Out of curiosity why isn't root allowed out of the box on the Nexus 7?
I mean I get that no one should use superuser access/root privileges on anything more than a "need to use" basis and honestly, I'll even admit that with the way the ecosystem has evolved, root isn't really entirely "needed" but, it still boggles my mind that there is no way I can just open up a terminal, type in a code, and get root.
I've tried googling the issue but, I generally get a bunch of responses about things which aren't quite related.
Snow_fox said:
Out of curiosity why isn't root allowed out of the box on the Nexus 7?
I mean I get that no one should use superuser access/root privileges on anything more than a "need to use" basis and honestly, I'll even admit that with the way the ecosystem has evolved, root isn't really entirely "needed" but, it still boggles my mind that there is no way I can just open up a terminal, type in a code, and get root.
I've tried googling the issue but, I generally get a bunch of responses about things which aren't quite related.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think its fine the way it is. its jailbroken out of the box so you can use your device how you wish and that is what matters. You can't expect a company to support users to change everything about it. Then people complain about bricked devices or contact them for support for some custom rom.
However I believe they made it pretty easy to root. They certainly could have made it a lot harder. Anyone who has the skills (or patience to learn how) to use root certainly can root a device based on the tutorials given. And other users who don't want to worry about it don't ever see it. The little bit of effort helps weed out the people who would mess things up for themselves.
firesoul453 said:
I think its fine the way it is. its jailbroken out of the box so you can use your device how you wish and that is what matters. You can't expect a company to support users to change everything about it. Then people complain about bricked devices or contact them for support for some custom rom.
However I believe they made it pretty easy to root. They certainly could have made it a lot harder. Anyone who has the skills (or patience to learn how) to use root certainly can root a device based on the tutorials given. And other users who don't want to worry about it don't ever see it. The little bit of effort helps weed out the people who would mess things up for themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't expect a company to support me changing anything I want about it. If I misuse root privileges, then I don't expect to have a lifeline when I call asus/google. I don't expect say Dell or HP to cover my PC if I try to install ubuntu and I botch something up.
However, refusing to let me have root because "might" mess something up is also flawed logic. I may also for one reason or another need root access.
While I am glad they make it easy to root, the reality is there is they are being counter productive. Honestly, just leaving in root access would decrease the chances of me bricking my device at this point. As of now to get root access I'll have to flash a custom recovery compared to just giving the ability to go into a terminal and type in "oem -su enable" or something.
If the flashing issue is really that big of a deal, then why force users to flash to get what they want in the first place?
Snow_fox said:
I don't expect a company to support me changing anything I want about it. If I misuse root privileges, then I don't expect to have a lifeline when I call asus/google. I don't expect say Dell or HP to cover my PC if I try to install ubuntu and I botch something up.
However, refusing to let me have root because "might" mess something up is also flawed logic. I may also for one reason or another need root access.
While I am glad they make it easy to root, the reality is there is they are being counter productive. Honestly, just leaving in root access would decrease the chances of me bricking my device at this point. As of now to get root access I'll have to flash a custom recovery compared to just giving the ability to go into a terminal and type in "oem -su enable" or something.
If the flashing issue is really that big of a deal, then why force users to flash to get what they want in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Root can cause problems. It can cause security problems if not used right and can brick not only while rooting but while flashing custom roms and things.
while you and I don't go asking for support, a lot of people do. People try to pass things off as warrenty problems and do call and email asking for support for things not originally on that phone.
And it hurts them in other ways. Google makes pretty much all their money from ads. Rooting makes it easy to block ads and you average rom might have it built right in. The only reason google bothers with android was for the ad money. So there is no incentive for them give root out of the box. They already are more open and free than their main competitions.
You could look at samsung. THey make their money of the hardware and so have been more open with rooting with odin, thought they still don't really care for it (probably because of the support issue)
And the carriers are even worse because rooting allows for things like wireless tethering for free and data is their biggest costs. Their certnaly isn't any reason for carriers to push for root.
I honestly don't know the true answer; only Google would know.
But in my opinion, it's because Android is an open source OS, and giving users root access allows them to alter .apk's very easily. This is bad for developers, because most developers make money from advertisements or in-app currency, and allowing users to alter their .apk to easily block ads or change in-app currency would thwart developer interest.
In Windows for example, the OS is not open source, but users have "root" access because they can always get to the root of every program/file. BUT users CANNOT EASILY alter the programs installed on Windows - if they want a hacked version, they usually have to download a hacked version that someone else hacked.
Whereas in Android, it's very easy for me to download any .apk I want, run my hack app that says "Search for this value and change it to this" and BAM it's now hacked in literally seconds.
firesoul453 said:
Root can cause problems. It can cause security problems if not used right and can brick not only while rooting but while flashing custom roms and things.
while you and I don't go asking for support, a lot of people do. People try to pass things off as warrenty problems and do call and email asking for support for things not originally on that phone.
And it hurts them in other ways. Google makes pretty much all their money from ads. Rooting makes it easy to block ads and you average rom might have it built right in. The only reason google bothers with android was for the ad money. So there is no incentive for them give root out of the box. They already are more open and free than their main competitions.
You could look at samsung. THey make their money of the hardware and so have been more open with rooting with odin, thought they still don't really care for it (probably because of the support issue)
And the carriers are even worse because rooting allows for things like wireless tethering for free and data is their biggest costs. Their certnaly isn't any reason for carriers to push for root.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not going to deny adblocking is one of my many vices. While many people have many views on it, all I can say is until ads no longer break my experience completely, I'll be stuck using adblockers. While this is becoming less of a problem with phones/tablets that have faster processors I've had my entire phone lock up before because of certain types of ads my phone couldn't handle. On top of that many are frustrating to deal with as there is no "x" visible for me to tap and I have to back out of whatever I was doing because the phone can't handle the discrepancy in size and find some way to navigate around the ad.
