Related
I see it mentioned a few times but what on the phone prevents say 4.4.2 from being installed after the upgrade to 4.4.3?
Because the partion table and bootloader are different and can't be downgraded at all.
Or, you can downgrade... But brick your device after, even later.
Anyone who knows anything about the moto x will tell you just don't. ?
I find that odd. I wonder what the purpose is for doing that.
There is no way to just re-write those sections? Even on a Dev Edition?
knitler said:
I find that odd. I wonder what the purpose is for doing that.
There is no way to just re-write those sections? Even on a Dev Edition?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Security!
Look at the whole Windows/AntiVirus industry.
All because Microsoft wanted unsecure compatibility with the old OS.
Saving software dev time making things work.
knitler said:
I find that odd. I wonder what the purpose is for doing that.
There is no way to just re-write those sections? Even on a Dev Edition?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the Dev edition is no different. All the same "rules" apply.
The Dev edition is the same as any other.... It just keeps is warranty if you unlock it.
aviwdoowks said:
Security!
Look at the whole Windows/AntiVirus industry.
All because Microsoft wanted unsecure compatibility with the old OS.
Saving software dev time making things work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm kind of not buying this for a second?
How about linux, which is often pointed to for its security... And you can upgrade, down grade, switch out every component for newer/older/different, switch kernels, upgrade kernels, downgrade kernels... hell change out kernels with out even rebooting.
Really not buying it has anything with security.
KJ said:
Or, you can downgrade... But brick your device after, even later.
Anyone who knows anything about the moto x will tell you just don't. ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we understand that, I mean if the OP didn't he wouldn't have the question of "why not?". Its not I think it might be a good idea... We are just trying to understand the situation because it seems unique, and so we were hoping someone who knows a lot about
AGISCI said:
Because the partion table and bootloader are different and can't be downgraded at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the most I have heard so far, and I have heard it once or twice... But can't the recovery image include information on the partition table?
I realize the way it is, but was curious on some more technical information explaining it...
scryan said:
I'm kind of not buying this for a second?
How about linux, which is often pointed to for its security... And you can upgrade, down grade, switch out every component for newer/older/different, switch kernels, upgrade kernels, downgrade kernels... hell change out kernels with out even rebooting.
Really not buying it has anything with security.
I think we understand that, I mean if the OP didn't he wouldn't have the question of "why not?". Its not I think it might be a good idea... We are just trying to understand the situation because it seems unique, and so we were hoping someone who knows a lot about
This is the most I have heard so far, and I have heard it once or twice... But can't the recovery image include information on the partition table?
I realize the way it is, but was curious on some more technical information explaining it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is security. Specifically the SECURED BOOTLOADER. Don't confuse secured with locked. Yes, you can unlock your bootloader, but it is still secured.
Read up on "TrustZone" and see why it is important, and why the OEMs would not want you to be able to downgrade. You can "buy" or "not buy" whatever you want....
I really don't get the linux reference. We are talking about a bootloader, not linux in general. That's beyond the fact that any smart linux user would almost never have any reason at all to downgrade. Think about the heartbleed vuln that was discovered recently. Why on god's green earth would you want to downgrade openssl back to a version that is vulnerable??
The early (4.2.2 & 4.4) bootloader (motoboot.img) was vulnerable to an exploit that allowed us to disable write protection. The updated bootloader (4.4.2+) is patched. You *CAN NOT* downgrade back to the vulnerable version.
^Does that not have *everything* to do with security??
scryan said:
I'm kind of not buying this for a second?
How about linux, which is often pointed to for its security... And you can upgrade, down grade, switch out every component for newer/older/different, switch kernels, upgrade kernels, downgrade kernels... hell change out kernels with out even rebooting.
Really not buying it has anything with security.
I think we understand that, I mean if the OP didn't he wouldn't have the question of "why not?". Its not I think it might be a good idea... We are just trying to understand the situation because it seems unique, and so we were hoping someone who knows a lot about
This is the most I have heard so far, and I have heard it once or twice... But can't the recovery image include information on the partition table?
