, surely not the one who actually make and put their name on the phone, no I blame the cell phone companies. They have gotten to big for their own shoes on this one, they stepped in a giant pile of it. How many millions of customers have you lost at&t? Hmmm? Answer that one. Maybe I'll be the next to jump ship, sprint has a great plan, half the price, and they'll pay our way out of the eta( early termination fee(s) ln case you didn't know) up to 600 USD on each line. Sounds good to where do I sign, oh you need to take my piece of it phone and trade it for one the COMES with an unlocked bootloader. Take it I never wanted this piece of it to begin with. Bye At&t, you had a good ride with most of us for longer than a decade, but you done shot yourself in the foot on this one. You should have never changed your name and started in the cell phone business. South Western Bell is dead, and this monstrosity that has been created is nothing more than a shell of its former company, what a bunch of sell outs. I hope you sleep good at night knowing how many people are cursing your name from every roof top and highest building. You don't play with other people's it. It isn't proper nor is it called for. Some customers will be loyal to the end, but I am sick of all the red tape and garbage we have to put up with. Higher rates for the same service? Do you think we are stupid?
DISCLAIMER
*PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS MY OWN OPINIONS. IT IS AIMED AT AT&T, AND THEIR INABILITY TO LEAVE A GOOD THING ALONE. IT IS NOT MEANT TO OFFEND US NORMAL FOLK THAT PAY RIDICULOUS PHONE BILLS EVERY MONTH. IF YOU ARE ONE OF THESE PEOPLE AND YOU FIND THIS OFFENSIVE I AM SORRY. I NEVER CUSSED OR SAID ANYTHING OFFENSIVE ABOUT OR TO AN INDIVIDUAL. *
*ANY INSTANCES OF "IT" THAT ARE EXTRAGRAMMATIC ARE A CUSS WORD IN DISGUISE AND IS SELF EXPLANATORY*
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT WITH YOUR OWN OPINIONS THIS A JUDGEMENT FREE ZONE, SO PUT SOME FEELING IN IT. OCCASIONAL SWEARING IS TO BE EXPECTED (AS LONG AS IT IS OK WITHIN THE POLICIES OF XDA IF DOUBT DON'T DO IT.).
ANY HELP WITH ABOVE STATED ISSUE PLEASE LINK BELOW SO THE POST ENDS UP IN THE PROPER SECTION (TROUBLESHOOTING AND WHATNOT).
ANYTHING FOUND IN PARENTHESES WAS ADDED FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, AND NOT MEANT TO DEMEAN ANYONE. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DO NOT KNOW THE TERM OF KNOWLEDGY.
IF ANYTHING IN THIS RANT HAS BEEN MISREPRESENTED OR IS INCORRECT PLEASE BRING TO MY ATTENTION.
THANK YOU TO ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY READ ALL THIS.
God bless and peace out,
Kelentaria
I switched to AT&T because of direcTV unlimited (saves me 15 bucks a month from what I was paying). I don't really care much about having root access, but I do care about being able to erase the bloat on the phone. Bloat should be optional software, not burned into the OS. Look at Windows for a PC. If you don't want an app that came preloaded, you simply uninstall it. How is that even legal to have software stuck on your phone, which you have no idea what it is doing in the background and also claim you have 32gigs of storage, but you actually only have 19?
I see some of your points, but the whole rooting thing will be an uphill battle. Each company is required by law to patch exploits that allow the system to be compromised. Unless Google makes root access standard (meaning easily unlocked with an app etc) you won't see it again , and if you do, rarely.
I could forgive them for the root issue, but not for the bloat, lack of WiFi calling on android devices, etc.
