how to disable dm-verity? - Moto G5 Questions & Answers

I have a moto g5 in bootloop.
I saw in other posts that for the bootloop "bad key", I need to disable dm verity. How do i do it?

yolomonkey said:
I have a moto g5 in bootloop.
I saw in other posts that for the bootloop "bad key", I need to disable dm verity. How do i do it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please read the FAQ section of my twrp thread - All the answers are there
https://forum.xda-developers.com/g5/development/official-twrp-3-1-1-0-moto-g5-t3699737
If on stock rom it clearly states you need to flash supersu/magisk to disable dm verity
If on custom rom you do not need to do this

Related

How to Root my new Moto Z2 Play?

OK, I just bought a new Moto Z2 Play, and I of course, want to Root it. I have done Root on all my previous smart phones so I have some experience. I read thru all the threads here, but still have some remaining questions.
Where can I get the latest Moto drivers for Win 10 64-bit? I rather have just the drivers, if possible, than some other bloat Moto utilities too.
Where can I get the latest ADB ? I know, there are lots of sources if I search, but I am looking for a safe copy.
What do I use for TWRP? TWRP 3.2.1-0 ? [TWRP][64 bit][3.2.1_r12] ? Alternate TWRP v3.1.1.0 ? I am even asking, because I read a post and its reply, that mentioned that the 64-bit had to be used, but I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else.
As part of TWRP, should I do the "Swipe to allow modifications for /system" ? I have read posts suggesting either way, and remain unsure which is best.
I plan to install the latest Magisk Manager, v5.5.5. Or should I install simply Magisk v15.3?
Should I plan to Hide the Magisk Manager?
Do I need to, also, install SuperSU and BusyBox from the Google Play Store?
Is there anything additional I need to do, to successfully handle Safety Net ?
Thanks!
Did you read?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/z2-play/how-to/guide-resource-help-thread-t3627615
I used Juniors version of TWRP.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/z2-play/development/twrp-3-2-0-0-moto-z2-play-albus-t3715660
Yes to Magisk Manager.
Yes to Magisk.
No to SuperSU.
No to Busy Box.
First, let me start with a heartfelt thanks! :highfive:
pizza_pablo said:
Did you read?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/z2-play/how-to/guide-resource-help-thread-t3627615
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but it has instructions like this:
At first boot twrp will ask for "Swipe to allow modifications for /system" and if you choose to allow it system partition will get modified. So if you choose to reboot back to OS without performing anything in twrp, the OS won't boot (as verity check is enabled in stock OS/kernel) . To avoid this you have to flash either SuperSU or flash any of the verity disabler zips there in xda.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is why it left feeling unsure, do I swipe or not? Is having the system partition modified "good" and a normal part of this type of root'ing?
Plus, the mention of flashing SuperSU, lead to my question about going that (which you replied 'no').
Maybe I am simply having a case of information overload. With possibly, a strong addition of having too many different opinions which might not all be valid.
WaltA said:
First, let me start with a heartfelt thanks! :highfive:
Yes, but it has instructions like this:
Which is why it left feeling unsure, do I swipe or not? Is having the system partition modified "good" and a normal part of this type of root'ing?
Plus, the mention of flashing SuperSU, lead to my question about going that (which you replied 'no').
Maybe I am simply having a case of information overload. With possibly, a strong addition of having too many different opinions which might not all be valid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm glad you have read! :good:
I understand you're dilemma and have also experience info overload, when researching rooting / flashing procedures. It never hurts to read it, yet again and watch any YouTube videos available on the subject.
I always swipe to allow modifications when installing TWRP. Otherwise, TWRP will be in READ ONLY mode.
I am not certain about Busy Box, but haven't needed it. Magisk has A Super User function, so SuperSU is not needed.
I am no expert, just trying to help, so please don't take anything I've said as the gospel. Read everything and then read it again.
pizza_pablo said:
Did you read?
https://forum.xda-developers.com/z2-play/how-to/guide-resource-help-thread-t3627615
I used Juniors version of TWRP.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/z2-play/development/twrp-3-2-0-0-moto-z2-play-albus-t3715660
Yes to Magisk Manager.
Yes to Magisk.
No to SuperSU.
No to Busy Box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any hint up to which 8.0 security patch update will @Junior Passos method will work
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using XDA Labs
The Analog Kid said:
Any hint up to which 8.0 security patch update will @Junior Passos method will work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. I'm still on Nougat. I have no interest in Oreo, for this device.
The Analog Kid said:
Any hint up to which 8.0 security patch update will @Junior Passos method will work
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using XDA Labs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm on August security patch.