I realize the way it is, but was curious on some more technical information explaining it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because even though the patition file and bootloader are included in the archive, they fail to flash because they have a lower version than what is installed.
AGISCI said:
Because even though the patition file and bootloader are included in the archive, they fail to flash because they have a lower version than what is installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't just fake the version number?
No, it's not possible.
samwathegreat said:
I really don't get the linux reference. We are talking about a bootloader, not linux in general. That's beyond the fact that any smart linux user would almost never have any reason at all to downgrade. Think about the heartbleed vuln that was discovered recently. Why on god's green earth would you want to downgrade openssl back to a version that is vulnerable??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The linux reference was in direct reply to the quote above it that was making the argument that the PC anti-virus industry as well as the proliferation of malware and viruses is an example of the insecurity that is a result of a computers administrator having the technical ability to downgrade his OS software.
I mention linux because he was using PC OS's as an example, and Linux allows you not only to downgrade... but rewrite the bootloader. Or use a different bootloader. You bootloader can boot securely with UEFI, or you can just use BIOS. All this insecurity, but virtually no viruses, and very few security issues.
Why would you want to downgrade openssl? I wouldn't. I probably wouldn't flash back to an earlier version of android either... I keep my system pretty damn up to date. The point is more that his assertion that MS and Windows proves that being able to downgrade creates inherent security issues doesn't really hold up when you look at other systems that provide even more freedom.
samwathegreat said:
You can "buy" or "not buy" whatever you want....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, and that is why I want to understand what it is I would be buying.
AGISCI said:
Because even though the patition file and bootloader are included in the archive, they fail to flash because they have a lower version than what is installed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess this is the part that we are not understanding. Perhaps because I don't understand enough and have not looked through decompressed recovery images enough... but basically the issue is that Motorola is bricking the device, rather then letting it be downgraded to an potentially insecure image. I am guessing then this is a soft brick?
Does recovery not have the ability to re-write the partition table though? Is there no partition table information in this recovery image? I get that the stock recovery would not allow it, but wouldn't a developer edition user be able to flash a custom recovery that wouldn't have issues flashing the partition table. Don't TWRP or CWM, ect do this?
I guess then that is where the trust zone comes in...
scryan said:
The linux reference was in direct reply to the quote above it that was making the argument that the PC anti-virus industry as well as the proliferation of malware and viruses is an example of the insecurity that is a result of a computers administrator having the technical ability to downgrade his OS software.
I mention linux because he was using PC OS's as an example, and Linux allows you not only to downgrade... but rewrite the bootloader. Or use a different bootloader. You bootloader can boot securely with UEFI, or you can just use BIOS. All this insecurity, but virtually no viruses, and very few security issues.
Why would you want to downgrade openssl? I wouldn't. I probably wouldn't flash back to an earlier version of android either... I keep my system pretty damn up to date. The point is more that his assertion that MS and Windows proves that being able to downgrade creates inherent security issues doesn't really hold up when you look at other systems that provide even more freedom.
I know, and that is why I want to understand what it is I would be buying.
I guess this is the part that we are not understanding. Perhaps because I don't understand enough and have not looked through decompressed recovery images enough... but basically the issue is that Motorola is bricking the device, rather then letting it be downgraded to an potentially insecure image. I am guessing then this is a soft brick?
Does recovery not have the ability to re-write the partition table though? Is there no partition table information in this recovery image? I get that the stock recovery would not allow it, but wouldn't a developer edition user be able to flash a custom recovery that wouldn't have issues flashing the partition table. Don't TWRP or CWM, ect do this?
I guess then that is where the trust zone comes in...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The custom recoveries don't flash gpt.bin nor motoboot.img so using a custom recovery it's impossible to correctly flash a Moto X. You MUST use stock recovery with a Moto X. The problem isn't that it causes a brick by flashing an old version. The problem is that a brick happens the next time you do an OTA update. When the OTA update occurs there is a mismatched partion table and bootloader, so it ends up causing a brick.