Your points and opinion is well taken here as a fellow ATT user. We won't even get Samsung to move on rooting and bootloader unlocking since they're path is the business level users. That's mostly to do with all of us modder folks being in the small minority when it comes to purchasing their phones. There should be an option to unlock the bootloader from them directly. Basically them allowing us to either choose to void our warranty to unlock the bootloader which relieves them of the responsibility of folks blaming them for their choice of modding the phone. Similar to the HTC process. But again this is my opinion. ATT on the other hand has been a constant pain with not being consumer friendly for the last 4 years from my guestimation.
psufan5 said:
I switched to AT&T because of direcTV unlimited (saves me 15 bucks a month from what I was paying). I don't really care much about having root access, but I do care about being able to erase the bloat on the phone. Bloat should be optional software, not burned into the OS. Look at Windows for a PC. If you don't want an app that came preloaded, you simply uninstall it. How is that even legal to have software stuck on your phone, which you have no idea what it is doing in the background and also claim you have 32gigs of storage, but you actually only have 19?
I see some of your points, but the whole rooting thing will be an uphill battle. Each company is required by law to patch exploits that allow the system to be compromised. Unless Google makes root access standard (meaning easily unlocked with an app etc) you won't see it again , and if you do, rarely.
I could forgive them for the root issue, but not for the bloat, lack of WiFi calling on android devices, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suggest you try Package Disabler Pro, its a small price to pay but it works perfectly disabling bloat from Samsung devices. It is not root but at the very least it helps make touchwiz bearable.
---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------
I don't think there is a single ATT user that doesn't share your opinion but nowadays we all know what we are getting into with them. Only the Nexus line remains untouched but with the recent surge in mobile payment use the manufacturers are locking down phones harder than eve, one the plus side it helps maintain security and protect your hard earned money but sadly some sacrifices must be made. My only wish is that Samsung would finally see the light and at the very least give us the option of stock android in their devices, a tall order I know but one that would be met with enthusiasm.
glm0025 said:
I suggest you try Package Disabler Pro, its a small price to pay but it works perfectly disabling bloat from Samsung devices. It is not root but at the very least it helps make touchwiz bearable.
---------- Post added at 02:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:54 PM ----------
I don't think there is a single ATT user that doesn't share your opinion but nowadays we all know what we are getting into with them. Only the Nexus line remains untouched but with the recent surge in mobile payment use the manufacturers are locking down phones harder than eve, one the plus side it helps maintain security and protect your hard earned money but sadly some sacrifices must be made. My only wish is that Samsung would finally see the light and at the very least give us the option of stock android in their devices, a tall order I know but one that would be met with enthusiasm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive done that, but the bloat still takes up a huge chunk of space - the APKs are just disabled
there hasn't been a bootloader unlocked at&t galaxy since the S3. The S4 was bootloader locked, but anyone with AMDL firmware (the second OTA) could bypass the bootloader and load ROMs that way. Anyone that updated past that was stuck with bootstrapped ROMs. The S4 was never bootloader unlocked ever.
psufan5 said:
Ive done that, but the bloat still takes up a huge chunk of space - the APKs are just disabled
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooted or not, you wouldn't get that space back. The pre-installed crud is installed on the system partition which is a separate space from where user apps (and all data) are stored. If you rooted and deleted those apps, the space would just go unused. (And really, those apps don't take up much space in storage.)
On the other hand, there are things in the AT&T preload that can't be disabled. Some might be daemons that load before (and outside the scope of) android, and others are embedded deep into the existing modules (such as systemUI.) For example, AT&T still uses a variation of carrier IQ software for analytics.
However, even if you had root, you couldn't easily get rid of those things without completely changing the firmware to something else. Once you did that, you'd also lose AT&T variant specific things such as AT&T's implementation of VoLTE, video calling, etc. (Just because other firmware might support features by the same name, it doesn't mean that they'll work on AT&T's network.)
My biggest complaint these days with AT&T variants is that AT&T blocks important system updates. Even VERIZON has become better about releasing firmware updates and upgrades for android phones when compared to AT&T. (Verizon used to hold the crown of being the absolute LAST carrier to update their phones... but no more. Now AT&T clearly owns it.)
Here's the funny thing: AT&T claims that they are locking down bootloaders and such in order to have a higher level of security for business customers. Yet, by taking MONTHS longer to release firmware updates, AT&T phones are often vulnerable to malicious exploits long after those exploits have been fixed by Samsung/HTC/etc.
garyd9 said:
Rooted or not, you wouldn't get that space back. The pre-installed crud is installed on the system partition which is a separate space from where user apps (and all data) are stored. If you rooted and deleted those apps, the space would just go unused. (And really, those apps don't take up much space in storage.)
