I currently have a Galaxy S II AT&T and my work is allowing us to use our personal phones to get corporate email.
We are a direct competitor to Samsung so my work does not allow any Samsung phones to join the program.
Is there a way to hide the model of my phone and make it look electronically like a different brand?
kingrat said:
I currently have a Galaxy S II AT&T and my work is allowing us to use our personal phones to get corporate email.
We are a direct competitor to Samsung so my work does not allow any Samsung phones to join the program.
Is there a way to hide the model of my phone and make it look electronically like a different brand?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm no expert, but I think that's against the law. It would involve changing the IMEI, and that's a no-no as far as I've heard.
kingrat said:
I currently have a Galaxy S II AT&T and my work is allowing us to use our personal phones to get corporate email.
We are a direct competitor to Samsung so my work does not allow any Samsung phones to join the program.
Is there a way to hide the model of my phone and make it look electronically like a different brand?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How would they know what kind of phone you have?
dsmboost said:
How would they know what kind of phone you have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would guess the IT department would have to okay the personal phone.
Sent from my smooth as butter SGH-I777.
dsmboost said:
How would they know what kind of phone you have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because the phone model is reported back to the corporate mail server. Exchange for example, can allow or deny certain phone models based on policy
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
Pirateghost said:
Because the phone model is reported back to the corporate mail server. Exchange for example, can allow or deny certain phone models based on policy
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeppp.. no ideas huh?
jack man said:
I'm no expert, but I think that's against the law. It would involve changing the IMEI, and that's a no-no as far as I've heard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, that would be if you were trying to hide it from the carrier. I doubt that the imei is used here. More likely it's a build prop check.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium
korockinout13 said:
No, that would be if you were trying to hide it from the carrier. I doubt that the imei is used here. More likely it's a build prop check.
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It depends on the mail client or security lockdown used. I used to have touchdown configured to report back to my exchange as an iPhone
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus
kingrat said:
We are a direct competitor to Samsung so my work does not allow any Samsung phones to join the program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless they are willing to provide you phones and service I think that's a pretty unreasonable requirement for a company to have. That would be like a Chrysler worker being told he cannot drive a vehicle from any other manufacturer to work and park in the company lot.
Sounds like it checks in the build prop file. I've never edited the model there so I'm not sure if it would work.
Sent from my SII(i777) running Task and Ktoonsez AOKP 10/28
I was somehow excited getting/reading my corporate emails on my SGS2 (thought I looked smarter or at least looked just like a business man) until fed up and said "Fk, I'll check emails when I'm at work ............. ONLY"
kingrat said:
We are a direct competitor to Samsung so my work does not allow any Samsung phones to join the program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sounds like somebody works for Apple...
Miami_Son said:
Unless they are willing to provide you phones and service I think that's a pretty unreasonable requirement for a company to have. That would be like a Chrysler worker being told he cannot drive a vehicle from any other manufacturer to work and park in the company lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I forget which car company did that but if u didn't own a car made by them u couldn't park in the company lot read Irt on the news a few years ago
http://mycolorscreen.com/oddspec/
Related
I've read today that all Android phones (and others) have Carrier IQ installed in them at the factory to that is capable of transmitting keystrokes, website visits, email and SMS data to the carrier.
My questions is, Can we build a ROM without it? Below is the link referring to the software.
Thanks.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-5...ets-secretly-logging-keystrokes-sms-messages/
With all of your reading you forgot to read the multiple threads in this forum about this.
No our phones don't have it right now so no we can not remove it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
pj1000 said:
I've read today that all Android phones (and others) have Carrier IQ installed in them at the factory to that is capable of transmitting keystrokes, website visits, email and SMS data to the carrier.
My questions is, Can we build a ROM without it? Below is the link referring to the software.
Thanks.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-5...ets-secretly-logging-keystrokes-sms-messages/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whoever told you all android phones had it was an idiot. Only some of them do - nearly all Sprint units, only newer AT&T units like the ****rocket and the Gingerbread updates for Infuse do.
(Probably Cappy GB has it and future updates for ours might.)