The developer edition and the standard moto x are 100% identical. They only difference is that you don't void the warranty when you unlock the bootloader on the dev edition, however with the non dev edition your warranty is voided. So the same problem with the partition table and the bootloader ALSO apply to the developer edition as well.
AGISCI said:
The custom recoveries don't flash gpt.bin nor motoboot.img so using a custom recovery it's impossible to correctly flash a Moto X. You MUST use stock recovery with a Moto X. The problem isn't that it causes a brick by flashing an old version. The problem is that a brick happens the next time you do an OTA update. When the OTA update occurs there is a mismatched partion table and bootloader, so it ends up causing a brick.
The developer edition and the standard moto x are 100% identical. They only difference is that you don't void the warranty when you unlock the bootloader on the dev edition, however with the non dev edition your warranty is voided. So the same problem with the partition table and the bootloader ALSO apply to the developer edition as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said :good:
Still the answer is security.
So upgrade as Moto intended & do not downgrade!
---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 PM ----------
scryan said:
Is there no partition table information in this recovery image? I get that the stock recovery would not allow it, but wouldn't a developer edition user be able to flash a custom recovery that wouldn't have issues flashing the partition table. Don't TWRP or CWM, ect do this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our recovery devs never restore such partitions or boot loader elements.
scryan said:
The linux reference was in direct reply to the quote above it that was making the argument that the PC anti-virus industry as well as the proliferation of malware and viruses is an example of the insecurity that is a result of a computers administrator having the technical ability to downgrade his OS software.
I mention linux because he was using PC OS's as an example, and Linux allows you not only to downgrade... but rewrite the bootloader. Or use a different bootloader. You bootloader can boot securely with UEFI, or you can just use BIOS. All this insecurity, but virtually no viruses, and very few security issues.
Why would you want to downgrade openssl? I wouldn't. I probably wouldn't flash back to an earlier version of android either... I keep my system pretty damn up to date. The point is more that his assertion that MS and Windows proves that being able to downgrade creates inherent security issues doesn't really hold up when you look at other systems that provide even more freedom.
I know, and that is why I want to understand what it is I would be buying.
I guess this is the part that we are not understanding. Perhaps because I don't understand enough and have not looked through decompressed recovery images enough... but basically the issue is that Motorola is bricking the device, rather then letting it be downgraded to an potentially insecure image. I am guessing then this is a soft brick?
Does recovery not have the ability to re-write the partition table though? Is there no partition table information in this recovery image? I get that the stock recovery would not allow it, but wouldn't a developer edition user be able to flash a custom recovery that wouldn't have issues flashing the partition table. Don't TWRP or CWM, ect do this?
I guess then that is where the trust zone comes in...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smh I normally don't chime into these threads but I had to, you can't downgrade the bootloader because of security/compatibility plan and simple. It's the same concept as why you can't downgrade most PC's bios, if there is a flaw found in the system as a whole, then they don't want you to downgrade to that version. A lot of the times when people brick their device trying to downgrade is because it will flash, but because an efuse was blown when it was upgraded the downgraded version will not boot. Yes the recovery can technically rewrite those partitions but again because the efuse was blown it will not boot. Also yes being able to downgrade on any system Windows, Linux, Unix, IOS, Xbox, PS, etc are causes to security issues. If you can downgrade a system to a vulnerable version, it is then by definition less secure, no matter how you try to spin it. Take the futex vulnerability which affected most linux kernels from the past 5 years, so why would any desktop linux user ever want to downgrade to a vulnerable kernel? They wouldn't but if the end user isn't knowledgeable of the vulnerability they wouldn't know that downgrading makes them vulnerable. So since phones are used by so many people who are not knowledgeable of vulnerabilities, why would you want to give them the opportunity to downgrade themselves to a vulnerable OS?