DM-VERITY

So I just bought a OnePlus 5t, and unlocked the bootloader and used magisk to get root.
Now I am getting this really annoying message, and after doing some research I found out that it is called DM-Verity.
There was a fix some time ago - https://forum.xda-developers.com/oneplus-3t/how-to/fix-dm-verity-warning-flashing-required-t3546531
Apparently it has been patched.
I saw some custom roms for the OP3 that have DM-Verity disabled but can't find any for the OP5
Anyone know what to do (other than ignore it), I would really like to fix it.
There was a thread about how to remove a error about DM-Verity not being enforced so I assume there is already a patch.
I searched for like one hour now but can't find any fix
It would be nice if anyone could tell me a method to remove it
Thanks
Which really annoying message do you get ?
When I ran rooted OOS I never got to see DM-Verity related messages.
Dior DNA said:
Which really annoying message do you get ?
When I ran rooted OOS I never got to see DM-Verity related messages.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Your device software cant be checked for corruption, please lock the bootloader.
Visit this link on another device:
g.co/ABH"
OK : this is seen on any modified firmware IIRC. I also see this when booting.
I believe, like it says, it's just because boot loader is unlocked.
Personally I don't care too much about it and ignore it. I prefer to keep bootloader unlocked.
Would it help to lock the bootloader again? You could try.
But it might have other side effects each time you want to modify device.
Not sure if it relates specifically to DM-Verity, I really doubt it. I let others comment.
It's the normal message that all devices have once their bootloader is unlocked. On some devices it can be removed, but unfortunately it's not possible on the 5T right now. Not sure if it will ever be possible.
just do not relock ur bootloader to try to get rid of the message, read up first before u relock it if you are going to