From what I understand, it doesn't send anything out of phones that have it installed, it just echoes data to the debug console.
Do you really think att needs that software to know your physical location? Does att need that to read your SMS? Know what numbers you dial?
Att could probably easily identify if you tether, or load a custom ROM on your phone. Its a matter of priority, and whether its worth the effort. Everything you do on your phone runs through their services. They know everything.
A program like that may make it easier for them to get the data, but I doubt it gives them any information that they couldn't get themselves if they really wanted it.
I don't see the big deal about it. What do I care if att knows where I am, who I call, and what I text, they already know all that. If att collecting data about how I use my phone leads to a better optimised data network, or better coverage then go for it.
What's next? People upset that google may be reading your Gmail? Or Comcast knowing what you watch on TV? Your credit card company knowing where you shop?
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
quarlow said:
Do you really think att needs that software to know your physical location? Does att need that to read your SMS? Know what numbers you dial?
Att could probably easily identify if you tether, or load a custom ROM on your phone. Its a matter of priority, and whether its worth the effort. Everything you do on your phone runs through their services. They know everything.
A program like that may make it easier for them to get the data, but I doubt it gives them any information that they couldn't get themselves if they really wanted it.
I don't see the big deal about it. What do I care if att knows where I am, who I call, and what I text, they already know all that. If att collecting data about how I use my phone leads to a better optimised data network, or better coverage then go for it.
What's next? People upset that google may be reading your Gmail? Or Comcast knowing what you watch on TV? Your credit card company knowing where you shop?
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Said like a true lamb... lol
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium
borguesian said:
Said like a true lamb... lol
Sent from my SGH-I777 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By call means, enlighten me.
How should the system work? How do they deliver your message if they don't know what to send? How do they connect your call if they don't know what you dialed? How do they send you a website without knowing the web address you input? How do they route a call to you if they don't know what towers you are connected to, and where those towers are?
My point is that people are up in arms because att has has access to data that you give them on a daily basis. They need that data to serve you as a customer.
Nothing you do on the internet, or using wireless networks will ever be truly private. The only thing changing here is how the data is collected, not whether the data is collected.
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
quarlow said:
By call means, enlighten me.
How should the system work? How do they deliver your message if they don't know what to send? How do they connect your call if they don't know what you dialed? How do they send you a website without knowing the web address you input? How do they route a call to you if they don't know what towers you are connected to, and where those towers are?
My point is that people are up in arms because att has has access to data that you give them on a daily basis. They need that data to serve you as a customer.
Nothing you do on the internet, or using wireless networks will ever be truly private. The only thing changing here is how the data is collected, not whether the data is collected.
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 quarlow
Very well said.
I can't really post a link but it seems like it has access to more than just your general txt/call/web data
From what I read in an article from Huffingtonpost.com
"The application, which is labeled on Eckhart’s HTC smartphone as "HTC IQ Agent," also logs the URL of websites searched on the phone, even if the user intends to encrypt that data using a URL that begins with "HTTPS," Eckhart said."
and from electronista.com
"The video also shows that the software records keystrokes. It likewise records calls with network strength values, which primarily allows carriers to fix problems but could also be used to intercept data. CarrierIQ is also collecting keystrokes of incompleted calls and even random keystrokes, or more than it needs
When using Wi-Fi, CarrierIQ records website security information, including URL and even passwords sent over the ostensibly secure HTTPS. This doesn't involve Sprint, as it's on Wi-Fi, so it shouldn't be recorded, Holly concludes."
In my opinion, it's one thing to know that a carrier obviously has access to much of this information if and when they should need it for court orders and other legal reasons. It's an entirely other thing though to specifically have software installed and intertwined into the core of the phone that has the potential to feed this information in another manner which obviously isn't explained to the end user.
I don't do anything on my phone that I wouldn't want them to see for very obvious reasons as stated above. But I would like to have at least the 'appearance' that not everything I do is going to be sifted through by AT&T or a 3rd party vendor. This type of software and the relative 'hush-hush' nature of it doesn't give me that feeling. It's like a rogue app just sitting in a dormant state waiting for AT&T or whoever to fire it up and log away.