Appreciate the info given... I don't want to downgrade, I am not trying to downgrade, I understand why its a bad idea, ect...
My view point was more questioning the insistence that it being technically possible to downgrade creates a security flaw on a machine that is kept up to date by a responsible individual. Unless we are trying to speak more abstractly about that fact that given someone the opportunity to make a mistake makes it more likely for one to occur, I don't think that security threat exists until you actually use that ability to downgrade to something with a flaw.
I guess then it comes down to personal viewpoint of do I want my phone to brick it self to protect me from myself and like sam said, you choose to go elsewhere... But then that is somewhat what I am trying to figure out. Even though its not something I would probably ever have to deal with, I don't like the idea... But "bricking" can be such a vague term with manufacturer specific recovery tools and "different levels of bricking".
Just trying to understand how what and when actually happens. I probably need to read some more of the recovery threads, and I have been looking through old threads here while considering VZ dev moto X and waiting for the x + 1 announcement, but I figured I would jump on the thread while it was here.
I understand keeping it simple because its generally a bad idea all around, and its just best not to confuse things... but its been hard to find deeper discussion or information then the general warnings. A bit of a better picture from this thread though.
aviwdoowks said:
Still the answer is security.
So upgrade as Moto intended & do not downgrade!
---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 PM ----------
Our recovery devs never restore such partitions or boot loader elements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By "Our recovery devs" do you mean the ones doing the moto specific stuff? Do you know if this Is typical of the custom recoveries for other devices?
@scryan
I know far less then other posters, but yes android recoveries are all very similar in that regard.
scryan said:
Appreciate the info given... I don't want to downgrade, I am not trying to downgrade, I understand why its a bad idea, ect...
My view point was more questioning the insistence that it being technically possible to downgrade creates a security flaw on a machine that is kept up to date by a responsible individual. Unless we are trying to speak more abstractly about that fact that given someone the opportunity to make a mistake makes it more likely for one to occur, I don't think that security threat exists until you actually use that ability to downgrade to something with a flaw.
I guess then it comes down to personal viewpoint of do I want my phone to brick it self to protect me from myself and like sam said, you choose to go elsewhere... But then that is somewhat what I am trying to figure out. Even though its not something I would probably ever have to deal with, I don't like the idea... But "bricking" can be such a vague term with manufacturer specific recovery tools and "different levels of bricking".
Just trying to understand how what and when actually happens. I probably need to read some more of the recovery threads, and I have been looking through old threads here while considering VZ dev moto X and waiting for the x + 1 announcement, but I figured I would jump on the thread while it was here.
I understand keeping it simple because its generally a bad idea all around, and its just best not to confuse things... but its been hard to find deeper discussion or information then the general warnings. A bit of a better picture from this thread though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing is you keep looking at it from a PC point of view, where you basically have full control over the software and hardware. Phones have much tighter restrictions on them from carriers, fcc, etc they're not personal computers. So the reason they make it where you can't downgrade the bootloader is because that's what controls the restriction on downgrading any other partition on the device.
So with the Moto X's 4.4.4 update they probably blew an efuse, so users with a locked device can't downgrade. This is done because with locked devices they can only flash signed kernels, so by blowing the efuse they can't downgrade to the vulnerable 4.4.2 and below kernel even though it is signed correctly. This is because lets say a malicious app was able to get on a device that had the ability to downgrade say back to 4.2.2. That app could flash the older vulnerable signed kernel to the recovery partition, to disable write protection gain more control over the phone etc, without the users knowledge. Now that is a stretch and probably will never happen but that doesn't mean the threat isn't there, and hackers are very creative at deploying malicious attacks. So by updating the bootloader and blowing an efuse the older vulnerable kernels can't be flashed. Now this is all negated if you're unlocked of course, but if you don't want to ever worry about this issue don't update your bootloader. This is not recommended but I've mentioned it several times on this forum I haven't updated my X's bootloader since I bought it, it's still running the factory 4.2.2 bootloader, running 4.4.4 with no problem.