Remove "Unlocked Bootloader warning" message at the start

Hi, i am new to rooting and modding and i want to get away the warning message on my oneplus5t that remember me everrytime i turn it on i have a unlocked bootloader.
Is there a way to do it? I want to change also the boot animation becouse is cool but with this message is horrible, i want to remove it before changing the boot animation.
Can someone help me to find a solution? I searched and i found is not removable yet i just wanted to make sure is 100% impossible to do it
I know, it's horrible but impossible to remove ...
asnachan said:
Hi, i am new to rooting and modding and i want to get away the warning message on my oneplus5t that remember me everrytime i turn it on i have a unlocked bootloader.
Is there a way to do it? I want to change also the boot animation becouse is cool but with this message is horrible, i want to remove it before changing the boot animation.
Can someone help me to find a solution? I searched and i found is not removable yet i just wanted to make sure is 100% impossible to do it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should use the Questions & Answers section. This is for original development only
There is no way as the bootloader is locked down. There was some guy claiming to be able to do this but it was just a hoax or a developer not knowing enough on this topic.
For the bootanimation there should be a bootanimation.zip in /system/media. That needs to be replaced.
Thanks and sorry if i putted this topic here
I will have always this **** when i boot it up so, damn oneplus
Silvio Scarani said:
I know, it's horrible but impossible to remove ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
un altro italiano
Macusercom said:
You should use the Questions & Answers section. This is for original development only
There is no way as the bootloader is locked down. There was some guy claiming to be able to do this but it was just a hoax or a developer not knowing enough on this topic.
For the bootanimation there should be a bootanimation.zip in /system/media. That needs to be replaced.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about, at the top of the site it says;
xda-developers > OnePlus 5T > OnePlus 5T Questions & Answers.
I just got the OnePlus 5T, my understanding is it's the same on this phone as some others, the boot loader message is low level, more like in the boot image, and the bootanimation.zip is just the splash images.
DoR3M3 said:
What are you talking about, at the top of the site it says;
xda-developers > OnePlus 5T > OnePlus 5T Questions & Answers.
I just got the OnePlus 5T, my understanding is it's the same on this phone as some others, the boot loader message is low level, more like in the boot image, and the bootanimation.zip is just the splash images.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was moved to this section by a mod.
Macusercom said:
It was moved to this section by a mod.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahh my bad...
You have to sign boot.img and recovery.img to remove the warning.
I have managed to eliminate it by signing those two images.
In my oneplus 5 and 5t I have twrp installed and with rom lineageos without warning.
Who wants to try to send me your boot and recovery and return it for you to try.
Remember that you have to close the bootloader whereby the phone will be wipe
Process:
fastboot oem unlock
unlock bootloader
You have to go back to fastboot mode
fastboot flash boot boot.img
fastboot recovery recovery_name.img
fastboot oem lock
Wuala
It can be done in any rom from firmware 5.1.5
superatmel said:
You have to sign boot.img and recovery.img to remove the warning.
I have managed to eliminate it by signing those two images.
In my oneplus 5 and 5t I have twrp installed and with rom lineageos without warning.
Who wants to try to send me your boot and recovery and return it for you to try.
Remember that you have to close the bootloader whereby the phone will be wipe
Process:
fastboot oem unlock
unlock bootloader
You have to go back to fastboot mode
fastboot flash boot boot.img
fastboot recovery recovery_name.img
fastboot oem lock
Wuala
It can be done in any rom from firmware 5.1.5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although the above procedure may work, I wouldn't suggest locking the bootloader after making changes like this.
xocomaox said:
Although the above procedure may work, I wouldn't suggest locking the bootloader after making changes like this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because no, you avoid the annoying message, you enjoy your own kernel and the recovery you want, do you mean that you are going to send some malicious files?
I've been with Android for many years to get my reputation for it. : =
---------- Post added at 09:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:12 PM ----------
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [green]
[ro.boot.veritymode]: [enforcing]
[ro.bootimage.build.date]: [Fri Sep 28 02:08:12 CEST 2018]
[ro.bootimage.build.date.utc]: [1538093292]
[ro.bootimage.build.fingerprint]: [OnePlus/OnePlus5T/OnePlus5T:8.1.0/OPM1.171019.011/1808081927:user/release-keys]
[ro.bootloader]: [unknown]
[ro.bootmode]: [normal]
[ro.build.date.utc]: [1538093292]
[ro.build.description]: [OnePlus5T-user 8.1.0 OPM1.171019.011 1808081927 release-keys]
[ro.build.display.id]: [superteam_dumpling-userdebug 8.1.0 OPM6.171019.030.K1 b8192e9518 test-keys]
[ro.build.expect.firmware]: [5.1.5]
[ro.build.expect.modem]: [2018-08-08 20:13:31]
[ro.build.fingerprint]: [OnePlus/OnePlus5T/OnePlus5T:8.1.0/OPM1.171019.011/1808081927:user/release-keys]
[ro.build.flavor]: [superteam_dumpling-userdebug]
[ro.build.host]: [Asus-Rog]
[ro.build.id]: [OPM6.171019.030.K1]
[ro.build.product]: [OnePlus5T]
[ro.build.selinux]: [0]
[ro.build.selinux.enforce]: [0]
[ro.build.tags]: [test-keys]
[ro.build.type]: [userdebug]
[ro.build.user]: [superatmel]
[ro.build.version.all_codenames]: [REL]
[ro.build.version.base_os]: []
[ro.build.version.codename]: [REL]
[ro.build.version.incremental]: [b8192e9518]
[ro.build.version.preview_sdk]: [0]
[ro.build.version.release]: [8.1.0]
[ro.build.version.sdk]: [27]
[ro.build.version.security_patch]: [2018-09-05]
---------- Post added at 09:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 PM ----------
In this post it is asked how to eliminate the warning in the boot, I have offered to help to remove it nothing more, since in my terminals it eliminates it.
No words are needed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzfd-dKgpes&feature=youtu.be
superatmel said:
No words are needed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzfd-dKgpes&feature=youtu.be
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're locking the bootloader...
3:58 in Video; fastboot oem lock.
Not exactly the solution people are looking for.
DoR3M3 said:
You're locking the bootloader...
3:58 in Video; fastboot oem lock.
Not exactly the solution people are looking for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course, that's the idea of ​​locking the bootloader again to avoid the message.
Try locking it with a boot.img or recovery that is not signed to see what happens
my getprop
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [green]
bootloader locked+boot signed NO WARNING MESSAGE
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [orange]
bootloader unlocked+boot unsigned WARNING MESSAGE
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [red]
bootloader locked+boot unsigned SYSTEM CORRUPT, NOT BOOT
So you need to have the bootloader unlocked if you have already put any rom, any boot or any recovery on your phone?
