New to android and captivate, so excuse me if I'm missing something..but it seems that with one's google account being tied into all the functions, including buying in the market with the credit card on file with google..there has to be a setting to not allow the device to be used with a different sim..or some kind of security that will lock down your google account if the phone is stolen? Is something built in..or is there an app out there that people generally use for peace of mind?
EDIT: All of the recent Nokia phones I've had has a setting to not allow a different sim to be used
fldude99 said:
New to android and captivate, so excuse me if I'm missing something..but it seems that with one's google account being tied into all the functions, including buying in the market with the credit card on file with google..there has to be a setting to not allow the device to be used with a different sim..or some kind of security that will lock down your google account if the phone is stolen? Is something built in..or is there an app out there that people generally use for peace of mind?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very interesting. I too would like to know the answer. This is one of the many reasons why I NEVER use:
A) Mobile Banking
B) Purchases of any kind that includes Plastic
C) Setup any accounts that wire account info
Call me paranoid, but hey, it will save you a ton of headache on that unfortunate "if" day. Please keep us posted.
So does anybody have an answer...or at least some kind of marketplace app that is used for security?
So is nobody interested in security? Or is there just no simple solution..one thing that I miss on my Nokia N97 is the remote lock..send a text of a secret word, and poof the device is locked...done
I think people are interested to some degree but no widely known easy method. And just an fyi, rooting your phone and gaining superuser privileges - as many of us have done - creates a big security hole for trogin malware attack, so if you have rooted your phone take care and know what your installing and try to pay attention to anything using super user privileges.
So when I first got the HTC One (on ATT) I was super pissed to find out Google Wallet or Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
I've wanted to keep my phone stock (or stock-ish) so the most invasive thing I've tried was TrickDroid. Still no dice.
Finally, I figured that the GE edition ROMs would stop this tomfoolery, nope... still blocked.
So my questions are:
1) Are there any (hacky) ways to get this apps working?
2) Via what methods are they being block?
3) If it is truly ATT being the jerks here, does anyone want to help me create a ****-storm about this?
I know carrier blocking apps is old but coming from Tmo, this is really, really pissing me off.
No matter what you do, Google wallet wont work properly, as the One doesnt have the required secure element to run it.
As for hangouts, they are working fine for me, not sure what might be happening there...
cowmixtoo said:
So when I first got the HTC One (on ATT) I was super pissed to find out Google Wallet or Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
I've wanted to keep my phone stock (or stock-ish) so the most invasive thing I've tried was TrickDroid. Still no dice.
Finally, I figured that the GE edition ROMs would stop this tomfoolery, nope... still blocked.
So my questions are:
1) Are there any (hacky) ways to get this apps working?
2) Via what methods are they being block?
3) If it is truly ATT being the jerks here, does anyone want to help me create a ****-storm about this?
I know carrier blocking apps is old but coming from Tmo, this is really, really pissing me off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TheBishopOfSoho said:
No matter what you do, Google wallet wont work properly, as the One doesnt have the required secure element to run it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Oh, and as for Hangout, my HTC One came with Google Talk, and after a normal Play Store update, it changed to "Hangout" (Rogers HTC One, not rooted).
cowmixtoo said:
Google Hangouts (the A/V) portion was somehow disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know att announced that the av portion (video chat) will be enabled over the next few months. Starting with unlimited users and going down the line. I think it works for me now as I am on the unlimited data plan.
Also search there is a hack if rooted to allow this now. You have to modify a file.
As far as wallet. Att Verizon and t mobile have rejected wallet for there own proprietary system called Isis. Currently only available in salt lake city and Austin. www.paywithisis.com
It sucks because they have not expanded the system beyond those 2 cities in a long time.
Sent from my HTC One using xda premium
WhatsAUsername said:
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wohah there. Unless you have a source that isn't blatent misinformation. Google wallet is not offically supported on the HTC One unless you are on the sprint network in the states. Source: http://support.google.com/wallet/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1347934
As the model in question is the AT&T version he is telling the truth. Getting it to work otherwise is a hack.