The other thing you're missing is we're technically not supposed to have the ability to restore our phones, except for the developer edition of course. The fastboot restore files are leaked not released to the public, they are designed for use when phones are returned to be refurbished. So they don't want the phones that are being refurbished to be flashed back to an older version, they want it to be refurbished and the latest software version flashed to it.
iKrYpToNiTe said:
The other thing you're missing is we're technically not supposed to have the ability to restore our phones, except for the developer edition of course. The fastboot restore files are leaked not released to the public, they are designed for use when phones are returned to be refurbished. So they don't want the phones that are being refurbished to be flashed back to an older version, they want it to be refurbished and the latest software version flashed to it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A bit selfish, and perhaps lazy of me but I am only really here talking about the developer version, I just haven't bothered to write the full "verizon developer edition " every time (most of this is research for next phone, which will be developer handset)... To me, obviously a locked phone is going to have weird restrictions and hacked together paths to getting things done, your not supposed to have admin rights...(yeah, maybe I do look at it too much as a computer. Mostly because I am annoyed the differences seem intentionally imposed). But when I pay outright for a device so that I can own it and have full administrative control... anyways, thats a different more philosophical discussion. The point is I have been talking about an unlocked device using third party software where possible.
Either way, appreciate the reply. I have a better understanding of the issue... Though coming from an S4 it still seems weird that MDK*/developer phones don't seem to have the same issues/warnings. It would seem however that the difference may be that MDK/dev owners only use kernels/roms prepared for their devices and do not update the bootloader. I suppose if more people in the Moto X community were worried about maintaining the ability to downgrade an unlocked device it would be technically possible to upgrade in a way that could be easily reversed, similar to the S4.
(*MDK was the first VZ S4 firmware, and the only one that has a released exploit to allow for a full custom recover. Later locked firmwares must rely on safestrap)
I'm not sure where the appropriate place for this would be, and I apologize in advance if this isn't it, but I need some assistance.
For starters, I'm an absolute n00b when it comes to anything root and I don't understand the language and procedures to it, only how to do it by following instructions. Hence why I'm currently on a 4.4 untethered root.
I'm due for an upgrade this month and am torn between getting a later device with Lollipop or a newer device with Marshmallow. The deciding point is if there's any kind of walkthrough on rooting Marshmallow, preferably a dumbed-down version for nondevs like myself.
I know there's currently an experimental one provided by Chainfire, and I skimmed through it but couldn't really understand it.
So any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
@Chainfire If you could weigh in, that would be very helpful.
What are you on about untethered root this isn't IOS. Also it's just two simple steps:
Get a recovery for your device (TWRP preferably)
Use either the stable zip from this forum or beta zip thosent matter and transfer it to your device.
Flash it in the recovery done you're rooted
@Xmaster24 I appreciate the response. I was losing hope on getting an answer as I had already gone with the newer device for my upgrade.
In jcase's pie thread for the 2013 Motorola line, that's what the 4.4 root was referred to as. Wasn't confusing Android with iOS.
And I apologize for being so n00bish, but how would I go about getting TWRP recovery? I do know how to flash the zip from there as I used Safestrap on my current device (but I already needed root access for it to work).
Kodalades said:
@Xmaster24 I appreciate the response. I was losing hope on getting an answer as I had already gone with the newer device for my upgrade.
In jcases's pie thread for the 2013 Motorola line, that's what the 4.4 root was referred to as. Wasn't confusing Android with iOS.
And I apologize for being so n00bish, but how would I go about getting TWRP recovery? I do know how to flash the zip from there as I used Safestrap on my current device (but I already needed root access for it to work).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on your device just tell me what it is and I can send you some info. Safestrap seems to be dead for at least a year thosent sound very safe lol.