Ok I'll end the paranoia and I don't think we have a basis to point our finger one way or the other yet, but clearly it's something I think that needs to be clarified and understood better.
Back in the olde timey days when folks just had land lines with which to communicate, the FCC made it illegal for third parties - yes, even carriers - to intercept and disclose conversations of their customers to third parties. Have we come all the way around to "let them use my personal communications as they see fit since they have it anyway?" I never thought I would see relatively sophisticated users, such as several of those contributing here, say "I do nothing wrong so I don't care who uses my data and for what purpose." Yikes.
pj1000 said:
Back in the olde timey days when folks just had land lines with which to communicate, the FCC made it illegal for third parties - yes, even carriers - to intercept and disclose conversations of their customers to third parties. Have we come all the way around to "let them use my personal communications as they see fit since they have it anyway?" I never thought I would see relatively sophisticated users, such as several of those contributing here, say "I do nothing wrong so I don't care who uses my data and for what purpose." Yikes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome to the Patriot act.
[Obligatory favorable statement about the Patriot Act]
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
I to agree with the carriers already know EVERYTHING we do. Whether we like it or not, that's how it works. But that takes place on THEIR end.
What I don't like is not knowing if it's secure. Main reason so many people were ticked their iphone were tracking them. Most knew it could be done, but the fact it stored that info on their phone with no encryption what-so-ever.
This is on OUR end now. The more ways to access everything we do, the greater the security risk.
If I get the choice, I'm definitely getting it off my phone. But if they prove it's without doubt secure? I still don't like it, but I'd feel a whole lot better about it. So what's the chance that will happen?
Sent from my páhhōniē
Here if yall want to know about CIQ. Good Read and good information for you to mull over. http://www.xda-developers.com/android/the-storm-is-not-over-yet-lets-talk-about-ciq/ Oh and MOST Devices that have this stupid thing on it that get root the first thing to get disabled is this little gem so I wouldn't worry about it too horribly much. I have seen a dev going around that strictly is going through phones that have it and removing it.
malickie said:
Here if yall want to know about CIQ. Good Read and good information for you to mull over. http://www.xda-developers.com/android/the-storm-is-not-over-yet-lets-talk-about-ciq/ Oh and MOST Devices that have this stupid thing on it that get root the first thing to get disabled is this little gem so I wouldn't worry about it too horribly much. I have seen a dev going around that strictly is going through phones that have it and removing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good article...
Oh yea here is a link that I found over in the HTC Vivid section just in case CIQ ever does hit our device I would assume the same thing could be done to remove it from the SGSII....
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1370541
@Kadin
Yea good article although a bit scary when you see all this thing does.
quarlow said:
Do you really think att needs that software to know your physical location? Does att need that to read your SMS? Know what numbers you dial?
Att could probably easily identify if you tether, or load a custom ROM on your phone. Its a matter of priority, and whether its worth the effort. Everything you do on your phone runs through their services. They know everything.
A program like that may make it easier for them to get the data, but I doubt it gives them any information that they couldn't get themselves if they really wanted it.
I don't see the big deal about it. What do I care if att knows where I am, who I call, and what I text, they already know all that. If att collecting data about how I use my phone leads to a better optimised data network, or better coverage then go for it.
What's next? People upset that google may be reading your Gmail? Or Comcast knowing what you watch on TV? Your credit card company knowing where you shop?
Sent from my Galaxy S II (i777)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the carrier can do all this already then you have to wonder why they have to put something like Carrier IQ on our phones.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/1...ed-phone-unlocks-will-be-a-thing-of-the-past/
Thoughts?
Linch89 said:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/1...ed-phone-unlocks-will-be-a-thing-of-the-past/
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it means that the play store will be selling many more devices. Makes me wonder if they helped it go that direction, I'm sure the big phone companies did.
I think if it is enforced then the phone manufacturers will have to start standing up to the phone companies. I think samsung has made it easier to root there devices and have been rewarded. HTC let verizon push them around and have paid.
I don't know tho. Those are my first thoughts.