The bootloader can not be edited but to avoid the warning message if boots and recoverys can be signed
superatmel said:
No words are needed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzfd-dKgpes&feature=youtu.be
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
superatmel said:
Of course, that's the idea of ​​locking the bootloader again to avoid the message.
Try locking it with a boot.img or recovery that is not signed to see what happens
my getprop
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [green]
bootloader locked+boot signed NO WARNING MESSAGE
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [orange]
bootloader unlocked+boot unsigned WARNING MESSAGE
[ro.boot.verifiedbootstate]: [red]
bootloader locked+boot unsigned SYSTEM CORRUPT, NOT BOOT
So you need to have the bootloader unlocked if you have already put any rom, any boot or any recovery on your phone?
The bootloader can not be edited but to avoid the warning message if boots and recoverys can be signed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand these things, but are you asking, or telling?
People want to keep the bootloader unlocked to hack on their phones, and locking it defeats this purpose.
The post is about trying to keep the bootloader unlocked and remove the message, but as I mentioned before, it's my understanding it's deep within the bootloader process, not an easy thing to get at, hack away. Also it seems, because of some Google Policy it's pushing on the phone manufacturers to have, as a requirement to their agreement with Google, at least it's what I've come to understand.
DoR3M3 said:
I understand these things, but are you asking, or telling?
People want to keep the bootloader unlocked to hack on their phones, and locking it defeats this purpose.
The post is about trying to keep the bootloader unlocked and remove the message, but as I mentioned before, it's my understanding it's deep within the bootloader process, not an easy thing to get at, hack away. Also it seems, because of some Google Policy it's pushing on the phone manufacturers to have, as a requirement to their agreement with Google, at least it's what I've come to understand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am saying.
But people do not need to have the bootloader unlocked to hack their phones. In fact I do not want to be hacked, but I do want to modify my boots to add things to the system. and also get not having the message at the start of the system
An example that for example I want
I would like to have the kernel blur but if I put it I have the warning message.
Solution:
I sign the blur kernel, I install it I close the bootloader and I have the kernel working and I do not have a warning message
Does not it help you to autopirate your phone?
---------- Post added at 01:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:28 AM ----------
I could now have oxygen os 5.1.5 or higher with modified kernel, recovery twrp, add xposed modules and closed bootloader.
It's not useful?
superatmel said:
I am saying.
But people do not need to have the bootloader unlocked to hack their phones. In fact I do not want to be hacked, but I do want to modify my boots to add things to the system. and also get not having the message at the start of the system
An example that for example I want
I would like to have the kernel blur but if I put it I have the warning message.
Solution:
I sign the blur kernel, I install it I close the bootloader and I have the kernel working and I do not have a warning message
Does not it help you to autopirate your phone?
---------- Post added at 01:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:28 AM ----------
I could now have oxygen os 5.1.5 or higher with modified kernel, recovery twrp, add xposed modules and closed bootloader.
It's not useful?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it's always been my understanding, that if someone is always tinkering, playing with their phone, constantly flashing roms, kernels, etc., then keeping the bootloader unlocked is simpler.
I personally just got the OnePlus 5T, so I don't know if it's doing something different here over other devices, where you can simply lock it on a custom rom and have it boot ok.
It's suppose to be from my understanding that some devices you can lock it, and everything works ok, and other devices, where if you lock it, it wipes all data and encrypts it over, then the rom boots up all wiped, and I'm talking Internal Storage all gone, everything wiped, not a situation good. Locking bootloader on some devices means, loose all data.
So the safest route amongst all devices is to simply leave it unclocked, and getting hacked by someone with an unlocked bootloader, isn't very likely to happen.
DoR3M3 said:
Well, it's always been my understanding, that if someone is always tinkering, playing with their phone, constantly flashing roms, kernels, etc., then keeping the bootloader unlocked is simpler.
I personally just got the OnePlus 5T, so I don't know if it's doing something different here over other devices, where you can simply lock it on a custom rom and have it boot ok.
It's suppose to be from my understanding that some devices you can lock it, and everything works ok, and other devices, where if you lock it, it wipes all data and encrypts it over, then the rom boots up all wiped, and I'm talking Internal Storage all gone, everything wiped, not a situation good. Locking bootloader on some devices means, loose all data.
So the safest route amongst all devices is to simply leave it unclocked, and getting hacked by someone with an unlocked bootloader, isn't very likely to happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry but I think you do not understand.
Your unlocked bootloader phone is vulnerable since it is ready for any option.
Mine to have it closed my data is safe because if someone opens it is completely deleted.
My phone with a oneplus recovery stock signed by me and a custom boot plus system modifications and closed bootloader is completely safe.
superatmel said:
Sorry but I think you do not understand.
Your unlocked bootloader phone is vulnerable since it is ready for any option.
Mine to have it closed my data is safe because if someone opens it is completely deleted.
My phone with a oneplus recovery stock signed by me and a custom boot plus system modifications and closed bootloader is completely safe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for any misunderstanding, I understand about the bootloader.
My mistake, I wasn't paying attention that you signed your own image. Did you sign both the recovery and boot?
Now you signed the images, but you locked the bootloader and it's my understanding that if signed, you could get rid of the message and still leave it unlocked. So with your signed images, can you leave it unlocked and the message is gone?
DoR3M3 said:
Sorry for any misunderstanding, I understand about the bootloader.
My mistake, I wasn't paying attention that you signed your own image. Did you sign both the recovery and boot?
Now you signed the images, but you locked the bootloader and it's my understanding that if signed, you could get rid of the message and still leave it unlocked. So with your signed images, can you leave it unlocked and the message is gone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, now you understand it. I sign boot.img and recovery.img and with that I can close the bootloader and the message disappears. That's what you see in the video.
Install twrp signed by me, lineageos latest version, extract by boot.img and sign it, so at the end of the whole I integrate the boot.img and then I close the bootloader
I have put lineageos to put something, but I create my own systems

[Recovery][UNOFFICIAL] TWRP Dirty Port For G7 Play

TWRP DIRTY PORT FOR G7 PLAY​
My friend was looking to get a G7 Play, so I wanted to whip something up for him really quick. I managed to make a dirty port of TWRP for the G7 Play, taken from the G7 TWRP image since they're the same SDM632 chipset. Until you guys get a real, proper build of TWRP done with the proper source code, consider this a stop gap to at least be able to flash things! It's not perfect obviously but hopefully it's good enough for now!
AS ALWAYS, I DO NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY IF FLASHING THIS BRICKS YOUR PHONE. WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO DO TO YOUR PHONE IS ON YOU!!!​
WHAT WORKS:
It boots! As you can see here, the G7 Play is in fact running this recovery image just fine
Not sure, don't have the phone to test for myself
WHAT DOESNT WORK:
Because this is a dirty port, the recovery will think this is a G7, when as we all know this is in fact a G7 Play. There is nothing I can really do about this, this is the nature of dirty ports
Not sure, don't have the phone to test for myself
DOWNLOAD:
DOWNLOAD LINK HERE
I cannot provide any source code since this was a dirty port, so no actual source was used. The only things I used to make this were a G7 TWRP image, a G7 Play boot image, and carliv's image kitchen
HOW TO USE:
Reboot to fastboot
Flash the dtbo with fastboot flash dtbo dtbo.img
After that boot from the recovery with fastboot boot recoveryname.img
THANKS TO:
@Alberto97 for the G7 TWRP image I dirty ported from
The G7 Play Telegram group for testing out the image I made, since I don't have a G7 Play to test this on myself. Specifically @noslen7 for testing the image and figuring out how to get it to run (need to flash the dtbo first) and for sending me the image I used above to show it's working and bootable
Carliv for that Carliv Image Kitchen he made, that tool rocks!
I can't test it anymore but if it's uses the same things as the one I built which was inspired by Alberto, do not try to install the TWRP unless you have already flashed the second bank.
fastboot boot recovery.img indeed won't harm so you can try that.
Any idea what works more then the one I built?
Which dtbo.img are we supposed to flash - the one from the stock ROM, or something else?
Great work!
First of all thanks for your hard work. I was really happy to see your post. I have followed the instructions exactly and I got "Failed (too many links)" when it attempted to boot my phone into recovery.
I am using XT1952-4_CHANNEL_RETCA_9.0_PPY29.105-5
Any ideas why it might have failed?
Thanks
jwreidmoto said:
First of all thanks for your hard work. I was really happy to see your post. I have followed the instructions exactly and I got "Failed (too many links)" when it attempted to boot my phone into recovery.
I am using XT1952-4_CHANNEL_RETCA_9.0_PPY29.105-5
Any ideas why it might have failed?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the same one I'm trying to use, tried the dtbo from the same firmware got the same results. Possible EU/Canada firmware as the screenshot of the phone that was shared is in celcius
This is how i boot this recovery successfully
daftshanks said:
That's the same one I'm trying to use, tried the dtbo from the same firmware got the same results. Possible EU/Canada firmware as the screenshot of the phone that was shared is in celcius
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
step 1 fastboot flash dtbo dtbo.img
s000.tinyupload. com/download.php?file_id=26286860633744490329&t=2628686063374449032989765
step 2
fastboot boot "recovery above"
s000.tinyupload. com/download.php?file_id=24332259722784445351&t=2433225972278444535138860
noslen7 said:
step 1 fastboot flash dtbo dtbo.img
s000.tinyupload. com/download.php?file_id=26286860633744490329&t=2628686063374449032989765
step 2
fastboot boot "recovery above"
s000.tinyupload. com/download.php?file_id=24332259722784445351&t=2433225972278444535138860
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I appreciate your reply on this. However the dtbo filebyou provided is about 3/5ths of the dtbo from my stock firmware, normally they would be at least close to the same file size. Can I ask you what firmware you are on? And were you able to permanently install TWRP? Possible root?
Downloaded dbto.img got same result
I downloaded the above dbto.img and flashed it instead of my own stock dbto.img and got the same result when I tried to boot from recovery - Failed ( too many links). I think the recovery IMG is not working for our Canadian ROM edition.
anybody with XT1952-1 RETEU reading this here, you can help!
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=79655902&postcount=5
Which dtbo.img to use? In the download area you only have the image of recovery
HOW TO USE:
Reboot to fastboot
Flash the dtbo with fastboot flash dtbo dtbo.img
After that boot from the recovery with fastboot boot recoveryname.img
dbto.img
That was in response to another query. I used my own dbto.img from my stock ROM. That part flashes fine it's the recovery.img that comes back with " failed( too many links) I have a Canadian phone.
Flashing dtbo.img will erase the smartphone data? Will I lose app data?
thank you
it worked for me fine it did give me some problems when i tried booting direct so i flashed to boot then went to recovery mode thru bootloader menu and it worked once in twrp i installed the original boot.img and im good.
Yo I'm coming from the g6 play forum with a quick question. Does this by chance work with the same current root method for the g6 play which is booting in twrp and formatting data to decrypt it then flashing twrp and flashing through twrp the encryption disabler zip then flashing magisk. If someone is able to confirm that I can possibly try to make a decent guide for you guys. We don't have a offical twrp that decrypts on its own and the twrp we have ain't a dirty port so I know there may be some differences when it comes to twrp related issues but it's better than nothing lol
ninjakira said:
Yo I'm coming from the g6 play forum with a quick question. Does this by chance work with the same current root method for the g6 play which is booting in twrp and formatting data to decrypt it then flashing twrp and flashing through twrp the encryption disabler zip then flashing magisk. If someone is able to confirm that I can possibly try to make a decent guide for you guys. We don't have a offical twrp that decrypts on its own and the twrp we have ain't a dirty port so I know there may be some differences when it comes to twrp related issues but it's better than nothing lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is one significant difference (as it regards rooting) between the Moto G6 Play and the Moto G7 Play. The G7 Play uses the A/B partition index while the G6 Play uses a standard GPT index. The current dilemma with root for the G7 Play involves the A/B partition config. Developer topjohnwu has been notified of this issue on the Magisk support thread, and has stated that he is working on a resolution at present.
Viva La Android said:
There is one significant difference (as it regards rooting) between the Moto G6 Play and the Moto G7 Play. The G7 Play uses the A/B partition index while the G6 Play uses a standard GPT index. The current dilemma with root for the G7 Play involves the A/B partition config. Developer topjohnwu has been notified of this issue on the Magisk support thread, and has stated that he is working on a resolution at present.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There has to be more to it than this. There are plenty of devices using A/B partitioning that can be rooted with Magisk. As far as I know, Magisk has supported A/B since version 17.1. Reading through the threads it sounds like more a TWRP problem than a Magisk one.
Has anyone tried patching boot_a and boot_b with Magisk and flashing both at once?
Spaceminer said:
There has to be more to it than this. There are plenty of devices using A/B partitioning that can be rooted with Magisk. As far as I know, Magisk has supported A/B since version 17.1. Reading through the threads it sounds like more a TWRP problem than a Magisk one.
Has anyone tried patching boot_a and boot_b with Magisk and flashing both at once?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You try and let's us know
Fdraco10 said:
You try and let's us know
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have the device otherwise I would. That's why I'm asking if anyone has tried it yet.
Spaceminer said:
I don't have the device otherwise I would. That's why I'm asking if anyone has tried it yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. I patched both boot_a and boot_b with Magisk v19.3. My device booted into the OS with no problems at all, yet Magisk Manager indicates that root is not installed. Topjohnwu has been notified of the root issue with the Moto G7 Play, and has stated on the Magisk support thread that he is looking into a resolution. It's not a TWRP issue at this point because there is no unofficial or official TWRP for the G7 Play as of yet. Like you, I fully agree this is a bizarre issue. Root strategies which are working on the Moto G7, G7 Power & G7 Plus are not working on the G7 Play. Although Magisk has certainly supported A/B devices for some time now, no universal root method is completely infallible. There are many devices -- both A/B and standard GPT -- that encounter problems with Magisk from time to time. Luckily for the Android community, topjohnwu works hard on resolving any known issues like the one at hand.
Viva La Android said:
Yes. I patched both boot_a and boot_b with Magisk v19.3. My device booted into the OS with no problems at all, yet Magisk Manager indicates that root is not installed. Topjohnwu has been notified of the root issue with the Moto G7 Play, and has stated on the Magisk support thread that he is looking into a resolution. It's not a TWRP issue at this point because there is no unofficial or official TWRP for the G7 Play as of yet. Like you, I fully agree this is a bizarre issue. Root strategies which are working on the Moto G7, G7 Power & G7 Plus are not working on the G7 Play. Although Magisk has certainly supported A/B devices for some time now, no universal root method is completely infallible. There are many devices -- both A/B and standard GPT -- that encounter problems with Magisk from time to time. Luckily for the Android community, topjohnwu works hard on resolving any known issues like the one at hand.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read the responses in his thread about that, and it seems like you guys aren't getting root without a working TWRP. The problem that was laid out, is that fastboot can't patch existing files, it can only overwrite them. Without a custom bootloader, Magisk would never be able to patch existing files through fastboot.
Personally, I think that's a very sh*tty position to be in, and I want to help you guys out. If you or anyone else wants to upload your most recent boot.img, it'll save me some time. I'm not too familiar with the A/B partition setup, but I am very familiar with TWRP. I think that I can get it working for you folks. I will make this happen or break my brain trying. No phone with an unlockable bootloader should go unrooted! Thank you for answering my question by the way. That's one less thing to troubleshoot.
I just want to confirm a few things before I get to work.
Is your base model number xt1952?
Is your code name Channel?
Where is the current TWRP hacked from? (Moto G7, G7 Power, G7 Plus?) - Moto G7. I found it in the OP.
And are you guys arm32 or arm64?

MI 9 SE dedicated ROM. How can i find it?

Looking for flash stock ROM again to solve safetynet issues. But i can't find dedicated stock ROM to MI 9 SE How can i find it? Is there any source?
Google broken?
https://mirom.ezbox.idv.tw/en/phone/grus/
coolek33 said:
Google broken?
https://mirom.ezbox.idv.tw/en/phone/grus/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude i have the same ROM but i'm getting safetynet cts profile mismatch. People said search in forums but haven't found anything useful. What do i need to do to solve this safetynet problem?
i got 12.0.2.0(QFBMIXM) in my phone. Should i reflash and lock the bootloader? Or should i just lock bootloader? i got unlocked bootloader and my build is 12.0.2.0(QFBMIXM) still getting safetynet profile mismatch.
seniordolphin said:
dude i have the same ROM but i'm getting safetynet cts profile mismatch. People said search in forums but haven't found anything useful. What do i need to do to solve this safetynet problem?
i got 12.0.2.0(QFBMIXM) in my phone. Should i reflash and lock the bootloader? Or should i just lock bootloader? i got unlocked bootloader and my build is 12.0.2.0(QFBMIXM) still getting safetynet profile mismatch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If CTS profile uses Hardware attest, it fails when Bootloader is unlocked
You must force Basic attest to hide the unlocked bootloader, you can do so by using Magisk Hide Props Config module. Find more in OP posts in the corresponding XDA thread, and/or in the MHCP GitHub guide
Btw, there is also a lot about in the Magisk General thread, also on XDA (and in Magisk Wiki on Github)

Categories

Resources