On the other hand, there are things in the AT&T preload that can't be disabled. Some might be daemons that load before (and outside the scope of) android, and others are embedded deep into the existing modules (such as systemUI.) For example, AT&T still uses a variation of carrier IQ software for analytics.
However, even if you had root, you couldn't easily get rid of those things without completely changing the firmware to something else. Once you did that, you'd also lose AT&T variant specific things such as AT&T's implementation of VoLTE, video calling, etc. (Just because other firmware might support features by the same name, it doesn't mean that they'll work on AT&T's network.)
My biggest complaint these days with AT&T variants is that AT&T blocks important system updates. Even VERIZON has become better about releasing firmware updates and upgrades for android phones when compared to AT&T. (Verizon used to hold the crown of being the absolute LAST carrier to update their phones... but no more. Now AT&T clearly owns it.)
Here's the funny thing: AT&T claims that they are locking down bootloaders and such in order to have a higher level of security for business customers. Yet, by taking MONTHS longer to release firmware updates, AT&T phones are often vulnerable to malicious exploits long after those exploits have been fixed by Samsung/HTC/etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bootloader is locked down for one reason - stop tethering on unlimited plans.
Thats about it.
psufan5 said:
Bootloader is locked down for one reason - stop tethering on unlimited plans.
Thats about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are misinformed.
I completely agree that the situation sucks. I know that this will fall over into the Note 6, and that saddens me. That is why I set up camp on the Apple side of the fence. They are always hacking into ios somehow (no fragmentation i guess?), and the OS, while still not as open as Android has matured a little. I do miss Android, but Samsung was my home, and it isn't easy switching to another OEM when their hardware designs are so different (no physical home button).
I happen to work for Sprint (for the time being), and the prices are better, but our systems suck, and our business practices are kind of shady. Hopefully I don't get into any trouble for this, but customers deserve to know the whole story. Example: a gentleman came in to get a new sim card for his S4 Mini. Now with at&t, you just go get a sim card, and all you have to worry about is standard/micro/nano. With Sprint, however, each size sim card has a wide variety of skus (barcodes), and we use a tool to see which ones are compatible with the device in question. In this guy's case, Sprint had discontinued the only sim card that would work with his phone.
To put it plainly, we force ultimatums on our customers; buy another phone, or do without. I'm actually ashamed to work for this company.
What sickens me is that they disable perfectly fine features to replace them with their crapware. I like their network coverage, but I'm really doubtful if I would/should stay with At&t anymore. I personally don't care much about the bootloader, but the fact that they are doing this sort of thing without facing any sort of push-back, is what annoys me.
sireniankyle said:
I completely agree that the situation sucks. I know that this will fall over into the Note 6, and that saddens me. That is why I set up camp on the Apple side of the fence. They are always hacking into ios somehow (no fragmentation i guess?), and the OS, while still not as open as Android has matured a little. I do miss Android, but Samsung was my home, and it isn't easy switching to another OEM when their hardware designs are so different (no physical home button).
I happen to work for Sprint (for the time being), and the prices are better, but our systems suck, and our business practices are kind of shady. Hopefully I don't get into any trouble for this, but customers deserve to know the whole story. Example: a gentleman came in to get a new sim card for his S4 Mini. Now with at&t, you just go get a sim card, and all you have to worry about is standard/micro/nano. With Sprint, however, each size sim card has a wide variety of skus (barcodes), and we use a tool to see which ones are compatible with the device in question. In this guy's case, Sprint had discontinued the only sim card that would work with his phone.