Linch89 said:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/1...ed-phone-unlocks-will-be-a-thing-of-the-past/
Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to that article, rooting on phones is fine. Rooting on tablets without consent isn't. Unlocking your phone to use on another network which doesn't specifically allow it will be illegal.
Basically, the companies aren't obligated to help you take control of your device anymore. We're likely to be forced into going to Google Nexus branded devices to be able to retain control.
I wonder if Google will eventually be fed up with carriers and they'll start being a carrier of sorts. You can already use Google voice to text and with groove ip you can make calls connected to Wi-Fi.
Linch89 said:
I wonder if Google will eventually be fed up with carriers and they'll start being a carrier of sorts. You can already use Google voice to text and with groove ip you can make calls connected to Wi-Fi.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's been rumored for years. With this new ruling, I don't doubt something like it will happen. They've already started offering Google Fiber, which is super-fast internet and television in Kansas City.
Who cares what the ruling is? They can't really stop you from rooting your phone OR tablet...
I just hope google doesnt go the way of skynet :/
somerandomname1 said:
Who cares what the ruling is? They can't really stop you from rooting your phone OR tablet...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They can't stop you, no. But if they enact the tools to detect it on their networks, they can take action. Will they, probably not. But legally they can now.
*Madmoose* said:
They can't stop you, no. But if they enact the tools to detect it on their networks, they can take action. Will they, probably not. But legally they can now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well phones are safe. And as for tablets I'm sure people will ALWAYS find a way to not get caught.
Sent from my ADR6410LVW using xda app-developers app
i think the big point of the article was that theyre cracking down on say...att sims on verizon phones. but doesnt that mean that carriers can see the state of your phone at anytime?? its already been confirmed that verizon is selling customer data (length of phone calls, # of texts, etc)
somerandomname1 said:
Well phones are safe. And as for tablets I'm sure people will ALWAYS find a way to not get caught.
Sent from my ADR6410LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
January 26th 2013. Not so safe after that.
i think the carriers will start pushing dev phones and regular ones...there are already some out there right?
My neighbor told me he saw this on the news. I checked on Taptu and sure enough there is an article on CNet saying that this Saturday it will become illegal to unlock any device without the carriers approval. I cant post the link cause i have fewer than 10 posts. Bummer.
Does anyone know anything more about this? How can they make an open source project like Android illegal. I understand the "Buy an unlocked device." idea, but but where I live there's simply no carrier that supports the use of an "unlocked" device.
I was just wondering what u devs thought about this. Will this effect any pure Google devices such as my GNex? What about my HTC phone which HTC provides the means of unlocking? Is that having the carrier's approval?
Sent from my UNLOCKED... Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
trxrider31 said:
My neighbor told me he saw this on the news. I checked on Taptu and sure enough there is an article on CNet saying that this Saturday it will become illegal to unlock any device without the carriers approval. I cant post the link cause i have fewer than 10 posts. Bummer.
Does anyone know anything more about this? How can they make an open source project like Android illegal. I understand the "Buy an unlocked device." idea, but but where I live there's simply no carrier that supports the use of an "unlocked" device.
I was just wondering what u devs thought about this. Will this effect any pure Google devices such as my GNex? What about my HTC phone which HTC provides the means of unlocking? Is that having the carrier's approval?
Sent from my UNLOCKED... Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the device is a Google branded device - coming straight from Google, not from any carriers like att or Verizon, then it shouldn't affect the device. So if you have a Verizon Gnex, yes. UNLESS Verizon decides to support it. This is why I always get my phone from Google itself as a device with no limitations except the hardware inside.
Sent from my N3xUS IV ;D
Have a Look at this thread
Sent from my muffin LIFE! Under maintenance.!
guys rooting and unlocking phones are legal!!!
So will there be a "grandfather" clause that will allow me to keep my GNex unlocked or will they be able to somehow re-lock my LTE GNex?
As i stated, the only svc available where I live, aka. the sticks, is LTE. I am not aware of any unlocked device worth owning that uses the lte network. Suggestions??