Xmaster24 said:
Depends on your device just tell me what it is and I can send you some info. Safestrap seems to be dead for at least a year thosent sound very safe lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm getting the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge. Considering it's not out in the US yet (I have it on preorder), I'm not sure if you'd be able to tell me anything at the moment.
Kodalades said:
I'm getting the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge. Considering it's not out in the US yet (I have it on preorder), I'm not sure if you'd be able to tell me anything at the moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh dear yes it has just been released probably no rooting info available for quite some time considering samsungs stance on root and open software. Maybe check again in a few weeks or months
Xmaster24 said:
Oh dear yes it has just been released probably no rooting info available for quite some time considering samsungs stance on root and open software. Maybe check again in a few weeks or months
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bummer. Kinda expected something along those lines though so I'm not surprised.
Would getting TWRP or some other kind of recovery still be possible at the very least?
Kodalades said:
Bummer. Kinda expected something along those lines though so I'm not surprised.
Would getting TWRP or some other kind of recovery still be possible at the very least?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flash fire could work but it requires root already. Doubt there are any easy exploits on a flagship just released phone
Xmaster24 said:
Flash fire could work but it requires root already. Doubt there are any easy exploits on a flagship just released phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Makes sense. I really appreciate the help. If you happen to learn of anything more, please let me know.
Kodalades said:
Makes sense. I really appreciate the help. If you happen to learn of anything more, please let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Guess not kingo root seems to be working :http://www.xda-developers.com/galaxy-s7-root/
I unlocked the bootloader of my G7plus, installed TWRP and then used TWRP to install Magisk.
So far, everything is working, root hiding is working as it should and Magisk's "SafetyNet Check" is reporting success.
Yay.
Almost.
a) During the boot I'm getting a message in the top left corner saying "verity mode is set to disabled"
b) Google Pay won't work, probably due to a)
Questions:
1) Is b) really due to a), and if so
2) How do I get rid of a)?
hildeb said:
I unlocked the bootloader of my G7plus, installed TWRP and then used TWRP to install Magisk.
So far, everything is working, root hiding is working as it should and Magisk's "SafetyNet Check" is reporting success.
Yay.
Almost.
a) During the boot I'm getting a message in the top left corner saying "verity mode is set to disabled"
b) Google Pay won't work, probably due to a)
Questions:
1) Is b) really due to a), and if so
2) How do I get rid of a)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1) no idea
2) that worked for me so far to use google pay (I just followed the instruction in #1, though there is a huge discussion and also some tools/scripts available within the discussion)
Hello, I have the same exact issue, plus the AR stickers in the stock camera aren't working anymore, and I suspect it's not a coincidence.
Any update on this would be more than welcome.
Alternatively, as I'm not sure I am going to do anything really useful with root access, I'd love if someone could suggest an un-rooting method... just in case. (I know this might sound like a stupid question, but years have passed since my last rooted phone, and I'm at a loss with all these new things around lol)
Thanks to anyone answering
Max Morden said:
Hello, I have the same exact issue, plus the AR stickers in the stock camera aren't working anymore, and I suspect it's not a coincidence.
Any update on this would be more than welcome.
Alternatively, as I'm not sure I am going to do anything really useful with root access, I'd love if someone could suggest an un-rooting method... just in case. (I know this might sound like a stupid question, but years have passed since my last rooted phone, and I'm at a loss with all these new things around lol)
Thanks to anyone answering
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's funny that you mentioned AR stickers not working for you now. I unlocked my bootloader today, and lost the function of AR stickers and Google lens. And I haven't even rooted. I'm going to lock the bootloader back to see if it makes a difference.