To put it plainly, we force ultimatums on our customers; buy another phone, or do without. I'm actually ashamed to work for this company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get what you are saying 100% but the only problem for me is that a locked down Android device does more than a jailbreaked iPhone any day of the week.,at the end of the day Android is still more open than IOS. As of right now Marshmallow has proven good enough for me that I'm not missing root or custom roms, that I would root and unlock if I had the chance you better believe it but even 6.0 Touchwiz is bearable right now.
glm0025 said:
I get what you are saying 100% but the only problem for me is that a locked down Android device does more than a jailbreaked iPhone any day of the week.,at the end of the day Android is still more open than IOS. As of right now Marshmallow has proven good enough for me that I'm not missing root or custom roms, that I would root and unlock if I had the chance you better believe it but even 6.0 Touchwiz is bearable right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It heavily depends on how well you know Cydia. . You can change everything about the layout in an iphone through winterboard or dreamboard. You can customize power options, and assign on screen and button shortcuts no matter where you are on the device (app, home screen, locked). Ad blocker, free spotify premium, a youtube downloader built into youtube, custom carrier logos, system wide night mode, keyboard sub symbols, finger print locked apps, remove the media cap in imessage or text messages, enable zedge ringtone downloads, kill all background apps, pop out video for any app, and custom folder sizes.
I can agree that a few of those are just catching up with Android, but a system wide on or off wifi ad blocker is something that only root can do. There are some things, like the no media cap in messages, that even a rooted android device can't technically do (depends on the carrier I suppose), because they don't go through Apple servers.
This isn't me crapping on Android. I love Android. I just needed a place to hold up until Samsung gets it together. I refuse to buy their locked up garbage anymore. The htc 10 is looking pretty good, too, but I was hoping for something with amoled.
Just so everyone is clear, we dont discuss piracy or fraud or such on XDA.
App developers work hard for their money, trust me it is hard to earn a living at 99cents a pop. Lets support our developers instead of supporting theft.
You're dumb. You're *****ing about a $600 term fee which is impossible for a single line. Buy your phone international or unlocked if this is such an issue for you and stop whining. The ATT model of phones are NOT for power users. Plain and simple. I'm surprised so many people are taking the time to read you *****ing.
This post is so funny...
You are all over the place with your words, your thoughts and your anger.
Why would you purchase the S7 on AT&T if you already knew all of this?
Especially if this has already happened to you with your Note 4?
End of the day, most of the customers who use AT&T have no idea about root. They have no care or concern about these things.
People like us, on XDA, who love to root and customize our phones have to understand that there is a paradigm shift in Android (particularly in regards to Samsung devices) that focuses on security rather than customization. Especially when dealing with Carrier phones. The bloat, the locked bootloader, the restrictions all have their reasons for existing.
Especially when Samsung is amidst a global (albeit slow) roll out of Samsung Pay. Trying to align themselves ever so closely with Apple in terms of quality and brand recognition.
Samsung Pay will NEVER work on a rooted phone, EVER! Doesn't matter if you restore stock firmware etc...
Carriers also have their reasons as well...
There are plenty of reasons why they both do it, most of which I don't want to sit here and write out one by one. Like you said in your post... Google it.
End of the day, if you want to root or customize your device then you should do your research before dropping $700+ on a phone.
Plenty of bloat free, bootloader unlocked, international and non carrier phones available for you to achieve root and enjoy Android.
Coming on here and posting a wall of whine just makes you look silly and childish.
Yes, it sucks... I share your annoyance as I'm sure many other AT&T/XDA members do as well - for years now.
End of the day, these mega corporations don't care about you or what makes you happy. It's a business, their business, deal with it. We all have to... If you want to protest, protest with your wallet.
HNIC215 said:
Samsung Pay will NEVER work on a rooted phone, EVER! Doesn't matter if you restore stock firmware etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I tend to agree with the majority of your post, I think this one statement I quoted might be a bit too absolute.
My understanding of SPay is that it relies on the KNOX fuse to determine if a phone is modified. If true, then if an exploit is discovered and implemented which grants root without tripping KNOX, then SPay could possibly work on a rooted device. (Hiding root is doable, and supersu has been playing the cat/mouse game with Android Pay for several months on this...)
The galaxy S6 was rootable without tripping KNOX when it was initially released...
Of course, it's possible that there's something in the samsung firmware that will immediately trip KNOX if root is even detected. If so, it's something new that hasn't been there before. Previously, tripping KNOX required an action at the bootloader level - and usually occurred when an image not signed by samsung was flashed via ODIN.