And what about my HTC Rezound with unlocked bootloader? I mean, verizon had to allow HTC to sell its phone with the unlockable bootloader?? I would think that they allowed the GNex as well? I mean its only a select few devices that have this built in.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
imda1 said:
guys rooting and unlocking phones are legal!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THe former is. The latter will soon be illegal.
imda1 said:
guys rooting and unlocking phones are legal!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is illegal in Bulgaria ago. And refuse warranty service if are changed ROM or device is ROOTed.
The only reason I like my android is because I can change the roms and root the phone. Allows so much customization and additional support when the manufacturer rather you go buy another phone every year.
Please understand. Rooting != Unlocking
Sent from my Kyocera Rise via Tapatalk
dibblebill said:
Please understand. Rooting != Unlocking
Sent from my Kyocera Rise via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure what you are saying. Are you saying rooting will not be illegal but that loading a new ROM on a phone that makes the phone no longer carrier locked will be?
Most of these forums revolve around putting new, improved, unlocked ROMs on our phones. If that's going to be illegal on the 26th, then we've got problems because all these forums will be about illegal activities!
Have I missed something?
trxrider31 said:
My neighbor told me he saw this on the news. I checked on Taptu and sure enough there is an article on CNet saying that this Saturday it will become illegal to unlock any device without the carriers approval. I cant post the link cause i have fewer than 10 posts. Bummer.
Does anyone know anything more about this? How can they make an open source project like Android illegal. I understand the "Buy an unlocked device." idea, but but where I live there's simply no carrier that supports the use of an "unlocked" device.
I was just wondering what u devs thought about this. Will this effect any pure Google devices such as my GNex? What about my HTC phone which HTC provides the means of unlocking? Is that having the carrier's approval?
Sent from my UNLOCKED... Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know how I missed this thread, I looked....but I just posted this http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2119633
Sign the Petition
it is important to do something against that so sign this petition https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7 !!
not sure in your country
depends on your countrys laws and if you purchased the phone straight from google them selves
There are many petitions floating around, yet, I don't believe this will be around for very long. If you PURCHASE your phone it's fine. The problem lies in people upgrading, unlocking, then selling their phones. So second party (the people that buy the unlocked phones) may be held liable as the IMEI might not be registered at 'sale' or 'upgrade' even though those numbers are plainly posted on the sales package. It still pisses me off though. I upgrade and don't really use the phones I get directly, (I don't sell the phone until my service agreement eligible for another upgrade) and to think someone I sell a phone to may be held criminally liable pisses me off. Even the same when I buy a phone considering ignorance is not an excuse. How many noobs are here begging for information? Say some kid buys an unlocked ICrap to use on T-Mobile? Pops in the SIM Card and gets reported. Who wins?
dibblebill said:
Please understand. Rooting != Unlocking
Sent from my Kyocera Rise via Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Boy are you way off. Rooting has nothing to do with it. This is for sim unlock only
Batcom2
Speeding in a school zone is illegal too but we all catch ourselves doing.
I suggest if you unlock your at&t phone you don't go calling them saying your going to T-Mobile. You wouldn't speed in front of that cop.
BTW this doesn't seem like a big deal. Hopefully it ends subsidized phones with two year plans so people can not have to wait 2 years to switch. If you paid 800 for it then you can unlock it, or what some people said where you make a backup of your stock and then do whatever.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app
zelendel said:
Boy are you way off. Rooting has nothing to do with it. This is for sim unlock only
Batcom2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you don't understand what != means.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I don't understand what is the problem of lawmakers, but one of them are simply f**ed up.
1. If i bought a phone from a carrier and i'm still paying the monthly fee, until my contract ends, what is the problem of the carrier if i unlock the device?!
2. If i unlock the device, root it or change the rom, i must be aware i will void my warranty.
Hey everyone, forgive my bad English, not my native language.
As the title says, I have problems tethering with my galaxy S3. My provider is Orange (France). I knew when I bought it 2 weeks ago that tethering wasn't part of my package but I have been doing it anyway with my galaxy S1 for 2 years with a slim ICS ROM (a CM one).