While this is only one example there have been other issues. Hell I had to use a script that required root back when I had my captivate just to get it it to work on my schools wifi. There were a number of issues and I imagine there are still a number of issues that make the lack of root almost a deal breaker.
Sure you can argue from a support issue point of view but, realistically as I already said, I wouldn't have to flash anything if I had access to root... I guess they just chalk it up to "some people are going to do whatever it takes anyway...." but, that just doesn't make much sense to not let people have it anyway.
Geodude074 said:
I honestly don't know the true answer; only Google would know.
But in my opinion, it's because Android is an open source OS, and giving users root access allows them to alter .apk's very easily. This is bad for developers, because most developers make money from advertisements or in-app currency, and allowing users to alter their .apk to easily block ads or change in-app currency would thwart developer interest.
In Windows for example, the OS is not open source, but users have "root" access because they can always get to the root of every program/file. BUT users CANNOT EASILY alter the programs installed on Windows - if they want a hacked version, they usually have to download a hacked version that someone else hacked.
Whereas in Android, it's very easy for me to download any .apk I want, run my hack app that says "Search for this value and change it to this" and BAM it's now hacked in literally seconds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is actually one of the best reasons I think I've ever heard and I've actually asked this question a lot in different places over the years. That's a pretty feasible answer.
Geodude074 said:
I honestly don't know the true answer; only Google would know.
But in my opinion, it's because Android is an open source OS, and giving users root access allows them to alter .apk's very easily. This is bad for developers, because most developers make money from advertisements or in-app currency, and allowing users to alter their .apk to easily block ads or change in-app currency would thwart developer interest.
In Windows for example, the OS is not open source, but users have "root" access because they can always get to the root of every program/file. BUT users CANNOT EASILY alter the programs installed on Windows - if they want a hacked version, they usually have to download a hacked version that someone else hacked.
Whereas in Android, it's very easy for me to download any .apk I want, run my hack app that says "Search for this value and change it to this" and BAM it's now hacked in literally seconds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting has nothing to do with decompiling apks. apk hacking is bad but thats a whole other thing. Anyone can get a hold of pretty much every apk easliy, no need for root.
Windows doesn't really have root, its pretty different. You can give programs administrator privileges I guess, but not exactly the same. Decompiling apks is only easier because its java, it has nothing to do with the os or root privileges.
Don't expect any of these companies support to support root until they have a reason to.
Related
i think guy brings up a good point and perhaps a decent solution. why not allow/encourage the dev's to explain a bit more. I'm a fairly adept nerd but when i'm installing an app sometimes i'm just not sure why in the world this app needs that permission...how is my mom or sister or anyone that i advocate Android to going to figure it out? why does this app need my coarse or fine location or full network access or access to the contact list etc...
and please do not say 'if you don't like what's listed, don't install the app'. that is exactly the point of this thread. the line items in the Review Permissions window don't always make sense. how can the average end user make a educated guess with the current system...they don't, they just start doing the same thing they do on their Windows Desktops...just click right on thru it. then what happens? some jerk writes a piece of malware. user has an issue. now its all androids fault. and viola, proof that linux based devices are still too geeky for avg use.
http://tech.shantanugoel.com/2010/08/14/android-permissions-malware.html
Unfortunately, there's no denying the cold, hard facts - ignorance is not bliss. Everything has a learning curve. Time and effort must be spent to educate users as to why <this> is happening and what it is doing for them. It's sad but true. Besides, if everything that required higher learning could be easily figured out I'm sure humanity would be freed from the shackles of poverty, war and hunger by now. So, yes, permissions are too obtuse for the average user. Unless they want to educate themselves on more generalized computing skills they'll never get it.
That's just my two cents. Sorry I couldn't be of better assistance
ok. so i wish to educate myself. please provide a full and detailed example listing why which permissions may be needed/used so that i will be able to make an educated choice. where is that link again?
i'm bringing up an issue...not asking for others to chime in and tell me how stoopid the end user base is. i'm an admin for over 10yrs. trust me ... i know. in this case i am also confused as are a large numer of folks. i understand the huge development curve android has experienced over the last 18mths. my concern is that if this issue is not addressed, even the folks that would take the time to read the Review Permissions page will give up. i know i have on more than one occasion. that's a bad trend.
Wow. You bring up a good point. Didn't mean to offend you or anything. I still don't have a good answer for you but I will let you know that I only install apps that I can trust usually after researching them via Google searches and talking about them with people here. I too am an admin (been a long, long 15 years now) and if there's 2 things I learned about recommending custom Android setups they are:
- If you think the user is going to use you as Wikipedia it's probably best to leave them at stock
and
- Only recommend this kind of stuff to users who are willing to accept responsibility for their actions otherwise you'll be the fall guy every time something goes wrong.
Again, I'm sure you know this and I didn't mean to offend you so..... bye.
Users can be pretty obtuse, and I think you're completely correct about the current permission system. However, I don't think it could be made much clearer without multiplying the number of permissions. Malware can exist because users consider certain permissions to be common. Conversely, apps with a good reputation can include permissions that make them wonder, "why would they need that?" Look at keyboards and how many people freak out when they go to enable them.
One thing that would be nice for users is if you could tap on a permission and the phone would display a short explanation of that permission. They probably aren't self explanatory for everyone.
beatblaster said:
- If you think the user is going to use you as Wikipedia it's probably best to leave them at stock
and
- Only recommend this kind of stuff to users who are willing to accept responsibility for their actions otherwise you'll be the fall guy every time something goes wrong.
Again, I'm sure you know this and I didn't mean to offend you so..... bye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no offense. i do understand. there was a point in time where i used to openly provide paid tech support to home systems of my coworkers....it was a short point in time. lol. but i digress ... i may have come off too strong in my reply, i was just trying to prevent the thread from wandering off.