Moving slightly off topic...
The problem, in my opinion, isn't that root can't be gained. There are plenty of exploits for gaining privileges that either Samsung takes too long to patch, or that the carriers (specifically AT&T) take too long to release the patches for. (AT&T is already 2 months behind on the S7's security patches. Those are patches for security concerns that are now publicly announced and should be easily exploited by reverse engineering the fixes that google publishes.)
The real problem is that people who would develop and publish a root method for hobbyists don't care anymore. Those people aren't going to buy a bootloader locked S7. Either they'll buy a different phone entirely (from a manufacturer that's more dev friendly), or they'll buy a non-carrier model that isn't bootloader locked. (Actually, there's another group, but it's very small: Industry insiders who are constrained by legal agreements (such as NDA's) preventing them from releasing anything they might come up with.)
garyd9 said:
While I tend to agree with the majority of your post, I think this one statement I quoted might be a bit too absolute.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what a Samsung Rep told me when I had the international Note 5 and wanted to know if I would be able to use Samsung Pay here in the states.
First, they said Samsung Pay would have to be available in the device's country of origin.
Second, they said the device can NEVER be rooted. If the device is rooted, it will NEVER be able to run Samsung Pay on it for the remainder of its life. Regardless if you restore with stock firmware and unroot.
Which makes sense actually when you think about it.
Apple is and has been synonymous with security and safety - in general but especially in regards to Apple Pay.
Samsung has always been considered the "Apple" or "iPhone" of the Android world - this statement holds true now more than ever before.
With Samsung Pay being released globally (slowly but surely)... Samsung will not risk the security of their platform by any means at all.
Letting users gain root access to their devices can potentially expose parts of their secure Samsung Pay platform and risk a major security or privacy incident that would lead to global fallout regardless of where the incident took place.
They will never allow this - especially with the progress they have made over the years to build a premium brand.
With the S7 and S7 Edge - they further that tradition and bring more security than ever.
Don't take my word for it...
Samsung Knox recognised as the strongest mobile security platform
Samsung has received strongest ratings for its mobile security platform Knox in areas including authentication methods, encryption management, jailbreak or root protection and application vetting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The latest version of Knox is currently available for Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge and optimised for Android 6.0 Marshmallow.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to a report, Mobile Device Security: A comparison of Platforms by renowned market analyst firm Gartner, Samsung's latest security platform Knox version 2.6 got the most strong ratings for any mobile security platform. The firm analysed the core OS security features built into a total of 12 mobile device platforms as well as enterprise management capabilities. Samsung also managed to gain leadership in mobile security market though Knox, coupled with Samsung Pay.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/samsung-knox-recognised-strongest-mobile-security-platform-1554836
HNIC215 said:
That's what a Samsung Rep told me when I had the international Note 5 and wanted to know if I would be able to use Samsung Pay here in the states.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay.. I wonder if he's related to one of the "samsung reps" that work in Best Buy stores.... or the ones that come visit AT&T stores on occasion. For the most part, they are really good in reciting the marketing material, but when it comes to details, they are clueless. In fact, at least as bad as Radio Shack sales people.
"KNOX" is a confusing term.
First, there's "KNOX" as a software security suite that is very closely related to what google calls "Android for Work." Both are basically a "secure" and private container/sandbox. The idea is that you take a personal smartphone to work and can run "work" apps that are completely sandboxes from personal apps. This has nothing whatsoever to do with SPay. SPay doesn't make use of this element of KNOX.
KNOX is also the name of a fuse in the device (which is likely a qualcomm "qfuse" in the SD820 S7's) that trips when the bootloader detects an unsigned kernel/recovery. _THIS_ is the KNOX that relates to SPay. Real human beings (not samsung sales or support reps) have confirmed that once the KNOX fuse is tripped, it prevents SPay from working. (It also prevents KNOX, the software suite mentioned above, from working.)