So as soon as I got the phone, I tried tethering with the stock ROM and confirmed my provider was preventing it and offering various pricely offers via an internet page when trying to tether... Then I rooted it and flashed CM 10.1. Tried tethering. It worked fined for a couple of days but now I get the Internet page from my provider offering tethering packages. I've been searching on the net for solutions but can't find any.
Some people think it's due to the Agent User. I think it's unlikely. Others think it's due to the fact that I got a new Sim card (micro sim). I tried a few Roms but nothing changed.
Funny thing is I managged to put the new micro Sim Card in my old galaxy S1 which normally uses old Sim cards and guess what? Tethering works like a charm...Should I keep the old S1 as a modem? I'm always on the road and kinda need the tethering. :crying:
I wonder how my provider knows I'm tethering with my S3 and sees nothing with my S1? I did a factory reset, data wipe, formated the SD card but it still doesn't work. Do you have any advice/suggestions? I'm at lost here. Thanks for you help
that's illegal, you're violating terms of service
So you pay for tethering GlenBun? That's bull. I shouldn't have to pay to use my own internet I already pay for. That's retarded. I don't tether much at all, I do if I need to though.
It is of course not illegal to tether .
It may be against your network / contract rules and invoke a penalty is all .
Penalty can be charges or more usual a cut off of data .
As i understand the network picks it up on a measure of the data flow or something like that .
jje
It's the carrier's way of protecting themselves. A computer uses much more bandwidth than a mobile phone under normal use, according to them. You pay to browse the net from your phone.
If your carrier charges extra for tethering - regardless of what you feel you should be allowed to do with your plan, then circumventing these controls is stealing. If you need tethering, you need a plan that includes it. Dont ask people on this forum to help you break the law
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
JJEgan said:
It is of course not illegal to tether .
It may be against your network / contract rules and invoke a penalty is all .
Penalty can be charges or more usual a cut off of data .
As i understand the network picks it up on a measure of the data flow or something like that .
jje
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
illegal as in violation of the contract.
if you don't like it you should switch carriers.
I'm sorry if some of you feel offended. You are right and I have been using tethering for so long that I didn't think that what I was asking on the forum was illegal. Didn'twant to start a debate either.
I did some more research and found a way around my problem. It's a bit annoying but it's still better than having to carry my SG1 around (which I keep as a backup plan :laugh.
Thanks for answering and sorry again for asking you something illegal.
i pay for the internet so i can use it where i want on what i want...
I`m glad that you find a way around
Neolin said:
i pay for the internet so i can use it where i want on what i want...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not if your carrier's terms of service, which you agreed to, prohibit it
Just move to three, im not paying for tethering yet I do it all the time for my gakaxy tab. They dont realise you're doing it unless you tether to something like a laptop. Then they prevent it. But for tethering to other phones and tablets three is perfect!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Glebun said:
not if your carrier's terms of service, which you agreed to, prohibit it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you not rooted your phone which against Samsungs terms of service?
samkent6 said:
Just move to three, im not paying for tethering yet I do it all the time for my gakaxy tab. They dont realise you're doing it unless you tether to something like a laptop. Then they prevent it. But for tethering to other phones and tablets three is perfect!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Three will pick up things like ipads so it really depends what you're using. If you're clever enough, you can easily tether laptops too, but as stated - its illegal. My three plan has tethering included
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
---------- Post added at 05:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:17 PM ----------
toxic34 said:
Have you not rooted your phone which against Samsungs terms of service?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where does it say that? They purposely release their phones without protection to sell to more people. They just wont honour warranty if you're rooted
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
A simple analysis of ip packets can say you if it has been through another device, the original Mac address (the first digits of it identify the chip manufacturer so easy to see it's not your phone) and so on.
VPN
toxic34 said:
Have you not rooted your phone which against Samsungs terms of service?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's not
Strange, I can tether my Nexus 7 but not my laptop..
Sent via TCP/IP
gsw5700 said:
Strange, I can tether my Nexus 7 but not my laptop..