I've tried to post on this topic in the past but have not nothing useful. in and of itself, i find that kinda sad. I've even seen some folks suggest that people "take a trusting stance because most developers do not intend harm". i wish i could. but i'm out of college.
it would be wonderful if someone (ie: a google dev or just someone with knowledge of these things) were able to create a page that could give real world examples and general rules of thumb. currently i have only found a couple pages that cover a couple settings. not nearly enough to be of much use.
Saturn2K said:
One thing that would be nice for users is if you could tap on a permission and the phone would display a short explanation of that permission. They probably aren't self explanatory for everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur.....I look at the permissions that apps ask for all the time. However, if I see a battery management app is asking me for full internet access and access to my contacts, I just pass on it. A lot of times you can figure out if an app is requesting bogus permissions just by using common sense.
rugedraw said:
I concur.....I look at the permissions that apps ask for all the time. However, if I see a battery management app is asking me for full internet access and access to my contacts, I just pass on it. A lot of times you can figure out if an app is requesting bogus permissions just by using common sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if your app is paid for by advertisements then it will need Internet Access so it can retrieve ads...thus paying the developer. often that's where i see 'coarse location' used as well...for regional specific ads. so in those cases, not nefarious use but a perfect example of what I'm talking about. thank you.
the problem with the current permissions system is twofold;
1) as mentioned, there is no details WHY or WHAT FOR a particular permission is required
2) its all or nothing, ie you can't give permission for network access and restrict access to contact list, etc. You have to accept all the requested permissions or deny and not install the app.
fwiw: There is an app in the market called "permissions" that tells you not only the permissions each app requires but it gets VERY specific. Within each permission category there is a whole list of specifics.
It won't help with apps you haven't installed yet but it's good info on the ones you already have.
*edit- Just revisited this app, it's not as detailed as I remember.
just a lil bump...
bumpity bump ...
nothing? at all?
[Poll] Petition to discard the term "Jailbreak" and "root" pertaining to WP7.
Simple Poll: Vote "yes" or "no":
Do you want the term "jailbreak" or "root" to pertain to any methods of gaining "access to the command line of the WP7 operating system by removing any limitations imposed upon them by Microsoft.
I prefer the term, "Hyjack".
lemonspeakers said:
Simple Poll: Vote "yes" or "no":
Do you want the term "jailbreak" or "root" to pertain to any methods of gaining "access to the command line of the WP7 operating system by removing any limitations imposed upon them by Microsoft.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you go to the White House with this petition say hi to the First Lady from me
Jailbreak is a term that became popular with the iPhone but it's not iPhone specific. Don't know about rooting.
Either way, whoever makes it names it. I don't think that even the First Lady has a lot of influence over it, it's probably outside her husband's jurisdiction. She could ask though.
jailbreak applies to wp7 phones. i don't know if you would be refering directly to:
drm
marketplace
3rd party apps
and root does not apply to wp7... root is a wonderful thing only unix/linux folks get to enjoy. on windows, it's a much more important, fancy cool sounding thing called 'administrator'. ha !
as far as voting either of them off the island, sorry, the island voted you off. (russia, island, yolk)
Oh god yes let's do away with this terminology...you don't root or jailbreak WM or WP7...I simply cringe when people use those terms.
jailbreak can be used but i dont thing we should use root. or we can make something new how about haxed
and its not like ur gonna get banned or shot if u use the word if 200 people vote yes
I reckon since the term 'flash' has been used with winmo devices, that we should continue using that term with WP7 onwards.
just combine them
jailroot........
actually, that sounds nasty
Why not? iPhone owners constantly refer to "bricking" their phones although obviously none of them know what the term actually means since you can't brick an iPhone.
Whatever yal come up with. Im still using the term Jailbreak. Why? because the guy that figured out how to enable tether on wp7, used the term Jailbreak so Jailbreak it is. Besides we were and still locked down like apple.
WP7 = iPhone
Same defects
Same philosophy
Same symptoms
So "jailbreak"... obviously
markgamber said:
Why not? iPhone owners constantly refer to "bricking" their phones although obviously none of them know what the term actually means since you can't brick an iPhone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure about that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unzwt2mU3PI&feature=related
agp64 said:
Are you sure about that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unzwt2mU3PI&feature=related
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here is a better brick
What shall we call it instead?
Going Native?
You have to provide an alternative before demanding people drop the current terminology.
For now, I'm using "jailbreak". It's not accurate, but it is the closest of existing terminology.
Root is not only inaccurate, but just plain wrong. Windows CE not only doesn't call it's highest priv "root", it is not a multi-user system. It only has "SYSTEM", strictly speaking. The levels of access are more a clever illusion provided by the WP7 runtime, rather than an actual permissions system in the traditional sense, with users and such.
in my honest opinion, it should be up to the person who does it. if they crack past the security, they themselves should get the right to name it.
I want the term "cracked" or "admin accesss"
Here Is the thread I started a while ago, where name suggestions was made.
I wanted to do a poll out of it. I think I'm gonna wait a little now and see what comes up in this thread...
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=838167
and let me quote my self again :
LOL , I have to much time ,actually it already has a name :
Application Unlock: Most WM5 phones only allow you to load applications that have an acceptable digital signature. If you try to edit the registry or load an application it will give you an error. Application Unlocking removes this barrier and allows you to install any application or edit the registry to your liking.