Now I need to express things in strange ways, and I hope you'll forgive the odd phrasing:
As far as devs on XDA and other sites similar to XDA have been able to determine, "root" does not prevent SPay from functioning. In fact, my understanding is that there are people who rooted their Galaxy S6 without tripping the KNOX fuse, later reverted to factory firmware, allowed the phone to OTA to newer firmware that included SPay, and SPay worked fine. However, there are others who have tripped the KNOX fuse while rooted who can no longer use SPay. The key here is that KNOX fuse...
I can say with a very large degree of confidence that SPay will work just fine if you happened to had a device that somehow had a working "su" binary in the path AND KNOX wasn't tripped. That might happen if the bootloader was designed to not trip KNOX... such as someone who developed software for preloads might have on a test device. Based only on information in the public domain, it might also happen if an exploit was found that didn't require flashing a custom kernel, recovery, etc.
It's POSSIBLE, and I actually don't know this, that the firmware released on these devices publicly has code to force tripping the KNOX fuse if root is detected. The galaxy S6 did NOT have this mechanism when towel root (or whatever root method it was) worked on it. I somehow doubt that samsung would have added this to the firmware, as there's too great a chance for a false positive, and tripping that KNOX flag is permanent.
In android user terms, a "rooted" device is merely a device that has a working suid "su" binary in the path owned by the 'root' user. (Later versions of android also require some sepolicy changes, but that's outside the scope of this thread.) That binary might be on /system or it might be in the kernel partition. However, neither is a permanent change to the device, and therefore it can be removed with no trace.
garyd9 said:
Okay.. I wonder if he's related to one of the "samsung reps" that work in Best Buy stores.... or the ones that come visit AT&T stores on occasion. For the most part, they are really good in reciting the marketing material, but when it comes to details, they are clueless. In fact, at least as bad as Radio Shack sales people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No this wasn't in person... Nor was it someone from the states (from what I could tell).
It was with a technician over the phone because the first customer service rep had no idea - so she transferred me to a technician.
Regardless, there is no point in discussing this endlessly.
There are already plenty of folks out there who are trying to solve this issue, only time will tell if they can succeed.
Let's see what happens.
Hello all,
In my circle of friends there was a suicide case and I was asked by the family if I would be able to remove a screen lock from a Samsung Galaxy S21. The family can't explain why their son killed himself and would like answers to all their questions. They assume that there is information on the phone or reasons for the suicide.
Are there any serious ways to get around such a block? I don't have much information about the device yet, nor do I currently have it with me. Maybe there are exploits or bruteforce toolkits to bypass the lockscreen. Programs like Tenorshare 4uKey or PassFab Android Unlocker are probably scam or?
I will get the device in the next week and could provide more information then.
Currently the following information is available:
Device Model: Samsung Galaxy S21 5G | Samsung SM-G991B | Android 11 | One UI 3.1
Mobile contract: active
SMS PIN & PUK: available
Google account credentials: available and valid and linked to the device but no backups available in Google Drive
Samsung account credentials: present and valid but not associated with the device so no backups available
Does the approach via Kali Nethunter and a HID keyboard attack work with a current Android Samsung Galaxy S21 bruteforcing or do you always get into the temporally increasing lock?
A data recovery $pecialist might be able to, ask the police for assistance.
Find the password for the lockscreen, or maybe through their Gmail or Samsung accounts, again passwords needed.
I think if they wanted you in the phone they would have unlocked it...
blackhawk said:
A data recovery $pecialist might be able to, ask the police for assistance.
Find the password for the lockscreen, or maybe through their Gmail or Samsung accounts, again passwords needed.
I think if they wanted you in the phone they would have unlocked it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not a helpful answer.
The police in this country does not help in such matters if it is assumed that no outside influence was involved.
A data recovery specialist also only executes toolkits or exploits. I am also able to do this if someone gives me a hint which toolkits or exploits would come into question for this model. I work as a sysadmin myself and therefore I am not completely untalented technically. I just lack information about which approach would be the best.
This is a community of people who like to hack their phones, not hack into other people's phones... which is considered unethical.
Are you serious?