Sent via TCP/IP
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, because your Nexus 7 has an Android User Agent string in the Android Browser (much like your phone) and your Desktop Browser does not have an Android User agent String... So packet analysis identifies your laptop as being a computer, ergo - shouldn't be connected to the network
"Illegal" requires a law to disallow it, in contrast to broken tos which invoke a penalty and/or revokation of the contract.
Huge difference, same as in rooting being against certain ToS but never illegal in sane countries.
What most people talking against tethering do not realize is that most old internat contracts on Dsl prohibited the usage by more than a single computer.
My old (Galaxy S1) contract for mobile phone included 30Gig traffic but I was disallowed to visit any webpage containing pictures, videos or other media, use Voip, or download stuff.
Would you _really_ follow that contract to the letter?
Usually a vpn connection or removing their proxy from the APN is enough to bypass filters.
Any encryption (like https) will work fine too.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
d4fseeker said:
"Illegal" requires a law to disallow it, in contrast to broken tos which invoke a penalty and/or revokation of the contract.
Huge difference, same as in rooting being against certain ToS but never illegal in sane countries.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
poor choice of words. I am not a native speaker
Circumventing contracts to take something for free that you are supposed to pay for is stealing. In the UK stealing is illegal last I checked. Just like downloading an album from torrent sites or watching cable through a chipped box
Would I do it? Sure but will I openly tell someone how to break the law? Nope
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
I believe this has been posted before, but I wanted to bring it back to life.
I received a new phone from Asurion (I'm on Verizon.) today. It came prepacked with MK2.
You can imagine the frustration with this that I had after having AOSP KitKat on my previous GS4, and I'm willing to do just about anything to bring the new one to a firmware in which I can unlock the bootloader.
Anyway, here is the Change.org link: http://www.change.org/petitions/sam...ock-the-bootloader-of-the-verizon-s4-sch-i545
Were only 340 signatures away.
Good luck
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Well I signed it what the hell. I just don't think they care though.
They're too much into the big picture to care about us folks who want to flash ROMs . they made the dev s4 to address this, I think that's where they will stay. They'll just end up losing people like us as customers as we move to the other carriers that don't lock them down.
Hey I'm with you though... Why not try. Doesn't cost anything.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
I agree. The big picture is what Samsung cares about the most. (They are turning more and more into Apple everyday.)
However, maybe with a stroke of good luck and 1000 petition signatures...
Sent from my Verizon Galaxy S4
From what I know its not Samsung its Verizon att etc , if I buy the international version of this phone its bootloader is unlocked somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
swordmastr54 said:
From what I know its not Samsung its Verizon att etc , if I buy the international version of this phone its bootloader is unlocked somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be entirely honest, I'm not sure. Although you do sound correct.
However, I'm sure if this petition make 1000 signatures, Change.org would get it sent to the leads of the departments in both companies. It's called CHANGE.org for a reason, and if they weren't to do that, I would be genuinely surprised. I guess we'll just have to get it signed and see what happens! :fingers-crossed:
swordmastr54 said:
From what I know its not Samsung its Verizon att etc , if I buy the international version of this phone its bootloader is unlocked somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, Knox was created by Samsung either way. Meaning that they technically could come out with a BL unlock, if they really wanted to for Verizon customers. (unless legal issues?)
I'm not sure, but I suspect Samsung is looking to expand into a corporate environment where security is king. I can see the possibility of selling unlocked bootloaders to those customers who know the risks involved, but their challenge is to protect the security of their products. I don't know where Blackberry is with the ability to "root" their phones, but when I was on the Storm, all kinds of people were looking to unlock their devices and were stymied by the security measures in place.
enterprise clients who represents the single largest bulk of cell phone sales vs those who mod their phones are driving the security for good reason...modders can purchase the dev edition with an unlocked BL if they want to...
safestrap is our option currently and gives us of plenty of choices.
retrogrymlyn said:
Also, Knox was created by Samsung either way. Meaning that they technically could come out with a BL unlock, if they really wanted to for Verizon customers. (unless legal issues?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well of course they could, Samsung does the actual "locking" of course. But it's the carrier that makes them do it.
To be honest 1,000 signatures is a joke compared to millions of enterprise customers.