The WP7 version
Application Unlock: Most WM5 WP7 phones only allow you to load applications that have an acceptable digital signature and are from marked place . If you try to You cannot edit the registry or sideload an application it will give you an error . Application Unlocking removes this barrier and allows you to install Sideload any application or edit the registry to your liking.
and here is the link to it , it is on the bottom of the page .
http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=FAQ#techicalJargon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can still sidle load and my phone is still interop unlocked but neither my registry editor nor my advanced configuration editor work. Way to go HTC and MS, pat your selves on the back. I pay $99 dollars a year to have my phone unlocked and to develop apps but I can't even develop useful apps because APIs and restrictions, I can't customize my phone with out hacks, nothing! And to top it all off the phone has very limited functionality. What is MS thinking? I'm seriously thinking about jumping ship after being a loyal Windows Mobile supporter from the very begging. It use to make me sick to think about how flooded the market is with Android phones and now I know why. I can't even come on here and vent my frustrations or voice my opinions without someone getting offended or warned like I'm some child. Granted that all phones have their fails but not as many as this phone, I wish Windows Mobile was still around, imagine a world with no having to have an Windows live account or no complicated Zune, imagine just being able to do what you want or need to do without any limitations or restrictions. Imagine being able to laugh at Android and iPhone users. I honestly don't see Windows Phone 8 being any better at all. Say what you want, lash out at me with your fan boy comments, report me to your MOD but no matter what you say or do at this rate WP will fail.
what is the radio driver version , is it 5.71??
well u cant blame anyone, WP7 is more secure than IOS.
thats a good thing right?
The purpose of paying $99 per year is to develop applications and publish them to the app store.
Being able to sideload for anything other than testing was just a side benefit.
If all you wanted was to side load apps, the ChevRon utility would have been a much better deal. One time fee verses yearly and 10% the cost.
Surprised that the radio drivers are to blame. Unless there was a flaw in them that was being exploited to make the editor.
It is pretty annoying that you can't directly programatically alter the registry.
But, I believe the provisioning methods still work. Just write a C# app that will provision a file. Then have the app generate an xml provisioning string to alter the registry and apply it.
There are ways to read the registry doing the same thing.
I can probably find a link in the Windows Phone 7 development section on how to do this.
I will update with a link if I find something.
Link for an HTC ProvXML importer and Reg to Prov XML convertor: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=907169&highlight=registry
Try searching that forum for ProvXML. There probably are examples. Serach is temporarily disabled. It always around this time of day for about 20 to 30 minutes.
I was afraid of this. The HTC driver updates may have been to v2 and that breaks the interop-unlock ability (such as allowing ACT and Reg Editors to run). This is known and mentioned by Heathcliff.
Magpir said:
what is the radio driver version , is it 5.71??
well u cant blame anyone, WP7 is more secure than IOS.
thats a good thing right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They just fixed an exploit.
Of course it's good to have your own device unlocked, but if Microsoft or HTC wanted you to modify the registry they would have released that feature natively.
For example LG has a native application to do this on their Windows Phones.
I interop unlocked my girlfriend's Optimus 7 the next day she got it in 1-2 mins.
what has the radio got to do with this?
will downgrading radio help then?
I know, it's my fault for being stupid and accepting the update, it's a little faster but I noticed it drains my battery much quicker and it disabled my reg exploits. to be honest I thought it was the keyboard fix but the keyboard seems to be getting worse. Microsoft is not what it use to be, Steve Jobs was right, MS is not original and always steal Apples ideas, why if the thing that made WM better is what is diving Androids success. I went to the T-Mobile store and was tempted to switch but walked out and have not decided yet but I just give up on WP this year if MS doesn't stop being so Communist like.
JVH3 said:
The purpose of paying $99 per year is to develop applications and publish them to the app store.
Being able to sideload for anything other than testing was just a side benefit.
If all you wanted was to side load apps, the ChevRon utility would have been a much better deal. One time fee verses yearly and 10% the cost.
Surprised that the radio drivers are to blame. Unless there was a flaw in them that was being exploited to make the editor.
It is pretty annoying that you can't directly programatically alter the registry.
But, I believe the provisioning methods still work. Just write a C# app that will provision a file. Then have the app generate an xml provisioning string to alter the registry and apply it.
There are ways to read the registry doing the same thing.
I can probably find a link in the Windows Phone 7 development section on how to do this.
I will update with a link if I find something.
Link for an HTC ProvXML importer and Reg to Prov XML convertor: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=907169&highlight=registry
Try searching that forum for ProvXML. There probably are examples. Serach is temporarily disabled. It always around this time of day for about 20 to 30 minutes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately I don't know how to work with ProvXML's. I will check out your link, thanks. do you by any chance know how to change the dark background color back to black using this method?
So you mean to tell me that Windows Phone is actually more secure than the iPhone? God all mighty!! I seriously hope Windows 8 is not as lame as Windows Phone.
sinister1 said:
Unfortunately I don't know how to work with ProvXML's. I will check out your link, thanks. do you by any chance know how to change the dark background color back to black using this method?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read the thread you sent me and it says that the new drivers also disable this method too.
To the OP, they also fixed a problem, If you ran connection setup with your phone in CDMA mode, it would kill 3G and the only real way to get it back was to hard reset the phone. It also broke those apps too.
To note, I manually installed 8107(last weekend, 3 days before vzw's release) and it did break Advanced Config (could not add more colors but, only had 3-4 extra onces) but, I am still able to sideload as I need. So, I'm not sure if it was the firmware that broke it...
I don't know what the big deal is with MS not letting us to simply personalize our phones? I mean really what is wrong with changing a notification tone, background color or tile color? If they really don't want anyone hacking the phone then simply give us those options. In every update instead of giving us simple features and options that we want all they do is secure the damn phone down even more It's almost like Microsoft wants to fail. Who wants to pay for a phone that is dictated to the point to where you can't even do that? As much as I hate to admit it; Android is coming up more and more when I think about my options.
sinister1 said:
I don't know what the big deal is with MS not letting us to simply personalize our phones? I mean really what is wrong with changing a notification tone, background color or tile color? If they really don't want anyone hacking the phone then simply give us those options. In every update instead of giving us simple features and options that we want all they do is secure the damn phone down even more It's almost like Microsoft wants to fail. Who wants to pay for a phone that is dictated to the point to where you can't even do that? As much as I hate to admit it; Android is coming up more and more when I think about my options.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it really comes down to what you can do. Opening up the phone, opens it to hack software to run. So, it opens a world of phones with pirated software on it with nothing MS can do it about it. Not everyone will go this route but, there are people who will not buy anything, and that kills the marketplace and vendors who will add to the marketplace.
As I always say, Pirates will always Pirate, block them and they'll find another way around it. BUT with blocking it makes honest people have a harder time to use their devices or software.
I personally just want to customize my phone and use all the home brew apps but, sad to say they will try to block the honest people just to attempt to stop the pirates...
Back to the subject on hand...
So, Connection setup no longer works (I get a Invalid sim if I go to GSM mode or in CDMA mode, Carrer is not in the database), is it possable to get a older version to sideload that would enable registry edits again ?
DavidinCT said:
I guess it really comes down to what you can do. Opening up the phone, opens it to hack software to run. So, it opens a world of phones with pirated software on it with nothing MS can do it about it. Not everyone will go this route but, there are people who will not buy anything, and that kills the marketplace and vendors who will add to the marketplace.
As I always say, Pirates will always Pirate, block them and they'll find another way around it. BUT with blocking it makes honest people have a harder time to use their devices or software.
I personally just want to customize my phone and use all the home brew apps but, sad to say they will try to block the honest people just to attempt to stop the pirates...
Back to the subject on hand...
So, Connection setup no longer works (I get a Invalid sim if I go to GSM mode or in CDMA mode, Carrer is not in the database), is it possable to get a older version to sideload that would enable registry edits again ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had that problem before, I had to toggle airplane mode and WIFI back and forth until it took.
DavidinCT said:
I guess it really comes down to what you can do. Opening up the phone, opens it to hack software to run. So, it opens a world of phones with pirated software on it with nothing MS can do it about it. Not everyone will go this route but, there are people who will not buy anything, and that kills the marketplace and vendors who will add to the marketplace.
As I always say, Pirates will always Pirate, block them and they'll find another way around it. BUT with blocking it makes honest people have a harder time to use their devices or software.
I personally just want to customize my phone and use all the home brew apps but, sad to say they will try to block the honest people just to attempt to stop the pirates...
Back to the subject on hand...
So, Connection setup no longer works (I get a Invalid sim if I go to GSM mode or in CDMA mode, Carrer is not in the database), is it possable to get a older version to sideload that would enable registry edits again ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The registry being locked down is less to do with piracy than control.
Code for the Windows Phone 7 was not a complete rewrite of the OS. They did reuse much of the old Windows Phone 6.5. They might have reviewed each piece and modified most, but they did reuse code. If they give you or developers control of the registry, then the entire device could be put into a state that would make nothing work. Or worse, your phone could be made to do just about anything in the background without your knowledge.
It's one thing to not allow programmers to access it. It's another to stop users from doing it intentionally. Any user doing it themself, knows the risks. And you can always reset the phone.
This latest lockdown might spur more interest in creating custom ROMs. Not sure if it is even possible yet for things like the Titan 2 and the new Nokia phones. But, this is the site to find out or find people doing it.
Your right I don't think it's possible at least not for the Trophy or CDMA phones at the moment, I guess we are just stuck at the state of sucks. Either way MS isn't making any money with their strategy at all the hold like 1% of the market; if it weren't for their PC sales they would have already went under.
sinister1 said:
Your right I don't think it's possible at least not for the Trophy or CDMA phones at the moment, I guess we are just stuck at the state of sucks. Either way MS isn't making any money with their strategy at all the hold like 1% of the market; if it weren't for their PC sales they would have already went under.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft has alot more products as well. SQL Server, Visual Studio (professionals don't use the express versions), Exchange Server, Office, XBox 360, msdn subscriptions, Skype, etc.
Microsoft makes money on all HTC and Samsung Android sales. Somewhere between $10 to $15 for each Samsung Android Phone and somewhere around $5 to $10 for HTC Android phone from patent licensing.
So, every Android sold helps Microsoft. Hopefully they use those dollars to improve Windows Phone 7.
This is actually the real reason that Microsoft can afford to deliver things a little late and still be OK.
They have a ton of cash flowing in all the time and the competition financially supports them.
I'm guessing that there is still a way using provisioning to affect the registry. When exchange servers push policies down, I thought they did that through provisioning. If exchange can do this, then there should be another way as well.
It's also how custom ringtones were created prior to Mango. It would create a xap to create a program that would write a ringtone file using provisioning. Something similar should be doable for the registry. Doing it this way would require you to use a computer to deploy the changes, but you should be able to make them.
Thaks guys for your feed back and support. If anyone knows a way that I can change my background back to default #FF00000 black now that the registry option is gone; please let me know, I will dontae becuse I have lookd at some Android phones and to be honest they are always pluged in and charging and the only other opption is the iPhone
Hmm.. was about to update and then cancelled it when I read this. Does it add tethering? but since it still lets us sideload... I kind of want to update, I don't do any registry stuff and i can always hard reset to interop unlock again right?
slick13 said:
Hmm.. was about to update and then cancelled it when I read this. Does it add tethering? but since it still lets us sideload... I kind of want to update, I don't do any registry stuff and i can always hard reset to interop unlock again right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it actually does nothing other that updates your radio's firmware and blocks exploits, worth less update unless you travel out of the country. This was lame on HTC and Verizon's part. I hate Verizon, MS should just stop doing business with them.
Saw this yesterday on xda tv and found article at UK info site concerning Chainfire.
Apparently Chainfire has come up with a whole new different approach to rooting once marshmallow becomes the standard.
At this point in time we will wait and see after we get marshmallow.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/supersu-v2...-marshmallow-without-modifying-system-1526678
Pp.
I wonder if it'll mean we can avoid tripping knox.
From what I read it sounds like this method circumvents firmware and security protocols.
It could be a knoxless process.
Pp.
The latest scoop, Chainfire has gone to the dark side.
He has sold out to some big entity (no name mentioned) and is pouring his recourses into this entity.
This is one way to stop tampering with your product, hire the person with the smarts to hack your product and make him work for you.
Rooting is going to have to wait for the next root savant.
Pp.
PanchoPlanet said:
The latest scoop, Chainfire has gone to the dark side.
He has sold out to some big entity (no name mentioned) and is pouring his recourses into this entity.
This is one way to stop tampering with your product, hire the person with the smarts to hack your product and make him work for you.
Rooting is going to have to wait for the next root savant.
Pp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where'd you see this?
The Root said:
Where'd you see this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reading in the link I posted in op, followed some comments and links I came across what appeared to be a disgruntled modder.
Read for about 15min before I can across the post.
Edit***
It was in the Nexus 6 link taking you to xda.
Pp.
I do not see what you're talking about. Can you be more specific? Maybe supply the link?
njdevils28 said:
I do not see what you're talking about. Can you be more specific? Maybe supply the link?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will find and post, it could have been a link to the Nexus 6 thread where I read it .
》》》 Edit 《《《
Here's something else I found, not the same article but it spells it out for you.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/0...n-involved-in-the-project-for-two-more-years/
Pp.
Here's a link and a copy of op where I found info on Chainfire defection.
WARNING: This is not a place for you to come to say how great you think Chainfire is. I'm not calling his character into question, only his methodologies and the character of the outfit he sold out to (and I don't question the act of selling out, that's business, pays the bills, and puts kids through college). The debates about what people prefer and why are as old as the first software. And of course, I will not tell you what to do, no matter how much I disagree with you. If you UNDERSTAND what I have to say, then THIS software is for you. If you don't, you are probably better off with binaries.
The root situation on Android 5.x left a lot to be desired. There was basically just one distributor of a functional substitute user command (su), and it was binary. Recently, ownership of that binary and all of its history has become the property of a previously unknown legal entity called "Coding Code Mobile Technology LLC". While it was presented as a positive thing that that entity has a great involvement with android root control, this is actually a VERY frightening development.
There are precisely two motives I can imagine for buying up all the root control software for Android;
1) monetizing it, which is contrary to the user's best interests,
2) something very frightening and dangerous involving the potential exploitation of everybody's devices.
You don't know the owners, and they are distributing a binary, so who the heck knows WHAT is going on.
Now a few important considerations with respect to your security and privacy;
1) Obfuscated binary cannot be sanely audited.
2) Function of this binary depends on the ability to manipulate selinux policies on the fly, including RELOADING the policy altogether and replacing it with something possibly completely different. Frankly, I've never heard a single reason why this should be necessary.
3) While a root control application may give you nice audits over other software that is using its service, it can *EASILY* lie about what it is doing itself. It can delete logs, it can share root with other applications that they have made deals with, it can directly sell you out to spammers, etc.
That is WAY too dangerous, and not worth the risk.
Frankly, you are safer if you disable selinux AND nosuid, and just run the old style of root where you set a copy of sh as 6755. And that is FRIGHTENINGLY dangerous.
So not satisfied with this state of root, and especially now with a new unknown entity trying to control the world, we bring you the rebirth of the ORIGINAL Superuser:
https://github.com/phhusson/Superuser
https://github.com/lbdroid/AOSP-SU-PATCH (this one is mine)
From the history of THAT Superuser:
http://www.koushikdutta.com/2008/11/fixing-su-security-hole-on-modified.html
Yes, look at the Superuser repo above and see whose space it was forked from.
Note: This is a work in progress, but working VERY well.
Use my patch against AOSP to generate a new boot.img, which includes the su binary.
Features:
1) selinux ENFORCING,
2) sepolicy can NOT be reloaded.
3) It is NOT necessary (or recommended) to modify your system partition. You can run this with dm-verity!
The source code is all open for you to audit. We have a lot of plans for this, and welcome suggestions, bug reports, and patches.
UPDATE NOVEMBER 19: We have a new github organization to... "organize" contributions to all of the related projects. It is available at https://github.com/seSuperuser
UPDATE2 NOVEMBER 19: We have relicensed the code. All future contributions will now be protected under GPLv3.
*** Regarding the license change; according to both the FSF and the Apache Foundation, GPLv3 (but not GPLv2) is forward compatible with the Apache License 2.0, which is the license we are coming from. http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html . What this means, is that it is *ILLEGAL* for anyone to take any portion of the code that is contributed from this point onward, and use it in a closed source project. We do this in order to guarantee that this VITAL piece of software will remain available for EVERYONE in perpetuity.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=63436951
Pp.
i want a 5.1.1 root without tripping knox.
ourfear said:
i want a 5.1.1 root without tripping knox.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think it's possible after last update.
Back in the beginning with 502 and first 511 update it was possible but updates patched exploits in kernel , not now. You either windup with tripped Knox or brick.
I'm a diehard rooter but have learned to live /like factory stock on this super phone.
With over 20 disable junk apps I get fenomenal battery life and trouble free functions on my phone the way root would make it in the past.
And that's all I want from this device.
Pp.
I have a rooted box and on certain programs that require root access it removes the allow screen too fast for me to click allow and therefore cannot use the addon. Is there a way to make it simply auto allow everything? On the 1st get I was able to do this but not on the second gen. And when clicking on supersu you cannot launch it to edit any options so basically I am stuck.
Have you tried editing /data/data/eu.chainfire.su/files/supersu.cfg? In particular, change "access=2" to "access=1" as the default.
retyre said:
Have you tried editing /data/data/eu.chainfire.su/files/supersu.cfg? In particular, change "access=2" to "access=1" as the default.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I have not. Not exactly sure what that means. Is that an adb command?
danknasty said:
No I have not. Not exactly sure what that means. Is that an adb command?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Open the file in any text editor (e.g., ES File Explorer has a Note Editor) and make the change to the default. If you can't, do an adb pull of the file, edit on another device, and put it back to its original location. Make sure you set permissions back to 600.
retyre said:
Open the file in any text editor (e.g., ES File Explorer has a Note Editor) and make the change to the default. If you can't, do an adb pull of the file, edit on another device, and put it back to its original location. Make sure you set permissions back to 600.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was going to try this but remembered that rooting on fire tv uses the a to a usb cable method and all the files are transferred automatically. I do not have a super user file... would I install another one and overwrite it on the box?
sure you do. How would you have root without su? Just look for the file mentioned above and edit it as per retyre's post above.
danknasty said:
I was going to try this but remembered that rooting on fire tv uses the a to a usb cable method and all the files are transferred automatically. I do not have a super user file... would I install another one and overwrite it on the box?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regardless of the method used to root, rooting involves the install of su and something like SuperSU to make it easier to work with. The fact that you're being prompted to allow su access is proof enough.
Install a root file explorer (I use ES File Explorer), allow it su access, go to the root of the device ("/") and look for the file in the location mentioned above.
retyre said:
Regardless of the method used to root, rooting involves the install of su and something like SuperSU to make it easier to work with. The fact that you're being prompted to allow su access is proof enough.
Install a root file explorer (I use ES File Explorer), allow it su access, go to the root of the device ("/") and look for the file in the location mentioned above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wasn't saying I didn't have supersu just that the method I use doesn't allow me access before I transfer but I see what you mean I can do this from the box itself. Was hoping I could do it to the supersu file on the computer so that when I root another box I wouldn't have to change the text file again. But I'll try this out later and see how it goes.
retyre said:
Regardless of the method used to root, rooting involves the install of su and something like SuperSU to make it easier to work with. The fact that you're being prompted to allow su access is proof enough.
Install a root file explorer (I use ES File Explorer), allow it su access, go to the root of the device ("/") and look for the file in the location mentioned above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried accessing supersu in two root browsers and it gives me a bunch of greyed out permissions... I am not sure how to even open it with notepad on es file explorer. This is a little different than the first gen as everything must be installed through tw recovery. Before Supersu would just ask me if i wanted to approve everything I clicked ok and never had to check it again. Is there any way I can edit any of the text that is being injected into the box when installing the firetv recovery via the usb cable method.. I believe this is where supersu is being transfered.
update: ok I found supersu inside the prerooted rom... I opened it as a text file and its pages and pages of random symbols etc.
harlekinade said:
Comedy gold.
I suggest you swipe left.
Or start reading what other people actually posted in here before. Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiler or what a filepath is, or why you shouldnt try to resell Fire TVs - just in case...
Here is why - I havent encountered any case where the allow root access prompt would be on screen for less than 15 seconds during which you have to press down/right/enter to grant it permissions - and it only pops on when you are actively launching anything that tries to pull root rights - so you already have the remote in your hands.
Automating root prompt behavior to grant root by default is a really bad idea in general and you asking not only how to automate it, but also automate further installations of such a setup, suggests that maybe you are battling with user behavior of folks that don't know what a superuser prompt is and that go with default settings in most cases. Ethically it is hard to support any of this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow that was really presumptuous and didn't at all relate to anything or help me.... excellent work. I suggest before attempting to troll a post you read the entire post so you can at least have a firm grasp on your ridiculous comments. 9 posts in you're doing great. Lol "ethically it is hard to support any of this." At least you made me laugh. I guess it's unethical in your opinion for me to paint my car red also since it comes from the dealership blue. Btw it never occurred to me to push down right then enter with the remote thanks problem solved.....
danknasty said:
I tried accessing supersu in two root browsers and it gives me a bunch of greyed out permissions... I am not sure how to even open it with notepad on es file explorer. This is a little different than the first gen as everything must be installed through tw recovery. Before Supersu would just ask me if i wanted to approve everything I clicked ok and never had to check it again. Is there any way I can edit any of the text that is being injected into the box when installing the firetv recovery via the usb cable method.. I believe this is where supersu is being transfered.
update: ok I found supersu inside the prerooted rom... I opened it as a text file and its pages and pages of random symbols etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you trying to edit SuperSU (the app)? You should edit supersu.cfg, which is the text config file for SuperSU. Look for supersu.cfg in the location mentioned earlier.
retyre said:
Why are you trying to edit SuperSU (the app)? You should edit supersu.cfg, which is the text config file for SuperSU. Look for supersu.cfg in the location mentioned earlier.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only supersu I was able to find using es explorer was the supersu file in the system folder... data showed up as black. I was finally able to find it using a different root browser I changed the setting for the app it self to 1 and it works. The only program that this gives me this issue with is teamviewer and I am wondering if it has to do with using a launcher version of kodi as it always kicks me out of the allow root selection screen, automatically disallows root and jumps to the kodi screen. But doing what you recommended worked. Thanks
harlekinade said:
Thank you for explaining your issue a little bit further. Changing the default of a superuser prompt to "yes" is something that shouldnt be considered an "easy fix" you could integrate into an image an then roll out on several devices.
Even if you LOL at the ethics of this, as you so eloquently put it - its still not something you should consider doing, generally speaking.
Just like you - trying to edit the Superuser binary in a texteditor - people can ruin their devices beyond repair, the default on "no" is a behavioral crutch to make it less likely that they find themselves in that situation.
Not sure if it would work for you - but I posted a teamviewer alternative in the general section (Exposed modules and root apps thread), that you might want to take a look at, as it doesnt require the app to be launched every time you want to access the Fire TV via VNC - as it runs as a service in the background.
I'm not exactly sure what you try to accomplish with teamviewer and why you want to roll out this configuration on multiple devices - so I'm not sure if it fits your purpose, but it might.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My issue was explained in the first post but i think you're really thanking me for telling you that I don't intend to sell rooted fire tv's with super user permissions on yes by default for malicious purposes... as you so eloquently put it.. I was actually laughing at the fact that you are on a forum that is primarily devoted to rooting and customizing devices but you draw the line at me wanting to default the supersu permissions on my devices because of ethical reasons. Anyways I'll check out that alternative to teamviewer you spoke of. I intend to use teamviewer for the purpose it was created which is to remotely access devices from my computer.
I actually did confirm that it was the launcher version of kodi that was kicking me out of the supersu prompt for anyone that was interested.. I turned off the xposed module to confirm.
harlekinade said:
You wanted support, you did get what you asked for, and then you almost ruined your device, because you din't see the file you were told to edit, and decided to open a different one. Then you blamed it on your root explorer app.
In the opening posting you stated that you wanted to change the default, but not why - and when I criticized this as being not needed in general, risky - and if you'd planned to roll it out to several installations, other people might use - as your postings intended, even unethical.
Unethical because of two concepts -
- You usually don't think about automation for mass deployment - if you don't plan an reselling devices, and we have a big problem with resellers in this community, not taking the responsibility "clause" seriously. Because of a principle you could describe as "sell and vanish". Which almost ruined the Kodi community, and arguably has impacted this one as well.
There is this distinct sense of "wasteland" after a general interest crowd was allowed to promote their interests (ad hoc, personal problem solving assistance) for a few months, by moderators that have no stake in this specific scene at all. I can only repeat that.
- It is ethically problematic to tell users like you how to change an important default and not what comes with it. The entire filesystem model and security in operating system depends on escalating user account rights. With root - you always grant access to everything.
Yes XDA (or what this community stood for in the past) is all for root (the rights to do whatever you want in an OS) - but ostensibly not for handing those permissions over to every user, or making sure that root level rights are granted by just pressing the big OK button on a TV remote, whenerver a popup comes up. The prompt is there for a reason. So is the default to no. If you want to change that because of a very specific personal problem, thats fine - you can (thats the "self empowerment" part), its the "mass rollout" of this configuration you hinted at - that rang some alarmbells - so to speak. Just from a "you might cause more problems than you solve" in the longterm - standpoint.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well just to clarify not at one point did I ever almost ruin my device that's just pure imagination on your part furthermore I did not blame any program for my own actions I stated my experience. Secondly I can do whatever I want with a device I purchase, are you attempting to police the entire community with our own personal "ethical" standards on what should and should not be done with their property? I can tell you're biased because people sell these and it makes you upset. I've identified as not part of that community and honestly I don't owe you any explanation on what I want to do with my devices period. The quantity is also irrelevant can one not own more than two tvs? But again the issue was solved mainly by the aid of the others contributing to this post thanks for your ethical input though. Lol.
harlekinade said:
Then a simple question.
Did you plan, at any point, to sell rooted AFTVs with Teamviewer on them and Superuser modified in a way that defaults to granting root rights to any process that asks for them?
Because thats a major issue. Not only because we saw in here over the past few months what happens if some peaple sell other people "free and easy" and then arent able to assist them if something breaks. The influx of technically illiterate users - having been sold on "free" and then not getting what they paid for in the end, looking for "support" everywhere they could think of, has scared the enthusiasts community in this sector for years to come.
And amazons moves surrounding it (explained away by product bloggers as "easier for most people" and "necessary") ended up establishing blacklists on consumer android devices for the first time in history (?), and almost killed Kodi as an afterthought (there was money to be made, if you faltered and bowed to amazons restrictions).
Resellers were and still are misusing this community by playing out entities that at no point had a self concept of becoming "product support helplines" and destroying the open source ethos by funneling a mainstream clientel through small community channels, that werent created to handle them.
If you look around you - in this forum, on reddit - even on aftvnews - this is what is left at this point, and some of us have no interest in rekindling the hype.
Part of demanding questions from an open source community is also, that you reflect, contrast, rethink and tinker with ideas in the open. XDA becoming a place for the masses to get personal support services - actually destroys communities like this. People demanding that you attend to their personal needs first, and always are respectful, charming and considerate can become problematic also.
When you had opened the Superuser binary in the texteditor, complaining that it only shows you "cryptic symbols" you were exactly one or two steps away from ruining Superuser on your device. Namely - changing ANY of those cryptic symbols and then saving the file you had already opened with the intent to edit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're still on about me reselling devices I don't know what to tell you I'm not gonna respond to it anymore. I was never close to bricking my device but I love how you decided to map out a scenario where I could have. You seem to be dead set on policing this forum (this post) and I find it odd you're talking about the history of this community after just 10 posts. I never demanded anything, this is a forum as you stated. I made an inquiry you can either help or you can ignore (I thanked those who helped). Or you can force your own moral agenda down everyone's throat that would be option c, the one you chose. Anyway there's really nothing left to be said my issue was resolved with the help of those interested in the actual question. I know people sell these things so does everyone else, this is not relevant to this post however.
harlekinade said:
I have a history in here beyond those 10 postings - but thats a story for another day..
My intent may have been to rattle some notions - but not to "police" by mentioning the concept of ethics once. I'm merely a peasant at this point in time, with a handful of soil in his hand, muttering "what have you done to this place"..
If I had any real power left to wield in here, arguing over concepts would be higher rated than providing "easy solutions". It isn't.
Also, sorry that I have borrowed your thread - and thank you for the conversation. I enjoyed it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I figured there was more to your ten post history. Perhaps maybe you were not so ethical at one point to have lost those powers??? [emoji50] But hey like I said you made me laugh so no complaints here. Continue to enjoy the forum as will I.