You really think it's unethical when a 21 year old boy takes his own life overnight and the family just wants to know why their son did it? Sure, the boy was of age at 21 and can do with his life what he wants. Nevertheless, any clear-thinking person can understand that the family wants to know why the son did that.
I have no bad intentions and I am only trying to help the family. This is not about hacking a stolen cell phone. Then I would just do a factory reset and use the phone normally and not write this post here.
Yes, well... be that as it may.
With a screen lock in place you can't simply factory reset as you still be locked out.
I believe my original response was valid. It's not an easy nut to crack... by design.
Hello, i own a phone repair shop and i'm a relation with a person specialized in unlocking phones. He said me that he can bypass the lock screen and keep data on all samsung phones and he can do it remotly. Being in this business i don't trust him a lot about keeping data. One of my customer's son is dead and his family want to access his phone, they gave me his phone and they are agree to loose data if things dont go good so i'm gonna try with this guy and if you want i will give you a feedback.
Hi sorry to hear that this terrible situation happened around you.
I am in a similar situation. My cousin died suddenly and his sister asked be to recover pictures and videos because he filmed himself before try to end his life and she would like to find if there is any video that could help us understand better.
I'm trying to find ways to do that and so far I haven't but I wanted to share some information in case it could be helpful to someone.
I tried the iMobie Data Extractor. It is supposed to help recover data from "broken phone". I guess it's the closest thing I found that didn't look scammy and could work. After about a month of back and forth with their support person, I managed to replaced the OS using Odin (because the official software left my phone in a non-bootable state) replacing all partitions except User Data. Unfortunately, that didn't remove the lock (PIN). I'm not surprised since I didn't wipe the User Data.
From a security perspective, it is good that it is hard (impossible) to access data of a locked phone, but from a family emotional perspective, it is hard to have to tell my family that I failed.
I wish you good luck and please post here if you find a way.
be safe
Touftaf said:
Hello, i own a phone repair shop and i'm a relation with a person specialized in unlocking phones. He said me that he can bypass the lock screen and keep data on all samsung phones and he can do it remotly. Being in this business i don't trust him a lot about keeping data. One of my customer's son is dead and his family want to access his phone, they gave me his phone and they are agree to loose data if things dont go good so i'm gonna try with this guy and if you want i will give you a feedback.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What happened
I don't have easy-to-hear information for you. But I offer these words as a way to think about this situation.
I believe Samsung intentionally builds phones which are extremely hard to break into. This is a conscious design decision they make. Why? Because so many users do things like credit card payments, banking, and social media, where, if you lost your phone and a bad person found it, an easy-to-break-into device would have potentially catastrophic results. Aside from the harm to a user who lost a phone, Samsung themselves would be subjected to great reputational damage, too. It's bad press when it's easy to break into and steal something.
Also, you may not be able to break into the device, even with the help of a commercial vendor. Exploits in Android, when found, are patched regularly. A very smart person might have had a way to crack into a phone last week, last month, or last year. But again, Samsung intends to continually patch the software to keep it secure. They make a point to telling people that Samsung phones are patched for several years, so users will feel confident their data will be secure.
One suspects certain governments have police or security organizations who likely could break in, but they are unlikely to help in a personal situation, as you described.
Although this doesn't seem to apply to you, it's worth saying that Samsung phones are also backed up (by default) to their "cloud." It's possible that a lawyer might be able, with proper documentation of the owner's death, to get access to Samsung's (or Google's) cloud backup(s). I don't think it's easy though. Google, at least in the USA, allows the owner of an account to specify how Google should handle their data if they stop accessing their accounts. (I think Google treats an idle account as "dead" and for reasons like this, if you no longer want to use a vendor like Samsung or Google, you should proactively delete your account, not merely let it go idle.)
Anyone reading this post, might want to consider having what can be an uncomfortable conversation with your friends and family: "How would you like your friends and family handle your electronic, financial, and social accounts in the event of your death?"
Please, forgive me if any of this sounds insensitive. My father worked in insurance and as part of his job he knew all to well that all people eventually die. And how hard it is for those left behind to pick up the pieces, especially when secrets are involved. My family knows where to find my keys.