Sent from my HTC6600LVW using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Barack Obama will personally address this issue if we get enough signatures!
Sent from my SCH-I545
Please unlock the bootloader of the SCH-I545, respectively. We wouldn't want this device to be retired due to the fact that the people are not fully satisfied with it in its current state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not signing that. It doesn't even make sense. ITYM "respectfully." And, they're not going to retire a phone because people are not fully satisfied, they retire phones when they don't sell or a newer model comes out.
And why not call it what Verizon calls it - the Samsung Galaxy S4? Do you think some VP keeps track of the phones by model number?
Skrazz said:
Barack Obama will personally address this issue if we get enough signatures!
Sent from my SCH-I545
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wrong site lol
Sent from my HTC6600LVW using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Such writing. Much horrible. Wow. If you want to make a petition you may want to proofread and/or learn the English language first. However, even if the petition was properly worded it would not help to unlock the bootloader any more than me praying for it to be unlocked. Nice try though.
mike.s said:
I'm not signing that. It doesn't even make sense. ITYM "respectfully." And, they're not going to retire a phone because people are not fully satisfied, they retire phones when they don't sell or a newer model comes out.
And why not call it what Verizon calls it - the Samsung Galaxy S4? Do you think some VP keeps track of the phones by model number?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to mention that from a hardware standpoint, this phone is still pretty good a year after its release.
Funny fact is the verizon rep spoke yesterday to us saying "all of our phones are unlocked and are free to do what you want with them"
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
xxtoxicravenxx said:
Funny fact is the verizon rep spoke yesterday to us saying "all of our phones are unlocked and are free to do what you want with them"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true from a carrier perspective. He was referring to "SIM locks," which prevent a phone from being used on a different carrier. People who've dealt with GSM phones are more familiar with the concept - other than some pre-pay phones, I'm not aware of any US CDMA ones which were ever locked (and they didn't have SIMs, so it's not a true SIM lock, they did it in a different way).
xxtoxicravenxx said:
Funny fact is the verizon rep spoke yesterday to us saying "all of our phones are unlocked and are free to do what you want with them"
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they are unlocked from carrier veiwpoint
again, its enterprise customers which number in the millions vs modders who number in the thousands who drive this.......
if you want to mod a phone, a developer edition is available
I'm sorry but I'm completely confused by your attitude toward this. Here you are on the largest modding website known to man and by your post count you've been here for quite a while. Yet you solution is "buy a dev phone".
I guess that might make sense for the devs who are creating roms for the community, but what about there userbase? Are you saying every single person on these boards (with a locked bootloader) should purchase a dev phone? I mean you might as well just close the site at that point because the userbase is going to dwindle, and then you've just got dev's making roms for devs.
I bought this phone, it is now my property and i should have the option to do with it what i please.
I guess I'll have to start buying dev car's and dev computers when i want to make mods to them too with that kind of attitude.
Void4ever
decaturbob said:
if you want to mod a phone, a developer edition is available
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
void4ever said:
I'm sorry but I'm completely confused by your attitude toward this. Here you are on the largest modding website known to man and by your post count you've been here for quite a while. Yet you solution is "buy a dev phone".
I guess that might make sense for the devs who are creating roms for the community, but what about there userbase? Are you saying every single person on these boards (with a locked bootloader) should purchase a dev phone? I mean you might as well just close the site at that point because the userbase is going to dwindle, and then you've just got dev's making roms for devs.
I bought this phone, it is now my property and i should have the option to do with it what i please.
I guess I'll have to start buying dev car's and dev computers when i want to make mods to them too with that kind of attitude.
Void4ever
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not about the attitude, it's about not much could be done to get Verizon to side with us in giving us unlocked bootloaders. Up to this day there has not being an unlock for the S4, Note 3, or newly updated S3. With it being so tight the only way to go is to buy a developer edition. User base or not, the answer for a bootloader unlock isn't going to just fall out of the sky the chances only get slimmer by the holes that get patched up from each loophole. Of course I see your side of your case but I also see why he'd say buy have a dev phone or simply jump carriers or a different phone that can be unlocked.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk