Related
There have been some indications the Galaxy Nexus would include an FM radio. Is there any conclusive evidence of FM ?
If Google ships the Nexus with an FM app, that would be a departure from previous practice.
The Nexus One shipped with the HTC Desire FM hardware intact, but no app.
The Nexus S did not have the Silicon Labs Si4709 FM chip that the Galaxy S did, and the Broadcom BCM4329 BT/WiFi/FM combination chip was not wired to allow FM.
This Galaxy Nexus apparently has a Broadcom BCM4330 BT/WiFi/FM combination chip like the Galaxy S2 has. But the S2 uses a dedicated Silicon Labs FM chip like the original "S1".
I doubt the BCM4330 will be wired for FM, so I'd guess there must be a Silicon Labs FM chip if the Galaxy Nexus supports FM.
I doubt Google would have created their own FM app, but who knows ? Would it be incorporated into the music app ? Would they use Samsung's FM app, perhaps modified ? Or have they decided their new music store sales will be improved if they neglect FM ?
And if there is an FM app in Google's Galaxy Nexus, can we presume that the source code will be open ?
Kess78 pointed me to Supercurio's doc here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a6808W2GwBkBX8x1YwaW3tYm3JSzkp87uQBNWY3TFmE/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1 .
He says : "FM Radio app is not present."
The only other FM reference there is for the Audio Codec:
Linux ALSA driver source code and its register definitions, describing basic audio hardware features available.
Main input/output type supported:
* Headphone
* Speaker
* Microphone
* Bluetooth
* Voice
* FM - digital
* SPDIF over HDMI
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But IMO that doesn't prove anything. First, I don't think he has the exact source code for the kernel on the phone. I've heard the source code is expected to be released in about a month. But maybe I'm wrong, for the kernel code at least.
Second, there are "phantom" FM definitions for a number of Samsung Galaxy devices that don't have the FM chip: The Galaxy Tab, I think the Nexus S and the Galaxy S2 devices with no FM chip, such as AT&T and T-Mobile variants.
So my thinking now is that Google won't be releasing an FM app. Whether or not there's a Silicon Labs FM chip remains to be seen, but I suspect Google went cheap as with the Nexus S and there is no usable FM chip. But I'm just guessing for now.
I believe the Samsung Note spec states that it has an FM radio with RDS. It may be that they use similar chipset in the Galaxy Nexus and there is hope for FM Radio down the road sometime.
htc6500uk said:
I believe the Samsung Note spec states that it has an FM radio with RDS. It may be that they use similar chipset in the Galaxy Nexus and there is hope for FM Radio down the road sometime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of Android phones, I'd say most of them, have bluetooth chips that include support for both sending and receiving FM.
The problem is just that Android lacks a framework and API for it. ST-Ericsson submitted a framework and example app for it to AOSP that has been worked on openly in Gerrit for months with input from several Google people. Unfortunately Gerrit is still down so we don't know the latest progress but it will hopefully be officially supported in the future. Until then, we will probably see FM support for it in CM like many other phones currently enjoy.
htc6500uk said:
I believe the Samsung Note spec states that it has an FM radio with RDS. It may be that they use similar chipset in the Galaxy Nexus and there is hope for FM Radio down the road sometime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MAYBE.
But the Galaxy S and Nexus S are almost the same phone. Yet the Galaxy S has the Silicon Labs FM chip, while the Nexus S does not.
The same is true for some variants of the Galaxy S2. The "canonical" Samsung Galaxy S2 has the Silicon Labs FM chip, while the AT&T and T-Mobile variants appear to have omitted it.
IMO, at least 2 reasons: (1) The phone is a bit cheaper if they don't install the FM chip, and (2) Carriers want us to use their expensive data plans for streaming.
I think Google also has some interest in keeping cheap, "old fashioned" airwave radio from us. Same for Apple.
blunden said:
A lot of Android phones, I'd say most of them, have bluetooth chips that include support for both sending and receiving FM.
The problem is just that Android lacks a framework and API for it. ST-Ericsson submitted a framework and example app for it to AOSP that has been worked on openly in Gerrit for months with input from several Google people. Unfortunately Gerrit is still down so we don't know the latest progress but it will hopefully be officially supported in the future. Until then, we will probably see FM support for it in CM like many other phones currently enjoy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've spent most of this year developing an FM app for various Android devices. See my sig.
My impression is that the ST-Ericsson Android FM API is doomed. Nobody but them has committed to it. Broadcom is the biggest provider of FM combo chips and has said nothing, and continues to keep their specs secret.
Except for some Japan market Sharp models, can you show me ANY Android phone that supports FM transmit ? Stock or with developer mods ? I tried this on my TI based HTC Legend and it won't work. It needs the proper antenna (and perhaps power) connections, and I've found no phone that has that, likely because they were never designed to transmit, and were even designed to prevent transmit.
Even with a theoretically usable Bluetooth/WiFi/ FM combo chip (Broadcom or TI), if the power, antenna and audio connections are not in place, FM receive is impossible. There are several phones in my app incompatible list that never had an FM app, and that I and nobody else has ever been able to FM enable. IMO nobody will ever FM enable these without impractical hardware modifications.
so this does have an fm radio ! i seen where some say it doesn't and then I seen some that say it does, The unlocked version of the SGS2 has one but the AT&T didn't so this seems too
Technical Details:
Network
2G Network GSM 850 / 900 / 1800 / 1900
3G Network HSDPA 850 / 900 / 1700 / 1900 / 2100
Camera - 5MP
Touch Screen - Yes
Weight - 135g
External Memory - No
Memory Slot - No
Bluetooth - Yes
Vibration - Yes
3G - Yes
GPS - Yes
Connectivity
GPRS Yes
EDGE Yes
3G HSDPA, 21 Mbps; HSUPA, 5.76 Mbps; LTE
WLAN Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n, dual-band, DLNA, Wi-Fi hotspot
Bluetooth Yes, v3.0 with A2DP
USB Yes, v2.0 microUSB
Additional Features
OS Android OS, v4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich)
CPU Dual-core 1.2GHz Cortex-A9 CPU, TI OMAP 4460 chipset
Messaging SMS(threaded view), MMS, Email, Push Mail, IM, RSS
Browser HTML
Radio Stereo FM radio with RDS
Games Yes
GPS Yes, with A-GPS support
Java Yes, via Java MIDP emulator
- NFC support
- Barometer sensor
- Digital compass
- Active noise cancellation with dedicated mic
- MP4/H.264/H.263 player
- MP3/WAV/eAAC+/AC3 player
- Organizer
- Image/video editor
- Document viewer
- Google Search, Maps, Gmail,
YouTube, Calendar, Google Talk, Picasa integration
- Adobe Flash support
- Voice memo/dial/commands
- Predictive text input
The specs you have listed are from GSMArena and "may" be wrong. The two people afaik who have the GN have said that there is no native FM radio app. At present we dont even know if the FM chip is even correctly wired inside to receive signals. If it is, then CM7 (or 8) will be able to support it.
mikereidis said:
I've spent most of this year developing an FM app for various Android devices. See my sig.
My impression is that the ST-Ericsson Android FM API is doomed. Nobody but them has committed to it. Broadcom is the biggest provider of FM combo chips and has said nothing, and continues to keep their specs secret.
Except for some Japan market Sharp models, can you show me ANY Android phone that supports FM transmit ? Stock or with developer mods ? I tried this on my TI based HTC Legend and it won't work. It needs the proper antenna (and perhaps power) connections, and I've found no phone that has that, likely because they were never designed to transmit, and were even designed to prevent transmit.
Even with a theoretically usable Bluetooth/WiFi/ FM combo chip (Broadcom or TI), if the power, antenna and audio connections are not in place, FM receive is impossible. There are several phones in my app incompatible list that never had an FM app, and that I and nobody else has ever been able to FM enable. IMO nobody will ever FM enable these without impractical hardware modifications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the API has potential still. A reason for not seeing any commits from other manufacturers for it is that it's still not finished and polished enough to be approved by Google. If it is, I think that we will see some more action by the other manufacturers. Also, in theory the Broadcom plugin could be developed by the community since it seems one of the MIUI guys have access to confidential information about commands etc. The basic functionality could probably be implemented by information from what is currently used in MIUI and CM.
I have not seen a phone that supports FM transmit, no. That would just be a bonus though. Why do you say they are specifically designed not to transmit FM? FM transmitting with limited power (to allow close range music transfer) is legal now in many countries. Also, I know for a fact that receiving works fine in many phones in CM so at least that functionality should be possible.
blunden said:
I think the API has potential still. A reason for not seeing any commits from other manufacturers for it is that it's still not finished and polished enough to be approved by Google. If it is, I think that we will see some more action by the other manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went searching for this API last night. I couldn't find ANY sign of it except for the original posts and documentation from a year or so ago. Where is this Gerrit code ? Or any evidence of recent activity ?
AFAICT, Google has nothing to do with the SE FM API. Do you have any evidence otherwise ? NONE of the chip manufacturers has said ANYTHING about it either, AFAIK.
blunden said:
Also, in theory the Broadcom plugin could be developed by the community since it seems one of the MIUI guys have access to confidential information about commands etc. The basic functionality could probably be implemented by information from what is currently used in MIUI and CM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In theory ? Probably ? I really don't want to sound harsh, but I will speculate that you are just speculating about these things. And I think you are being too hopeful.
blunden said:
Why do you say they are specifically designed not to transmit FM? FM transmitting with limited power (to allow close range music transfer) is legal now in many countries.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, sure it's legal, with the proper FCC or whatever certifications. Those cost money, as does the engineering. The chip connections are specifically made to disable transmit. Thus, no software can enable FM transmit.
I'd be happy to learn I am wrong about any of the above. But until I see evidence, these are my current opinions based on my knowledge and experience.
mikereidis said:
I went searching for this API last night. I couldn't find ANY sign of it except for the original posts and documentation from a year or so ago. Where is this Gerrit code ? Or any evidence of recent activity ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When the kernel.org servers were taken down recently it also meant that AOSP and Gerrit that were both hosted there got taken down too. When Gerrit comes up again and if they keep all the history (that's not decided yet according to jbqueru) you can see for yourself. It used to be available on the following links.
https://review.source.android.com//#change,20506
https://review.source.android.com//#change,20507
https://review.source.android.com//#change,20508
https://review.source.android.com//#change,20509
I do have a limited part of the history from 20507 on gmail but I unsubscribed after a while because it was spamming my inbox. Here is a PDF of the parts I have. Some of it is missing though.
mikereidis said:
AFAICT, Google has nothing to do with the SE FM API. Do you have any evidence otherwise ? NONE of the chip manufacturers has said ANYTHING about it either, AFAIK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google is involved as in being actively commenting and reviewing it in Gerrit at the time. They provided details of changes they wanted to see etc. and seemed to show some interest in the API. You are right though in that it was written entirely by ST-Ericsson. Also, it's not made by SE (meaning Sony Ericsson) but by ST-Ericsson, a partnership between ST-Microelectronics and Erocsson. No Sony involded.
mikereidis said:
In theory ? Probably ? I really don't want to sound harsh, but I will speculate that you are just speculating about these things. And I think you are being too hopeful.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This part was speculation, yes. A third party plugin would not make it into any official builds at least. What I said about someone close to MIUI having some inside knowledge about what commands to send to the chip using hci_tool to enable FM receiving, RDS etc. was based on a claim they made themselves. That claim was send to me indirectly by a researcher from this group. It started with me submitting some comments on Gerrit. It started with me being approached by ST-Ericsson (Andreas Gustafsson specifically) asking if I could provide some more information and if I wanted to help them test it. I was later forwarded a message from the mentioned research group. After some emails back and forth it turned out they needed RDS which is currently not supported for the broadcom chip drivers used in CM. I therefor suggested that he should contact the MIUI guys to find out where they got the basis for the drivers they had written. That's when he told me a that a friend of xinyu had the datasheet for it but wouldn't share it.
mikereidis said:
Yes, sure it's legal, with the proper FCC or whatever certifications. Those cost money, as does the engineering. The chip connections are specifically made to disable transmit. Thus, no software can enable FM transmit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You might be right about it not being wired up for transmission of FM. Receiving works on most phones with compatible chips though as shown by it actually working in CM and MIUI.
mikereidis said:
I'd be happy to learn I am wrong about any of the above. But until I see evidence, these are my current opinions based on my knowledge and experience.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now you at least know what I base my opinions on. Too bad Gerrit isn't up.
blunden said:
When the kernel.org servers were taken down recently it also meant that AOSP and Gerrit that were both hosted there got taken down too. When Gerrit comes up again and if they keep all the history (that's not decided yet according to jbqueru) you can see for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks ! You are more familiar with this than I thought, so my apologies for assuming otherwise.
I'm surprised that 20 minutes of Google searching didn't reveal anything but a few year old documents and posts. Gerrit is still down ? Sheesh ! And that was the only place for somewhat open discussion ?
I've been working 60+ hour weeks on my Android FM app since February, and am trying to earn a meagre income from this project to keep it going indefinitely.
The reverse engineering I continue to do is VERY time consuming, generally has problems, and my app only runs on a fraction of the Android devices out there. So I am EXTREMELY interested in this API, if it has success.
I vaguely recall checking up on this API around August, probably via Gerritt. I had the impression it wasn't going anywhere very fast.
blunden said:
Google is involved as in being actively commenting and reviewing it in Gerrit at the time. They provided details of changes they wanted to see etc. and seemed to show some interest in the API.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, from your PDF I see one Google email address (Dave Sparks), as well as Broadcom and TI. Interesting...
See my next post for more...
I had an interesting email from someone working for an org with interest in enabling OTA radio on more smartphones.
I posted the Q's and A's on my app thread for anyone interested: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=19242542&postcount=1601
I think he and I agree that the biggest obstacles include the lack of usable, open APIs, the secrecy of the chip documents, and the manufacturers that specifically disable FM on many devices.
blunden said:
This part was speculation, yes. A third party plugin would not make it into any official builds at least. What I said about someone close to MIUI having some inside knowledge about what commands to send to the chip using hci_tool to enable FM receiving, RDS etc. was based on a claim they made themselves. That claim was send to me indirectly by a researcher from this group
It started with me submitting some comments on Gerrit. It started with me being approached by ST-Ericsson (Andreas Gustafsson specifically) asking if I could provide some more information and if I wanted to help them test it. I was later forwarded a message from the mentioned research group. After some emails back and forth it turned out they needed RDS which is currently not supported for the broadcom chip drivers used in CM. I therefor suggested that he should contact the MIUI guys to find out where they got the basis for the drivers they had written. That's when he told me a that a friend of xinyu had the datasheet for it but wouldn't share it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, as soon as I read the Broadcom chip header file for the MIUI/CM FM app, I was convinced the MIUI folk had some inside info. You don't get register defines like BC_REG_SPARE0 by reverse engineering alone.
My app runs on Broadcom and TI chips using what I've learned through hard rev eng work and what I've found on the net, including that header file. I support Samsung Silicon Labs and V4L too, but those "specs" are more open.
My app also supports RDS. AFAIK, neither the CM FM app, nor the MIUI app support RDS, so I think mine is the only 3rd party Android app that does on these chips. FMTwoo works w/ RDS on Galaxy S/Silicon Labs (as does mine).
And I think my app is the only one that communicates directly through the HCI UART. I had to do that because so many devices use Broadcom proprietary Bluetooth which doesn't support normal HCI access, AFAICT.
BTW, AFAIC, the MIUI and CM FM apps are now distinct. Some call the CM app MIUI, and About still says so. The MIUI FM app for Droid X is using Motorola and TI specific libraries. OTOH, the CM TI support is based on work that I did, via hcitool and (for my app direct access to HCI).
Last I looked the ST Ericsson API was VERY rich (IMO) with a lot of potential features, including handling Audio routing, which is a big problem I deal with regularly.
And yet the only multi-chip opensource Android FM code is the CM code, which is still pretty basic. Until not that long ago it only sent commands blindly, and couldn't get values such as the end frequency from a seek command.
So I feel that unless some individual or company "champions" it, I don't see much prospect for a community API implementation that goes beyond basics anytime soon. And it's not just the FM chips, it's the audio routing system for the phone, and sometimes other things, like antenna switches.
I don't think anybody is going to retrofit current phones with this API, except perhaps on specific aftermarket ROMs like MIUI and CM. There MAY be manufacturer support for this API on future phones.
I've considered writing some plugins myself, given my codebase and info. But for now I'm just waiting to see if this API goes anywhere, and if so I will support another API in my app, in addition to the 5 current APIs, possibly with a 6th (Broadcom proprietary) in the next several months.
I'd be very interested if you could give a name of someone who might be able to share more recent info on the progress of this API.
Thanks !
mikereidis said:
Thanks ! You are more familiar with this than I thought, so my apologies for assuming otherwise.
I'm surprised that 20 minutes of Google searching didn't reveal anything but a few year old documents and posts. Gerrit is still down ? Sheesh ! And that was the only place for somewhat open discussion ?
[...]
OK, from your PDF I see one Google email address (Dave Sparks), as well as Broadcom and TI. Interesting...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand. There are a lot of uninformed posts on XDA so it can serve to be sceptical sometimes.
Gerrit seems to be relatively poorly indexed on Google, if it's indexed at all. Yes, it's still down unfortunately. It makes me kind of sad since that was the only place I've found that you see and participate in open discussions between Google and the submitter. They usually respond if you make an informed comment or ask a relevant question. Unfortunately it's very hard to get in touch with developers to discuss improvements or report mistakes made in the non-open souce apps.
mikereidis said:
[...] I've considered writing some plugins myself, given my codebase and info. But for now I'm just waiting to see if this API goes anywhere, and if so I will support another API in my app, in addition to the 5 current APIs, possibly with a 6th (Broadcom proprietary) in the next several months.
I'd be very interested if you could give a name of someone who might be able to share more recent info on the progress of this API.
Thanks !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I contacted both people I've spoken to at ST-Ericsson about this to ask if there has been any progress as well as if I should refer you to them. I described your interest in this and how you can potentially help out. Unfortunately one of the addresses returned a "no such user" error but one of them seems to work fine still.
EDIT: I should also once again point out after reading the Q&A post you linked to that ST-Ericsson is entirely separate from Sony Ericsson and is therefor not affected by any Sony buy out as far as I know. The thing they have in common is that they both were spawned by Ericsson and then fusioned with competitors and that they are partly owned by Ericsson.
blunden said:
EDIT: I should also once again point out after reading the Q&A post you linked to that ST-Ericsson is entirely separate from Sony Ericsson and is therefor not affected by any Sony buy out as far as I know. The thing they have in common is that they both were spawned by Ericsson and then fusioned with competitors and that they are partly owned by Ericsson.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks ! Yes I sent an email to the one shown for Andreas Gustafsson and got that "550 No such user" bounceback. I hope that's just a spam issue and not a sign this API development is dead or struggling,
Yes the names and shifting ownerships etc. is confusing. I had thought that Sony-Ericcson was the only phone manufacturer to have committed to supporting this API.
So was it ST-Ericsson that made this commitment ? And they are a chip company, so how could they make such a commitment unless they have FM chips and were supporting the FM portion of the API, or the same for audio chips.
Basically I'm wondering if any hardware company has made any commitment to producing plugins for their hardware. Or is it all experimental at this point ? I can understand though that various Linux driver standards (such as V4L which also has a radio portion) have had little commitment from HW manufacturers, yet the "community" created drivers and apps for them.
"Geritt" naming is confusing too. CyanogenMod uses "Geritt" and they are up on their servers. So it's "Android Geritt" ?
-----
And yes, I could in theory help out. I could create plugins using my existing code. I guess this only makes sense if I open source the code.
Should I ? I don't know; There are pros and cons. It doesn't make much sense to me that I would do this for FM chips, while "rich" companies like Broadcom do nothing.
I could also do the app side, but there again, drivers are still needed. And it seems a bit more logical that the open source CM FM app be modified to use this API, or even the Qualcomm Code Aurora app.
Open source is great, but doesn't pay the bills unless some corporate sponsorship is involved.
mikereidis said:
Thanks ! Yes I sent an email to the one shown for Andreas Gustafsson and got that "550 No such user" bounceback. I hope that's just a spam issue and not a sign this API development is dead or struggling,
Yes the names and shifting ownerships etc. is confusing. I had thought that Sony-Ericcson was the only phone manufacturer to have committed to supporting this API.
So was it ST-Ericsson that made this commitment ? And they are a chip company, so how could they make such a commitment unless they have FM chips and were supporting the FM portion of the API, or the same for audio chips.
Basically I'm wondering if any hardware company has made any commitment to producing plugins for their hardware. Or is it all experimental at this point ? I can understand though that various Linux driver standards (such as V4L which also has a radio portion) have had little commitment from HW manufacturers, yet the "community" created drivers and apps for them.
"Geritt" naming is confusing too. CyanogenMod uses "Geritt" and they are up on their servers. So it's "Android Geritt" ?
-----
And yes, I could in theory help out. I could create plugins using my existing code. I guess this only makes sense if I open source the code.
Should I ? I don't know; There are pros and cons. It doesn't make much sense to me that I would do this for FM chips, while "rich" companies like Broadcom do nothing.
I could also do the app side, but there again, drivers are still needed. And it seems a bit more logical that the open source CM FM app be modified to use this API, or even the Qualcomm Code Aurora app.
Open source is great, but doesn't pay the bills unless some corporate sponsorship is involved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ST-Ericsson have chips with FM, as well as complete SoCs. I think Andreas might have either changed address or company but I spoke with a guy named Ulf as well and his address worked.
Gerrit is actually the name of the review system that is written by Google and released open source. CM started using it to improve the quality of the code in the project. Usually when people refer to Gerrit it should be fairly obvious which one they are talking about based on context. I was talking about AOSP Gerrit though.
I think the plan was to get other chip manufacturers interested in writing the plugins for it as that would allow them to market yet another feature of the chip to Android phone manufacturers. The chance of a phone manufacturer including functionality that requires them to write a whole new Android hardware API is highly unlikely, unless it's something like 3D screens that is very compelling for the marketing department. For that reason it's important to get the APIs implemented.
I did not mean that you should have to do an official implementation but rather that you might help them make it easier developers to test it. As you said, the manufacturers should not expect the users to implement these plugins. I just let them know you were interested about this and might have some valuable input.
I got an update from Ulf at ST-Ericsson. Work on the API has been moved to their branch in India. I should receive contact information for that team. Not that much has happened with it since AOSP Gerrit went down except for a few bugfixes.
blunden said:
I got an update from Ulf at ST-Ericsson. Work on the API has been moved to their branch in India. I should receive contact information for that team. Not that much has happened with it since AOSP Gerrit went down except for a few bugfixes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks ! Yes, please let me/us know of any developments.
My first impression is that moving a project to a different country is not a good sign.
My second impression is that "not a good sign" is an understatement.
IMO, Life goes on with proprietary APIs and minor roles for ALSA and V4L.
Hi, any news about GN fm radio possibility?
bye
I have read at least 50 disinformation type posts on this site about unlocking a branded Xperia (Verizion in my case) they all seem to be wanting me to pay money to Alejandrissimo or Jinx13 but when I click on those hyperlinks they are all "Invalid post" so what am I supposed to be finding here that I missed?
There is not any topic stickied that is describing how to unlock the thing & every article / forum post / google search I find is another disinformation post with no real evidence.
I know how to flash ROM's onto android using recovery loaders.
I know how to access the program menu's in various phones
I know what the CDMA spectrum is.
I'm not some newb making this post because I need my hand held step by step to do something.
I just need some real information
If anyone has a link to a real method or anything helpful please let me know
I have researched (and watched the welcome video) on this site to find an answer and I haven't found anything.
Thanks
-Jon
Ok, so the links to the unlockers in my thread are broken. Does it mean that my post has "disinformation"? Is there any other way to unlock the bootloaders? No to both, as far as I know. I'll try to fix the links, but seriously...
About why my post (or any other helpful resource about the matter) is not stickied, I don't know nor do I care. No one reads stickies anyway.
Logseman said:
Ok, so the links to the unlockers in my thread are broken. Does it mean that my post has "disinformation"? Is there any other way to unlock the bootloaders? No to both, as far as I know. I'll try to fix the links, but seriously...
About why my post (or any other helpful resource about the matter) is not stickied, I don't know nor do I care. No one reads stickies anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By disinformation it would seem that some exists.
droid-life reported 4 months ago ashergray(XDA) found a method to unlock the bootloader.
Why none of the methods being released or talked about is beyond me.
Also I'm confused why the method is being charged for by others but not officially it would seem.
You have to pm users on the forum to arrange a sale. Why does a topic not exist for this purpose?
All this confusing data is leading to a big headache right now. I was hoping for answers and all I find is rabbit holes on this elusive topic.
Thanks for the reply tho.
Ashergray's method was dried out (it exploited a flaw, and the flaw was fixed).I mention ashergray in the thread, as it is only fitting, in the thanks part.
About why they ask to be contacted privately or publicly, it's their business... Is there something that should be cleared in my thread, aside of the links of course? I mean, I can try to rebuild the first post if necessary.
Logseman said:
Ashergray's method was dried out (it exploited a flaw, and the flaw was fixed).I mention ashergray in the thread, as it is only fitting, in the thanks part.
About why they ask to be contacted privately or publicly, it's their business... Is there something that should be cleared in my thread, aside of the links of course? I mean, I can try to rebuild the first post if necessary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could start off by explaining why in 7 months time the boot loader is sill locked.
Or why your links to the unlock threads are dead. Both of them.
Or how I'm supposed to unlock the bootloader if these users can't provide that service any longer.
Also you could mention why Sony. being developer and hacker supportive hasn't assisted in taking Verizon's clutch off the bootloader
It is rather annoying coming from Droid x where the device is locked down with a fuse but yet a wide array of custom roms exist that bypass the locked bootloader and then coming to this phone that appears to have not progressed beyond hello world.
So you tell me where to look for an unlock because I'm fresh out of searches and ideas.
Thanks
-jon
P.s I also wonder if the exploit you speak of was patched. Why not just flash to an earlier rom with the problem still existing.
You could start off by explaining why in 7 months time the boot loader is sill locked.
Or why your links to the unlock threads are dead. Both of them.
Or how I'm supposed to unlock the bootloader if these users can't provide that service any longer.
Also you could mention why Sony. being developer and hacker supportive hasn't assisted in taking Verizon's clutch off the bootloader
It is rather annoying coming from Droid x where the device is locked down with a fuse but yet a wide array of custom roms exist that bypass the locked bootloader and then coming to this phone that appears to have not progressed beyond hello world.
So you tell me where to look for an unlock because I'm fresh out of searches and ideas.
Thanks
-jon
P.s I also wonder if the exploit you speak of was patched. Why not just flash to an earlier rom with the problem still existing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) I kindly would like to ask how I'm supposed to know why the bootloader is locked. It's a corporate decision by carriers and Sony Ericsson in which neither I, nor anyone in this forum, have any input. If I had any hard data about why Sony Ericsson doesn't cooperate in the issue, I'd say it. However, I just don't know why, and I prefer not to speak of what I don't know.
2) It seems that both threads have been wiped out of existence (which I didn't know until right now), and I see that a new site appears in Alejandrissimo's signature (http://unlock-bootloader.com/) where he's promoting his services externally (not only the unlocking, but the TA fix and hard-brick fix too). I'd guess that somebody complained about these people making business inside XDA, but then I question the idea of wiping their threads like... months afterwards. At any rate, don't worry, you still can unlock your bootloader with Alejandrissimo's help.
3) On Droid X the bootloader was bypassed because Motorola wouldn't ever unlock it. The FreeXperia team, who had bypassed older Xperia models' bootloaders, decided against it as they saw the new policy of Sony Ericsson's (unlocking phones which didn't come with carrier subsidy). I could unlock my bootloader from day one, and I'm happy to say I've helped devs here therethrough.
4) The exploit was related to the website where you could unlock R800i models. In order to unlock your bootloader, you need to give your IMEI number (an ID code for GSM phones). Ashergray could convert MEID numbers used by CDMA phones into bogus IMEI numbers, which could be used to unlock the devices. Sony Ericsson patched the website so ashergray's trick didn't work anymore.
5) My thread is a "how-to", do you really expect me to add points 1), 3) and 4) to it?
4 months is an eternity for this kind of business. Exploits get fixed (look at the PSXperia case), policies change (like HTC's and Motorola's) and threads are wiped on short or no notice.
Logseman said:
1) I kindly would like to ask how I'm supposed to know why the bootloader is locked. It's a corporate decision by carriers and Sony Ericsson in which neither I, nor anyone in this forum, have any input. If I had any hard data about why Sony Ericsson doesn't cooperate in the issue, I'd say it. However, I just don't know why, and I prefer not to speak of what I don't know.
2) It seems that both threads have been wiped out of existence (which I didn't know until right now), and I see that a new site appears in Alejandrissimo's signature where he's promoting his services externally (not only the unlocking, but the TA fix and hard-brick fix too). I'd guess that somebody complained about these people making business inside XDA, but then I question the idea of wiping their threads like... months afterwards. At any rate, don't worry, you still can unlock your bootloader with Alejandrissimo's help.
3) On Droid X the bootloader was bypassed because Motorola wouldn't ever unlock it. The FreeXperia team, who had bypassed older Xperia models' bootloaders, decided against it as they saw the new policy of Sony Ericsson's (unlocking phones which didn't come with carrier subsidy). I could unlock my bootloader from day one, and I'm happy to say I've helped devs here therethrough.
4) The exploit was related to the website where you could unlock R800i models. In order to unlock your bootloader, you need to give your IMEI number (an ID code for GSM phones). Ashergray could convert MEID numbers used by CDMA phones into bogus IMEI numbers, which could be used to unlock the devices. Sony Ericsson patched the website so ashergray's trick didn't work anymore.
5) My thread is a "how-to", do you really expect me to add points 1), 3) and 4) to it?
4 months is an eternity for this kind of business. Exploits get fixed (look at the PSXperia case), policies change (like HTC's and Motorola's) and threads are wiped on short or no notice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've sent you some PM's to remove spam / offtopic / rant from the board.
Thanks for the information tho. I wasn't aware of any of that.
It seems that the name FreeXperia is a bit of a misnomer because my Xperia is going to be locked unless I pay 25$ apparently and thats sad when I only paid 90$ for the phone used. Could have been cheaper if I had bought bad ESN(I probably should have tried)
Imagine my surprise coming from Droid X to this phone where droid X has heaps of ROM's available to everyone for free and now I have to worry about getting this device to function at the same level as my old DX with Gummy JAR rom.
I Just wish the spirit of opensource would be in this sub-forum so we could have some real development in terms of flavors of roms and such.
Do you think their is any reason the developers are all charging fee's to show the method through team viewer? I thought it could have something to do with leaking the method and then it could be fixed in later updates. but then again maybe I'm wrong.
It's not that they "show" you the method. They "perform" the method for you. I'm not sure if you can do it with Omnius as well... but if you can, it will be marginally cheaper (unlocking credits are needed anyway!) and you have no assistance.
And about the old "why charge for open source software" dead horse, which is pointless here because there is no open source software involved (the bootloaders are closed-source, SETool is closed-source, and so on):
The Free Software Foundation said:
“Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Additionally, as I said before, the FreeXperia team has this policy: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=15253598&postcount=217
Logseman said:
It's not that they "show" you the method. They "perform" the method for you. I'm not sure if you can do it with Omnius as well... but if you can, it will be marginally cheaper (unlocking credits are needed anyway!) and you have no assistance.
And about the old "why charge for open source software" dead horse, which is pointless here because there is no open source software involved (the bootloaders are closed-source, SETool is closed-source, and so on):
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right on. I'm following you thus far.
Question tho. I read that sony was the best company for hackers and developers right now because they actually are allowing people to get access to the bootloaders. If all this is true why are they not assisting in the unlock of branded phones?
I might be wrong on this but aren't most peoples phones branded anyways through buying a contract?
and that leads to why FreeXperia didn't realize that and find an exploit / workaround for the bootloader being locked on branded phones.
If Setool and Omnius (or whatever it's called) are able to unlock the phones then why was sony. the engineer of the device not able to perform this same task?
Also I thought locking the bootloader violates the FCC regulation. open access provision so why didn't Sony assist the FCC to bypass Verizon.
God another douche, you pay 90 bucks for your phone and you think this community owes you something. Go complain to sony.
What do you mean, Sony can't do it? Of course they can. But they have chosen to do so only with R800i non-branded phones. Considering that they locked bootloaders without any official way to unlock them on previous Xperia models, that's a big step forward. That's as far as Sony Ericsson can go: on branded phones, they must obey what the carriers want.
Please do read Bin4ry's statement:
Now think about, if we would try to hack and bypass devices what will happen with future phones? In our opinion future phones will be locked down again like X10 was, eventually even more.
So why don't use the possibilties which are give by SE? Stick to their rules and hope for more support and maybe even nicer implementations (for example a accessable bootpartition from recovery).
We like SE devices, so we don't want to hijack this (i call it) "test" which SE drives with us?
I can fully understand that U.S. users which cannot unlock are quite unhappy with the actual situation, but sorry we will NOT work on anything else than development for officially unlocked devices! That was a team decision.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Note that this is costing them a lot of flak because they don't use R800x models for testing purposes either, and CM7 has many issues in R800x phones.
Also I thought locking the bootloader violates the FCC regulation. open access provision so why didn't Sony assist the FCC to bypass Verizon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this is correct, sue. I'm sure you'll have backing from everyone here.
Logseman said:
What do you mean, Sony can't do it? Of course they can. But they have chosen to do so only with R800i non-branded phones. Considering that they locked bootloaders without any official way to unlock them on previous Xperia models, that's a big step forward. That's as far as Sony Ericsson can go: on branded phones, they must obey what the carriers want.
Please do read Bin4ry's statement:
Note that this is costing them a lot of flak because they don't use R800x models for testing purposes either, and CM7 has many issues in R800x phones.
If this is correct, sue. I'm sure you'll have backing from everyone here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what your saying is that CM7 is not even worth flashing even if i was unlocked?
I would be better off to root / Titanium backup / delete bloat and be done with it?
Its a shame that they are forcing most people to stay stock SE/Verizon ROM because they are scared of the repercussions of angering SE. I think even if they stay inert that SE will eventually add more DRM to "protect" the devices.
About the lawsuit. I don't believe I'm the first person to mention it. Verizon has already been sued for 25 Million i believe on another occasion and it's been said by others that they are breaking FCC Regulation. The problem would be to get something done about it and I wouldn't have those resources.
The reason for the charge is very simple. In order to unlock our version of the Play (R800x), it takes a hardware dongle and the purchase of credits to allow the software to work. All you are paying Al or whoever for is the cost of the number of credits necessary to unlock your phone. They aren't getting rich off anyone.
If there was another way to unlock the Verizon version, someone would have posted it by now. There isn't, and that's just how it is.
There is a good spirit of free info sharing on this site. You might have to do a little digging but it's there. For example, how to unroot the R800x without having an unlocked bootloader. Takes about a whole 5 minutes to do.
EDIT: I do have to say that after digging around a bit more, I don't blame you for being perturbed. While no one owes us Verizon Play owners anything, there could have been something posted and sticky to make it a bit easier to find out what is going on. And perhaps have had a bit less condescension toward us as well. Must be that UK mentality toward us Colonists!
Re: Droid X vs XPlay development -
Different phones from different brands on different carriers require entirely new learning to develop for, not to mention owning a device to work on. I'd say there's probably only about a dozen people worldwide putting in serious work on this phone.
That's not a lot. If you want more options, you may have to do it yourself.
No custom roms... No unlocks... Nothing..... Why??
Because it is a secure device like the dell venue pro. The other HTC devices (gen 1) had a long standing HTC bootloader exploit.
Actually, I don't think it's really any more secure. It's just because, frankly, the world runs on GSM. The US and a very few other countries use CDMA, but the international hacking community has relatively little interest in CDMA devices - they couldn't use one even if they could buy one.
The DFT guys claim to have a working bootloader unlock for the CDMA devices (Arrive and Verizon Trophy) and, given that, I'm sure custom ROMs will come eventually. It will take time, though; I think DFT didn't even have the devices until a few months ago.
As for homebrew, most of the original HTC homebrew (TouchXplorer, Advanced Explorer, etc.) worked fine on the Arrive. Additionally, there's lots of device-agnostic homebrew that works on anything (assuming it has been dev-unlocked).
The problem is the interop-lock. I (and a few others) are researching universal interop-unlocks, but so far we haven't made one work. Aside from LG, no devices have a registry editor already available, so we have to take over another program and make it edit the registry for us. The only apps that have successfully been used for this so far are network configuration apps, because they have a lot of configuration data and we can often modify it. The Arrive is permanently locked to a single network, so there's no point in it having a network configuration app.
On my list of reasons why I prefer GSM over CDMA, "can use hackable network configuration tools" would normally be pretty far down the list. Since the release of Mango and the interop-lock, though, it's become much more important on WP7. I don't really have anything against Sprint as a company - they just use a poor choice of wireless technology. CDMA is to GSM as Imperial is to Metric; the US keeps on using it and everybody else thinks we're crazy for it.
This actually belongs in the Q/A section, but if you look at most other devices (droid custom, windows mobile, etc) the GSM customizations are much more numerous than their CDMA counterparts.
Pretty much GoodDayToDie nailed it as to why the CDMA counterparts don't see a lot of action. Most of the major teams live in countries where GSM is the norm.
Thread Closed
This is not Development. It is a device specific question, i will from now on not move these, they will be closed.
Please refer to the read before posting sticky
Qualcomm QSEE and Radio/Modem vulnerability. Totally broken. How do we "fix" it?
Hola.
First and worst problem, the Radio/Modem firmware is vulnerable to remote exploitation. Could we use the Radio F/W for the Z2 or any other currently supported device in the Z series and apply it to the Z1? Or do we just rip the sim card and never ever ever use the Radio/Modem again? ( And disable the Radio/Modem in kernel , and cut the traces on the logic board, and wrap the device in tin foil, and leave it in a led box, buried under 4 feet of concrete. )
http://arstechnica.com/security/201...nes-and-networks-at-risk-of-complete-takeover
Next, QSEE, https://bits-please.blogspot.no/2016/05/qsee-privilege-escalation-vulnerability.html?m=1
A chip update might be needed as the author suggested, if a magic kernel update can't mitigate this, I'd do the required changes in the my backports hobby projects of course, but did not touch this part last time as I've not enabled encryption myself, I do a lot of kernel sorcery on the device and gazillions of reboots, It's just not practical. I'll "officially" "forum launch" the backports kernel in the coming days as I have a few goodies lined up. https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports/ - We could perhaps work around this by levering other encryption schemes native to the Linux kernel and just implement a light boot image and Kexec boot another kernel once the password is entered and such. Compiling a kernel w/o QSEE at all, and hammer a nail tru the chip .
But as this stands, the device isn't safe to use on the cell networks, as far as i know, the entire Qcom based and thereby the Z series is affected, along with every other Qcom device, past and current ... One can't risk getting owned without any knowledge and no working counter measures like this these days. But given the extent of this fault/vulnerability, it might be time to ditch the cellphone part of the cellphone all together, there simply is no such thing as security and privacy in this system, this is just one of several very serious faults and shortcomings of the worlds cellphone network system. Add this to the list after the for instance the SS7 system design malfunction which allows re-direction of calls without the knowledge of the subscriber, just like having a second sim card, and I can't really understand why any security concious person with a need for security would even considers walking around with these mobile tracking and information leaking devices... The computer in your pocket is the way in to all your personal information, you carry it around, connect to your local home network, your work network, your friends network, whatever, you risk infecting all these positions with malicious sorcery... Not good.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/04/18/ss7_60_minutes_iphone/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-hacking-your-phone/
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Karsten Nohl caos
This is a real shame, really, I like Qcom and their SoCks. . . ... It's where my main familiarity lies with ARM and SoC's.. I feel like a leprechaun working with say, Exynox sources... Though their devices are sound of course, it's just a matter of familiarity of the device, code and community.
Cheers
threader said:
Hola.
First and worst problem, the Radio/Modem firmware is vulnerable to remote exploitation. Could we use the Radio F/W for the Z2 or any other currently supported device in the Z series and apply it to the Z1? Or do we just rip the sim card and never ever ever use the Radio/Modem again? ( And disable the Radio/Modem in kernel , and cut the traces on the logic board, and wrap the device in tin foil, and leave it in a led box, buried under 4 feet of concrete. )
http://arstechnica.com/security/201...nes-and-networks-at-risk-of-complete-takeover
Next, QSEE, https://bits-please.blogspot.no/2016/05/qsee-privilege-escalation-vulnerability.html?m=1
A chip update might be needed as the author suggested, if a magic kernel update can't mitigate this, I'd do the required changes in the my backports hobby projects of course, but did not touch this part last time as I've not enabled encryption myself, I do a lot of kernel sorcery on the device and gazillions of reboots, It's just not practical. I'll "officially" "forum launch" the backports kernel in the coming days as I have a few goodies lined up. https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports/ - We could perhaps work around this by levering other encryption schemes native to the Linux kernel and just implement a light boot image and Kexec boot another kernel once the password is entered and such. Compiling a kernel w/o QSEE at all, and hammer a nail tru the chip .
But as this stands, the device isn't safe to use on the cell networks, as far as i know, the entire Qcom based and there by the Z series is affected, along with every other Qcom device, past and current ... One can't risk getting owned without any knowledge and no working counter measures.
This is a real shame, really, I like Qcom and their SoCks. . . ... It's where my main familiarity lies with ARM and SoC's.. I feel like a leprechaun working with say, Exynox sources... Though their devices are sound of course, it's just a matter of familiarity of the device, code and community.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With all due respect, but neither the arstechnica nor many others know what they are talking about, not to mention that the cell tower vulnerability has already been fixed and most likely the software has already been remotely updated. With regard to Qualcomm, you cite a 2015 vulnerability which also has been fixed. Qualcomm is better than other chip makers. They regularly post security advisories and fixes. Take a look here: https://www.codeaurora.org/projects/security-advisories
Regarding android code, if the rom is built with 4.9 or higher tool chain and developer enabled stack_protection-strong flag, most buffer overflows are prevented...
Regarding basebands: nobody knows what's going on there, because they are all closed source. So, to take advantage of potential vulnerabilities, one must be a state actor...
Heya Opti.
https://github.com/programa-stic/security-advisories/tree/master/ObjSys/CVE-2016-5080 , if you research the issue, the fault lies in a widely used library used by a myriad of manufactures regarding the cell system vulnerability, if you keep reading, the fault is of a nature and in equipment which might be in remote locations and not easily updated, and in the case of the use in cell phones, it will require a modem f/w update, which is as you say, closed source and not something we can patch. Hence why i am asking if radio updates from Z2 or others can be applied to our Z1.
Currently the assumption is that it requires a state actor, but in reality this will, if you research it, it requires access to the signalling system, with enough resources, say a multi billion million dollar one, a chain can be created where this actor can access systems where this fault can be exploited. And what's to say there isn't a mass exploitation of the flaw from even state actors. The flaws is assumed to now be complicated and resource demanding to exploit, thats not to say that down the line, or for all we know, some wise smart soul out there hasn't made the attack trivial even long before the flaw was disclosed. Point is , it exists, it's as bad as it gets, and we might as well be using windows 95 with no firewall directly connected to the world wide interweb.
Cheers
optimumpro said:
With all due respect, but neither the arstechnica nor many others know what they are talking about, not to mention that the cell tower vulnerability has already been fixed and most likely the software has already been remotely updated. With regard to Qualcomm, you cite a 2015 vulnerability which also has been fixed. Qualcomm is better than other chip makers. They regularly post security advisories and fixes. Take a look here: https://www.codeaurora.org/projects/security-advisories
Regarding android code, if the rom is built with 4.9 or higher tool chain and developer enabled stack_protection-strong flag, most buffer overflows are prevented...
Regarding basebands: nobody knows what's going on there, because they are all closed source. So, to take advantage of potential vulnerabilities, one must be a state actor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Woosh, good thing I enabled all crypto option in my Kernel....
The only thing we can do now on baseband is to edit it with NV tools. But not much.....
Testing Z2/Z3 modem/baseband fw sounds good, make sure to use both baseband img and fw files in system/etc/firmware....
Goodness, its worth a shot if nothing else, or this becomes a dev phone with no function but night time radio and certain apps . Might as well drop Android all together and use it as a micro laptop with a proper linux on if this stands. And that's a shame cause i really like it, and i can run apps as root on it, so i know if im being messed with. At least the phone should boot with the wrong radio firmware. Certainly someone has more experience with the z2 etc fw then me. I managed to update the bootlaoder when i stuck to 4.4 to boot the 3.10 kernel and such and risked bricking my phone like that, but it worked, just a matter of reading and really understanding what you're doing before prepping and flashing the device. Question is if it pukes due to being for a different device? Maybe if its similar enough we could binary patch our radio fw with the update for z2? Have these received the Radio fix for this serious fault at all yet anyway?
BlackSoulxxx said:
Woosh, good thing I enabled all crypto option in my Kernel....
The only thing we can do now on baseband is to edit it with NV tools. But not much.....
Testing Z2/Z3 modem/baseband fw sounds good, make sure to use both baseband img and fw files in system/etc/firmware....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome to try this, https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports , got too late , so i need to test it tomorrow.
https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports - not sure i did selinux correctly as Sony touched it. Gonna try implementing the new rnd device and some other network improvements ( buffer fixups ) which was submitted as a patch to the kernel recently. I'll bet my left toe nail there are problems compiling though, i nearly fell asleep preparing the commit from a WIP i had laying around.
Edit: Bah, i broke something, i got past this before i started putting the changes into the stable published backports, mainly the neon optimized aes/sha in arch/arm/crypto/ - damned thing compiled with in my experimental kernel...
optimumpro said:
With all due respect, but neither the arstechnica nor many others know what they are talking about, not to mention that the cell tower vulnerability has already been fixed and most likely the software has already been remotely updated. With regard to Qualcomm, you cite a 2015 vulnerability which also has been fixed. Qualcomm is better than other chip makers. They regularly post security advisories and fixes. Take a look here: https://www.codeaurora.org/projects/security-advisories
Regarding android code, if the rom is built with 4.9 or higher tool chain and developer enabled stack_protection-strong flag, most buffer overflows are prevented...
Regarding basebands: nobody knows what's going on there, because they are all closed source. So, to take advantage of potential vulnerabilities, one must be a state actor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
threader said:
You're welcome to try this, https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports , got too late , so i need to test it tomorrow.
https://github.com/threader/kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx-backports - not sure i did selinux correctly as Sony touched it. Gonna try implementing the new rnd device and some other network improvements ( buffer fixups ) which was submitted as a patch to the kernel recently. I'll bet my left toe nail there are problems compiling though, i nearly fell asleep preparing the commit from a WIP i had laying around.
Edit: Bah, i broke something, i got past this before i started putting the changes into the stable published backports, mainly the neon optimized aes/sha in arch/arm/crypto/ - damned thing compiled with in my experimental kernel...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't need Sony and you don't need CM to keep on top of security updates (they are actually quite behind on this). All you need is Google gerrit, Google Security Bulletin and Code Aurora Security Advisories. These 3 sources have it all. Both Sony and CM take most everything from these 3 sources. In addition, about 80% of commits from 3.10 kernel are portable to 3.4 without problems.
Sony blobs: with regard to rhine devices, there is virtually no development. If you look at blobs that they occasionally update, the rhine files they include in their "updates", especially for LP, are just copies from prior releases, as can be seen by time stamps.
Baseband: I am pretty sure that no baseband from Z2 or Z3 would ever fit Z1... We are just out of luck here, but targeting baseband costs thousands if not millions of $. So, if you are concerned about these, throw your phone away and run for a country that has no extradition treaty with your country..
Removed person (nickname) nickname, if the person wishes to identify, person can do this if person so wishes. I can say the person was involved in the Xperia project early, open source team if memory serves, but its not up to me to decide weather or not he wishes to be mentioned here by identifier.
IRC Log snippet:
---
<nickname> thredur: for the first issue, just enable airplane mode, for the second disable qsee in the kernel and enjoy life without drm and whatnot
<thredur> nickname, ok, thats no problem, true, airplane mode is one solution , so there is no patch for the radio for any devices?
<thredur> yet
<nickname> thredur: no idea what the status is on upgrades for that stuff
<nickname> thredur: but i can only presume that there's plenty devices out there that will never get any patches for these issues
<thredur> that's my assumption as well. but the radio part is very/rather similar between certain revisions i would think? except of course if not a new standard is implemented or big bad bus changes have happened
<thredur> i'm really very blank on the radio modem part
<thredur> but hey, people have been binary patching bits of the Amiga 68k's for years, and bios stuff in peecees' it should/would probably not be unimpossible to figure out the effected part and between two updates on the same device and patch the change into a similar but not officially supported device
<thredur> oh well, the z1 is a good development device anyway.
<nickname> that's totally doable, if you find a way around the firmware signature checker
<thredur> hum, yeh, i think open devices, or unlocked like our near and dear z1 would just flash that?
<nickname> flash, no problem...but it won't boot the modem
<thredur> i dont think i'd risk bricking the device if i flash the wrong radio image , no ?
<thredur> exactly
<nickname> the z3 modem will run just fine on z1, but it's not certain that you have any modem functionlity left and i would suggest you have a good backup of everything...
<thredur> ah, of course, i use the z1 as a second device
<thredur> but thanks, thats certainly supported , the z1
<thredur> err z3
<nickname> but who knows what issues you have in that modem
---
I implemented some ASM AES/SHA neon optimized code I found over at Codeaurora, only change really I made is for it to compile with Linaro; ( KBUILD_AFLAGS :=$(KBUILD_AFLAGS:-msoft-float=-Wa,-mfpu=neon-vfpv4 -marm -mfloat-abi=soft) added to arch/arm/crypto/Makefile ).
Getting close to a release now! Cheers fellow tinkerers, coders and hobby coders!
I messed up some selinux stuff just now earlier, so reverting that to the original kernel-copyleft-14.6.A.1.xxx compile and ought work, it's too late for me to test today, but it's ready to be butchered but others
From config to give you an idea.
Code:
+CONFIG_KERNEL_MODE_NEON=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_ARM=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_ALGAPI=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_ALGAPI2=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA1_ARM_NEON=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA512_ARM_NEON=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_AES_ARM_BS=y
+CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA1_ARM=y
Now I just need a patch for Drumpf and Pillary, replacing it with Birdie Sanders which is clearly better for system stability.
optimumpro said:
You don't need Sony and you don't need CM to keep on top of security updates (they are actually quite behind on this). All you need is Google gerrit, Google Security Bulletin and Code Aurora Security Advisories. These 3 sources have it all. Both Sony and CM take most everything from these 3 sources. In addition, about 80% of commits from 3.10 kernel are portable to 3.4 without problems.
Sony blobs: with regard to rhine devices, there is virtually no development. If you look at blobs that they occasionally update, the rhine files they include in their "updates", especially for LP, are just copies from prior releases, as can be seen by time stamps.
Baseband: I am pretty sure that no baseband from Z2 or Z3 would ever fit Z1... We are just out of luck here, but targeting baseband costs thousands if not millions of $. So, if you are concerned about these, throw your phone away and run for a country that has no extradition treaty with your country..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi everybody...
It used to be much easier to find the answer to something... but Google is all ads trash now.
I have seen the answers to this question all over the place. Out of days of searching, I have only gotten lots of bad info.
I really just want to know, for sure:
Is there any Samsung Fold 3 sold anywhere in the world, that you can root AND use in the U.S.?
And if so, what is the model?
TiA
It's right here in the forums man...
Link to post on Rooting: https://forum.xda-developers.com/t/...lash-official-firmware-noob-friendly.4404473/
Models: SM-F926B / SMF926N / SM-F9260
How-To Find: How to find the Model: on your phone → Settings → About Phone → The third row says the Model number and you need to remove the part with the part of /xx, for example, SM-F926B/DS and you only need to type SM-F926B
The U/U1 Models that are sold in the US (Locked/Unlocked) are the ones that cannot be rooted at this time.
EVERY version can run in the US provided it's SIM UNLOCKED and has the right radios, but what I understand is that the 5G radios are the only difference and there are some international models that will work in the US, you just have to look and maybe read more. I have no intention of rooting my Fold 3 at this time, so I have not looked too much into this, but this is just what I found looking here on this forum and even just on the first page.
Thanks. I knew I'd take a little heat. But as you can see, I've been here since 2009... and with a name like AlienPDA... you know what I started on. So I'm not noobing out, I'm just autistic and I like clear answers. Life was easier back then -=)
I am trying to replace a Nexus 6. I haven't found another phone that came close to its specs, (mind you, it's rooted and OC'd to the bleeding edge, 3GHz) in nearly a decade. The screen alone destroys most phones: Resolution, 1440 x 2560 pixels, 16:9 ratio (~493 ppi density), and two VERY CLEAR front-firing speakers.
And now that phones have a silly aspect ratio made for skinny jeans, it looked like I was never going to replace my Nexus.
The fold is the closest a phone has come, and with the Fold 4 coming out, the 3 is in a good price range. But I need root to run a few work programs and provide tether.
> EVERY version can run in the US provided it's SIM UNLOCKED and has the right radios, but what I understand is that the 5G radios are the only difference and there are some international models that will work in the US, you just have to look and maybe read more. I
That part is the part I was referring to in my post. The bands. I've stayed with my carrier all these years, because I have a grandfathered (true) unlimited data plan, and their coverage has the least holes. I know this is because of the bands... and I'd hate to create holes by dropping certain bands.
The nice thing about XDA, we're so big, usually someone has had to have tried XYZ setup.
But I haven't found a post, where someone:
bought a Fold 3, international,
rooted it,
and put it on a U.S. carrier.
So, seemingly, everything stated about the Fold 3, has been hearsay.
Here's an example:
AnnaNguyen said:Thank you William again I just did it and I confirm works on SM-F926U
But... I personally, after reading that, tried the same thing, and it DID NOT work.
So... my option is then to make a new post...
"Samsung Fold 3 SM-F926U not taking root via Magisk"
And then someone will reply... "We already told you that U.S. Fold doesn't take root"
But, but... I mean... it's right there. She said she did it??? Right?
Your reply was, "the info is everywhere, you just need to look..."
Your reply
> The U/U1 Models that are sold in the US (Locked/Unlocked) are the ones that cannot be rooted at this time.
On the first page of the link YOU PROVIDED:
> Thank you William again I just did it and I confirm works on SM-F926U
So...
Do you understand my confusion perhaps?
Apparently either you or Anna are wrong.
But if Anna is wrong, then my question stands.
I'm not dumb, I just cannot make informed decisions on conflicting information.
Totally understand why that might be confusing, but if in doubt look at the thread title.
If the root method included the SM-F926U/U1 model it would have been listed. Since it's not then it is a fair presumption that the model was not included.
As for if the phones will work in the USA will depend on the bands they support. The models SM-F9260/B/N were originally designed and sold with other regions in mind, so they may lack certain bands for use in the USA. You will have to research the bands supported on the 3 models and compare them to the bands your carrier uses.
I know it's not a specific answer to your question but it is a recent experience. A previous phone I had (note 20) was an international model and I can say that it did work, but only in a very generic way. It had limited band support for my carrier so it didn't work that well. Suffice it to say I didn't keep the phone and I returned it. While I had wanted to root the phone in all honesty it would be pointless if I wasn't able to get good performance out of it on the cell network.
> Totally understand why that might be confusing, but if in doubt look at the thread title.
> If the root method included the SM-F926U/U1 model it would have been listed. Since it's not then it is a fair presumption that the model was not included.
Do remember... Talderon's reply to me:
> It's right here in the forums man...
Is it? Is it?
Let's pretend I am an AI... and I am being programmed solely by this fora.
It's a bit more than confusing...
[it is easy, from a human perspective, you're presuming a point of "starting", we all 'started our life on this planet', some X time ago, and have a corpus of knowledge thusly].
But the AI, it's newly born. All the info on here, IS the point of starting.
So, referentially, regardless if the title of that post is limiting the models that it applies to, how do you decide then, that saying it works on "U", isn't NEW information to be added to canon, especially since the author of the thread himself, thanked the person, and didn't correct them.
So IS IT REALLY in the forum, if it's miscible with bad info?
I reread the thread and there really isn't anything in there that debunks it works on "U". Why would the OP thank a person that obviously stated an incompatible model?
I mean, I know personally it doesn't work, now... but if I am being told that the information I seek is on this forum, but the information is bad, how is any of this helpful? I am right back at the question I posed, unanswered unequivocally by the forum.
Keeping this as basic as possible.
1. The SN-F926U/U1 models are not rootable at this time. Anything else said to the contrary should not be believed, debated or given a second thought.
2. It is unknown if a root method for the SN-F926U/U1 will ever be found. If you do not see any threads about work being done on a root method then it means no one is working on one.
3. If and when the SN-F926U/U1 becomes rootable someone will post the method and instructions for use. The thread title will clearly say SN-F926U/U1. Only when you see the threat and flood of people posting about successfully using said method should you consider the information as valid.
4. The international models were built and designed to function and connect to cell networks outside of the USA. The bands they support will vary some depending on the model
5. USA carriers may/might allow a sim/network unlocked international model to connect to the carriers cell network. However it is up to the carrier to determine what services and features are supported.
6. You need to research the cell network bands your carrier uses. Then look up the bands the fold 3 models your thinking of using. Using that information find the model that works on the most number of bands used by your carrier.
7. You can also call your cell carrier, provide the model number(s) your interested in using and ask them is the model supported and what features will or won't work.
8. Because of internatonal carrier and hardware differences you should not expect or have any expectation that an international model will have the same performance level as that of a model designed and sold for use in the USA.
9. If no one has posted the information you seek it means that either of the following is true:
*what your asking doesn't work
*No one has tried what you are asking
*You need to adjust your search terms
1. The SN-F926U/U1 models are not rootable at this time. Anything else said to the contrary should not be believed, debated or given a second thought.
2. It is unknown if a root method for the SN-F926U/U1 will ever be found. If you do not see any threads about work being done on a root method then it means no one is working on one.
3. If and when the SN-F926U/U1 becomes rootable someone will post the method and instructions for use. The thread title will clearly say SN-F926U/U1. Only when you see the threat and flood of people posting about successfully using said method should you consider the information as valid.
--------------------------------------------------------
Well... Shouldn't someone maybe then remove the post where someone claims that they successfully rooted the SN-F926U, so people don't buy the SN-F926U thinking it can be rooted?
I kinda feel like this is where the "gap in understanding" is at.
--- I want to do X, can I?
"Just look in the forums your answer is there"
--- Well it says I can do X here.
"That's not right, ignore that... but everything else is accurate"
--- ??????
Mods have the ability to remove incorrect info right?
As a forum of various members from all over we are required too exercise common sense and reasoning when we read the forum and apply the tools, instructions and methods. Even the thread in question indicates one needs a "Galaxy fold 3 and common sense'.
For example if one is not ready to accept the risks and consequences (i.e. Knox being disabled and apps not working because they require Knox) they should not root a device.
Another example is where one post is made where someone says it works on the U model by extension does not make that one post to be true. Especially when you take into consideration other pieces of information like it has been stated numerous times already the U/U1 is not rootable, the thread title not including U/U1, the requirement of the root process listed that OEM unlocking in developer options menu be present (which the U/U1 models do not have), and no other thread exists detailing how/with what (and proof that the method works) to root the SM-F926U/U1.
Also I disagree that an understanding gap exists.. Even with that one post left alone enough content already exists that (and even this thread) will address any further issues about it.
That all being said if you want to discuss it further you should contact the forum moderators via PM.
Ok... For one, you didn't post enough information to answer your question.
There are 2 variants of the Nexus 6, XT1100, and XT1103, and they themselves have different band coverage.
Additionally it would be in your best interest to start with the bands your carrier uses, not what the phone supports. You have a grandfathered plan, there will be bands that will almost certainly be locked out from your plan's coverage. Chances are your Nexus is only using one or two, start with *#*#4636#*#* and see what bands you're currently using, then check if a fold supports it.
Ugh, been sick, so forgot about this thread.
Glad you got some more answers and details.