WhatsAUsername said:
Blatant misinformation. I know for a fact that you can get Google Wallet to run on the HTC One. Someone mentioned it earlier and took pictures to prove it. He even posted how he was able to do it, but I wasn't interested in rooting my phone, so I didn't look into it any further.
Oh, and as for Hangout, my HTC One came with Google Talk, and after a normal Play Store update, it changed to "Hangout" (Rogers HTC One, not rooted).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Blatant" misinformation? Hardly. Try googling it, only Sprint editions of the One support wallet, there are many and varied references to other One versions lacking the hardware to support Wallet in its current incarnation.
How's this?
One thing worth mentioning: The HTC One Google Play Edition doesn't come with Google Wallet -- and the app also isn't available for installation on the device via the Play Store. (Wallet is installed on the GS4 Play Edition.) A Google spokesperson tells me this is due to the One's hardware lacking an embedded secure element that Wallet requires in order to run.http://blogs.computerworld.com/android/22397/galaxy-s4-htc-one-google-play-editions
So there's a hardware deficiency on the GSM version?
Why even both putting NFC on the phone?
BarryH_GEG said:
How's this?
One thing worth mentioning: The HTC One Google Play Edition doesn't come with Google Wallet -- and the app also isn't available for installation on the device via the Play Store. (Wallet is installed on the GS4 Play Edition.) A Google spokesperson tells me this is due to the One's hardware lacking an embedded secure element that Wallet requires in order to run.http://blogs.computerworld.com/android/22397/galaxy-s4-htc-one-google-play-editions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cowmixtoo said:
So there's a hardware deficiency on the GSM version?
Why even both putting NFC on the phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NFC has other uses as well. You can share things easily between phones. Also some places have NFC payments without google wallet. In Canada Rogers and CIBC have teamed up and made NFC payments for the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Google Wallet is the biggest NFC payment network for a phone. For people coming from Wallet devices (like I had the GN and the N4 before) this is an insane let down.
I would have never bought the HTC Onc and moved to ATT if this lack of functionality was made clear.
bobruels44 said:
NFC has other uses as well. You can share things easily between phones. Also some places have NFC payments without google wallet. In Canada Rogers and CIBC have teamed up and made NFC payments for the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cowmixtoo said:
Google Wallet is the biggest NFC payment network for a phone. For people coming from Wallet devices (like I had the GN and the N4 before) this is an insane let down.
I would have never bought the HTC Onc and moved to ATT if this lack of functionality was made clear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All it took me to look up was a quick google search. And Google Wallet is only the biggest NFC payment system in the UnS. Everywhere else does not have that option. NFC does have other uses, limited yes, but other ones.
Carrier Issue
IMO, this is a carrier's issue or fault, not HTC's.
bobruels44 said:
the s3 (another phone without google wallet).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dgtiii said:
IMO, this is a carrier's issue or fault, not HTC's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're both missing the point. The issue being discussed is a h/w issue where, for some reason, HTC's omitted the secure element in the NFC chip they use that Google Wallet (and any other payment systems) is dependent on. Carrier's block access to Google Wallet but if the phone's properly equipped h/w wise you can work around it. You can't work around the absence of a secure element. If you want to know what the secure element does do a Google search on "Google Wallet secure element."
BarryH_GEG said:
You're both missing the point. The issue being discussed is a h/w issue where, for some reason, HTC's omitted the secure element in the NFC chip they use that Google Wallet (and any other payment systems) is dependent on. Carrier's block access to Google Wallet but if the phone's properly equipped h/w wise you can work around it. You can't work around the absence of a secure element. If you want to know what the secure element does do a Google search on "Google Wallet secure element."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the s3 I was not talking about google wallet there. I was talking about the Canadian variant of the s3. Google wallet is not available up here on any device on any carrier. That's why I was mentioning that. I may be incorect about the hardware component on that variant however my point of there are alternatives in other outcries remains.
So, is the problem with NFC a physical hardware piece, or can it be fixed with software? "Lack of a secure element" is why Verizon blocked Google Wallet on the Verizon Galaxy Nexus but that still ended up working.
dsass600 said:
So, is the problem with NFC a physical hardware piece, or can it be fixed with software? "Lack of a secure element" is why Verizon blocked Google Wallet on the Verizon Galaxy Nexus but that still ended up working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You guys are confused. Here's what a secure element is and does...
If you're not familiar with how Wallet functions, it's a bit odd as an application goes. The Wallet app isn't the only "piece" necessary to get the Wallet service functioning, there are two other parts of the equation. One you're already familiar with: NFC (near-field communication). It's a simple, open wireless standard that transmits data over very short distances. In Wallet's case, it transmits payment data. But there's a third wheel in play that many people aren't aware of, and it's called a "secure element." Without getting too technical (eg, into things I don't at all understand), the secure element's job is to store encrypted credentials (your payment info) and tell the Wallet app "hey, these are the credentials you need to transmit to the payment terminal."
Only one card's credentials are stored on the element at a given time (obvious security reasons), which is why you need an internet connection if you want to switch your active card in Wallet. When you sign in to Wallet or change cards, the Wallet app calls up to the Google server, pulls down your credentials for a particular card, and then writes them to the secure element.
But one does not simply write to the secure element (... or walk into Mordor), it requires special permissions. Google Wallet is doing something few apps do - asking for direct, exclusive access to a secure piece of hardware in the phone. Not only that, once Google takes over the secure element, it wants total control. Because of the security concerns (and related technical difficulties) involved in sharing a secure element, Wallet and only Wallet is able to utilize the internal secure element on a Wallet-enabled device. That means Google is directly managing every layer of the process. http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...why-the-carrier-is-still-allowed-to-block-it/
People got Wallet working on the VZW GN by side-loading it; much like everyone else who's running Wallet even though it's not carrier or region supported for their particular device . VZW's beef is that they don't trust third parties to use security-enabled h/w that VZW can't control on VZW-sold devices. When VZW realized people were by-passing the process they, with Google's help, did the following...
So Google Wallet has never officially been available for Verizon, on any smartphone. However for months now users have been able to side-load Google’s awesome Wallet app for mobile NFC payments using the web store, or installing a custom ROM. Today however it appears that Google’s pulled the backend plug. http://androidcommunity.com/google-wallet-gets-pulled-from-verizon-galaxy-nexus-20120914/
If the VZW GN didn't have a secure element Wallet would have never worked. The only two phones I've heard about without a secure element are the DNA/Butterfly and the One (except apparently for Sprint).
BarryH_GEG said:
You guys are confused. Here's what a secure element is and does...
If you're not familiar with how Wallet functions, it's a bit odd as an application goes. The Wallet app isn't the only "piece" necessary to get the Wallet service functioning, there are two other parts of the equation. One you're already familiar with: NFC (near-field communication). It's a simple, open wireless standard that transmits data over very short distances. In Wallet's case, it transmits payment data. But there's a third wheel in play that many people aren't aware of, and it's called a "secure element." Without getting too technical (eg, into things I don't at all understand), the secure element's job is to store encrypted credentials (your payment info) and tell the Wallet app "hey, these are the credentials you need to transmit to the payment terminal."
Only one card's credentials are stored on the element at a given time (obvious security reasons), which is why you need an internet connection if you want to switch your active card in Wallet. When you sign in to Wallet or change cards, the Wallet app calls up to the Google server, pulls down your credentials for a particular card, and then writes them to the secure element.
But one does not simply write to the secure element (... or walk into Mordor), it requires special permissions. Google Wallet is doing something few apps do - asking for direct, exclusive access to a secure piece of hardware in the phone. Not only that, once Google takes over the secure element, it wants total control. Because of the security concerns (and related technical difficulties) involved in sharing a secure element, Wallet and only Wallet is able to utilize the internal secure element on a Wallet-enabled device. That means Google is directly managing every layer of the process. http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/0...why-the-carrier-is-still-allowed-to-block-it/
People got Wallet working on the VZW GN by side-loading it; much like everyone else who's running Wallet even though it's not carrier or region supported for their particular device . VZW's beef is that they don't trust third parties to use security-enabled h/w that VZW can't control on VZW-sold devices. When VZW realized people were by-passing the process they, with Google's help, did the following...
So Google Wallet has never officially been available for Verizon, on any smartphone. However for months now users have been able to side-load Google’s awesome Wallet app for mobile NFC payments using the web store, or installing a custom ROM. Today however it appears that Google’s pulled the backend plug. http://androidcommunity.com/google-wallet-gets-pulled-from-verizon-galaxy-nexus-20120914/
If the VZW GN didn't have a secure element Wallet would have never worked. The only two phones I've heard about without a secure element are the DNA/Butterfly and the One (except apparently for Sprint).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow. Thank you for that reply. Just one thing I'm confused about. Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work. With that in mind, does this mean that the secure element is software that could potentially be added on afterwards by, possibly, a third party source like someone on XDA, or does it have to be built into the phone initially?
dsass600 said:
Wow. Thank you for that reply. Just one thing I'm confused about. Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work. With that in mind, does this mean that the secure element is software that could potentially be added on afterwards by, possibly, a third party source like someone on XDA, or does it have to be built into the phone initially?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. Really great explanation of secure elements but I also agree. I had the galaxy s3 to mobile edition and all files, libs and what not where pulled from the sprint version and made flashable to all s3s.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4 Beta
TheBishopOfSoho said:
"Blatant" misinformation? Hardly. Try googling it, only Sprint editions of the One support wallet, there are many and varied references to other One versions lacking the hardware to support Wallet in its current incarnation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm glad someone already posted that link about people getting it working before I came back to check this thread. Stop misleading people. I already told you previously that I understood the lack of a secure element, but that it was still possible (at least at one point) to get it working. There's no need to put down others just because you feel so sure about your own knowledge. -.-
dsass600 said:
Last year, the Galaxy S3 did not have a secure element, but the Sprint version did, so people were taking some lib files from the Sprint version, putting them on their S3s, and getting Google Wallet to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All Samsung's NFC-equipped devices have a secure element (which is h/w). What you guys are talking about is missing s/w necessary to provide access to it. I'm guessing in the cases you're mentioning they were carrier SGS3's and the missing s/w was a carrier-requested "enhancement" specific to their SGS3. It's kind of like carrier's pulling the FM radio s/w but leaving the h/w which allows people to later get the functionality back.
http://nfctimes.com/news/samsung-embed-secure-element-galaxy-s-iii-other-nfc-phones
In the case of the DNA/Butterfly and non-Sprint One’s the physical secure element has been omitted and no amount of s/w can reverse that.
This is a pure guess on my part but HTC not providing a secure element is probably because they don't want to deal with the administration of it. Much like MAC addresses, secure elements are serialized and need to be tracked on a per-device basis which means maintaining a database and supporting Google in dealing with borked secure elements (which happens a lot). And that includes replacing the NFC chip if the secure element gets borked which would/could be a warranty claim. With so little carrier support for Wallet it's not a bad strategy as outside XDA people wouldn't miss access to it. And as far as I know Wallet's the only app that currently requires the presence of a secure element.
A few days ago I rooted my G900T S5 with Towelroot and all went well.
About five minutes ago I was changing my font and the phone had to reboot. When it came back on line the first thing that came up in notifications was a security warning from Google. The warning said that i should immediately uninstall the Towelroot app because it is known for breaching Google's Security policy.
I thought that was kinda weird. I know they warn you about third party apps, etc..., but all my previous Android phones have been rooted and i never got a warning from Google.
That's it. Just thought I'd share that thought on the notification.
@ fffft
I'm aware of Google's corporate greed and wanting to have control of all aspects of our personal electronics, even though they let Android be open source. I was surprised to get that notice from them because for the last 5 years starting with my Captivate, every phone I've had has been Samsung Galaxy of some model or another, 5 different phones all have been rooted and custom roms and until the other night never had Google send a notification saying to remove an apk file because it is a root file. I have to assume because towelroot is an actual third party apk and sits in the files. All other root styles that I've used, Odin, Heimdall, aren't an apk file that sits in the phones files.
So that must be the reason for the warning. It wasn't a warning because it rooted the phone, it did it because it was a third party app. It doesn't matter what the app is, although it does matter what it does. So I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
You do realise Google only wants to protect you because Towelroot works off of a security exploit right? You do realise that a malicious app can do the same thing that Towelroot did to you phone and gain root access without your permission right?
The difference between CF autoroot and other root methods is that it can only be done with consent, whereas any application can utilise a security exploit without your knowledge or permission.
OH WAIT OFC ITS GOOGLE BEING AN EVIL GREEDY COMPANY UGH GOOGLE PLZ
@Hellscythe
I'm not gonna start an argument over whether or not Google or any other company is greedy and wants our money or not. Because we all know the answer to that argument. Businesses are in business to make a profit and as much profit ad they can every fiscal year. Bottom line end of that discussion.
The post I wrote wasn't whether or not Google was being greedy. If you read it correctly, it is me wondering why I got the notification and then after I realized that it wasn't about the phone being rooted it was about the security breach possibilities. Which you so aptly brought up again captain obvious.
So thanks for your input. Your two cents was well spent. MOD EDIT: Inappropriate comment removed! Please read forum rules on conduct!
In doing my taxes, I noticed that the H&R Block app tries to execute su (which I promptly deny) and then nags about my device being compromised (app still works anyways.) It's obviously not, but it got me thinking: Since we're operating in the kernel now, I figure that we should be able to prevent apps from seeing the su binary at all unless we as the device owners explicitly want the app to be able to see it. Maybe even do something like allow creation of an app whitelist and/or blacklist.
If it's tricky to pull off, make it a pro feature (I paid for pro.)
I imagine this would fix Android pay as well (though I don't use it so I don't care) but it might be a motivating reason for others to want such a feature.
Other benefits to this include enhanced security against questionable apps that might, for example, try to take advantage of possible zero day in SuperSU itself.
I could be wrong, but isn't systemless SuperSU installed to ramdisk?
Also since the mount points are still on top of /system (without actually modifying system), doesn't that mean it would be visible anyway?
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Not if you only exposed the mount point to specific users, and only set the $PATH variable to specific users (which is another possible way to detect root.)
There are a lot of things that can be done, that can be done in theory, that can be done if somebody puts the work in, etc.
Outside of just a time investment, these things are very complicated to do and have them work on a large number of devices.
That's not even considering the legal repercussions.
There are a lot of apps that check for just the existence of 'su' and then you're done. Or if an installed app has a name like 'supersu'.
One that's been a constant thorn in my side has been 'Good for Enterprise'. Only way I've seen where a rooted phone worked past root detection was when it was a Cyanogenmod type that had a custom root (non supersu) built into the development settings and you installed/ran the app with those root settings off.
So agreed with Chainfire that all apps check for root differently.
Use "rootcloak" or simply disable supersu if you are system-less. The only caveat with using rootcloak is that it requires xposed and it is dreadful at hiding xposed meaning any security app looking for xposed will more than likely find it
Hi,
I used to root my phone but since I bought the S10 I found myself using Samsung Pay instead of using my cards all the time.
Before I used to root in order to have:
- Spotify mod, but now you can hack Spotify without root installing a modded version
- adaway but you can still use adhell
- YouTube vanced worked on non-root device
So do you think it's worth rooting the phone to maybe removing some bloating and add some minor customisations but lose Samsung Pay?
ValouSydney said:
Hi,
I used to root my phone but since I bought the S10 I found myself using Samsung Pay instead of using my cards all the time.
Before I used to root in order to have:
- Spotify mod, but now you can hack Spotify without root installing a modded version
- adaway but you can still use adhell
- YouTube vanced worked on non-root device
So do you think it's worth rooting the phone to maybe removing some bloating and add some minor customisations but lose Samsung Pay?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think yeah, debloating is the first thing to pushed me to root, but more reasons exist, like tweaks to systemui, backups, also this time i use it to be able to mock locations on pokemongo hehe.
The only thing stopping me to root my s10 was securefolder, because the warranty doesn't mind if you break,wet,loose the phone and since someone found a way to use it theres no other reason to not root for me
Chuytl said:
i think yeah, debloating is the first thing to pushed me to root, but more reasons exist, like tweaks to systemui, backups, also this time i use it to be able to mock locations on pokemongo hehe.
The only thing stopping me to root my s10 was securefolder, because the warranty doesn't mind if you break,wet,loose the phone and since someone found a way to use it theres no other reason to not root for me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I DO NOT ROOT ANYMORE!
Debloating is NO LONGER an excuse either!! Infact the phones are SUPER EASY to remove ALL the bloatware from!!!
Just flash a stock "unlocked" firmware and boom, bloatfree.. you dont even need to sim unlock!!!
Modded Apks are good enough for me, and work fine on unrooted devices.
You maintain ALL features...
AND YOU KEEP YOUR WARRANTY INTACT!!!
Some apps only work with root. Root also gives you access to install a custom recovery which can be used to make nandroid backups of the phone. Something stock recovery can't do unless you use the flash fire app in which case you need root to use it.
psynetkilla said:
I DO NOT ROOT ANYMORE!
Debloating is NO LONGER an excuse either!! Infact the phones are SUPER EASY to remove ALL the bloatware from!!!
Just flash a stock "unlocked" firmware and boom, bloatfree.. you dont even need to sim unlock!!!
Modded Apks are good enough for me, and work fine on unrooted devices.
You maintain ALL features...
AND YOU KEEP YOUR WARRANTY INTACT!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if thats your choice thats ok...
warranty is not a deal with because probably I'll break my phone before any factory issue also a full debloated stock firmware?
im not telling you to root but for me is not a need is because i like to do it. manually debloting a rom, use of apps that need device admin without grant it, backups,kernel wireless and framework tweaks, ui customization and a lot of things you can do with root only
Couple of reasons why I have it rooted:
- Replace the ugly Samsung Emoji for any other (I use the legacy but updated blobs).
- Full disable Google if you care "a bit" about privacy.
- Remove Bixby and remap without accepting their contract.
- Full VPN, Android by default don't tether internet with VPN
In overall, rooting is needed if you want to own your device and care about privacy. People have more usage for rooting, but that's why I prefer rooting.
The main reasons I used to root were
-Install black theme. These days every manufacturer offers black themes and Google also offers black themes.
-Adaway for ads removal. There are many alternatives for non rooted devices.
-Viper 4 Android for superior sound. I bought an external DAC which is much better.
-Debloating. Nowdays we are able to remove most of the apps we don't want.
I like my rooted LG G4 a lot, but I need my S10 to use my bank apps without hassle, so I will probably never root it.
Not any real important reasons that usually can't be done some other way, sometimes because their friends are doing it.
Tel864 said:
Not any real important reasons that usually can't be done some other way, sometimes because their friends are doing it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rooting is cool, only cool kids root :good:
I root my phone just because I want to have the freedom to do what I want.
I like to modify config files for apps (whatsapp for example - better photo quality, larger videos and so on).
Adhell isn't working anymore and non-root adblockers including AdGuard DNS are either sucking battery or you need to disable it often to enter websites. You can't add filters to the DNS. Adaway works great on root.
Also Substratum or similar is great and I like the Swift Black theme.
For me it's more the principe. Before I switched to Android I used to have jailbroken iPhones, only - and I loved the freedom.
But since my warranty's void and my USB port got destroyed by fake moisture I'm thinking about to suppress my thoughts of "Android freedom" - the repair shop wanted 400€ for switching the mainboard. I let them send my S10 back and now VaultKeeper prevents booting...and without USB I don't have any chance to use the phone.
So, rooting is great but if your device got damaged it gets expensive.
It's annoying that the phone brands are working so hard to prevent rooting without any logical reason...VaulKeeper and KNOX are just two examples just by Samsung. Huawei, for example, disabled the unlocking of their devices completely, this was the reason for me to switch to Samsung.