fossiltkm said:
It's funny that you mentioned AR stickers not working for you now. I unlocked my bootloader today, and lost the function of AR stickers and Google lens. And I haven't even rooted. I'm going to lock the bootloader back to see if it makes a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have rooted and passed the Safetynet in Magisk and Lens is working good. I never bothered with AR stickers elsewhere but in Wizzards Unite game they seemed to work just fine too
Unlocked bootloader, rooted and permanently installed twrp last night and now receiving this message. Is it anything to worry about, as in will any basic functions be affected? Not sure, because I haven't had a chance to test everything yet. If nothing will be affected, how to simply remove the message?
edit nvm
rev79 said:
Unlocked bootloader, rooted and permanently installed twrp last night and now receiving this message. Is it anything to worry about, as in will any basic functions be affected? Not sure, because I haven't had a chance to test everything yet. If nothing will be affected, how to simply remove the message?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After rooting, Magisk is supposed to care about the verity mode. AFAIK usually no app will know about the disabled state . Trying to hide the message may cause more harm.
Ok, thanks. I was just wondering because I also have a Samsung tablet (completely different device, I know) rooted using Magisk and the verity message is not present on bootup there. Also, in the magisk settings, both preserve encryption and preserve dm-verity are unchecked while they are checked on the G7. Is that just because they require different setups? I did flash the available bootlogo from https://forum.xda-developers.com/g7-plus/themes/bootlogo-modded-bootlogo-unlocked-t3910421 and it removed the warning screen about the bootloader, but the verity message remains. I guess those are different things?
The bootlogo only hides the message by using the same color like the message for the background. In my opinion modifying the logo partition to virtually let the message disappear makes no sense. If you want to see what is happening, it makes things complicated. Also the logo partition is modified now, which was one reason for not being able to update OTA. On the G7+ the unlocked bootloader seems to be reason enough to prevent OTA updates against Motorola support FAQ saying otherwise, so this doesn't matter anymore, but I still don't like it.
tag68 said:
On the G7+ the unlocked bootloader seems to be reason enough to prevent OTA updates against Motorola support FAQ saying otherwise, so this doesn't matter anymore, but I still don't like it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Moto G7 series has fundamentally problems to receive OTA updates. But to install it your device must be on stock. Otherwise the update could hard brick it since Google uses block based updates.
WoKoschekk said:
But to install it your device must be on stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unlocking bootloader is the method for me to make sure I can do Nandroid backup and access files which are otherwise protected by running twrp one time. Maybe that I could root for Titanium Backup. That is all.
When I tried it, my G7plus was stock. Not rooted, no twrp.
As OTA did not run anyway, I rooted in the meantime. But using the Magisk manual for OTA updates, it should be possible to temporarily disabled Magisk - it still does not work.
I asked where to find the logfiles where you can see in which partition the error occurred (they are not where they used to be on older phones), but it seems no one knows the answer.
tag68 said:
When I tried it, my G7plus was stock. Not rooted, no twrp.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you try it? Did you receive the notification for a new update and then you pressed "install"?
tag68 said:
I asked where to find the logfiles where you can see in which partition the error occurred (they are not where they used to be on older phones), but it seems no one knows the answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The log would tell you that the compatibility check fails. The .zip runs a check of all partitions at the beginning which compares the verity hashes.
All logs will be cleared when you reboot the device. There is no log like a last_kmsg or something that gives you some information about errors before the reboot. To get logs like that you would need a Magisk module or a own script handled by Magisk.
The only way to run the update manually is to download the ota.zip, delete the compatibilty check inside the .zip and flash it through TWRP. But this could lead to a hard brick and is not recommended.
WoKoschekk said:
How did you try it? Did you receive the notification for a new update and then you pressed "install"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wanted to. But there was a message like (translated from German) "You are not eligible for system updates as system integrity is compromised." Install OTA was not available. So I could not update, against Motorola support FAQ OTA with unlocked bootloader.
WoKoschekk said:
The log would tell you that the compatibility check fails. The .zip runs a check of all partitions at the beginning which compares the verity hashes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not the first device where I said 'only unlock bootloader to avoid that erase userspace, nothing else is being done for quite some time.' As mentioned I want to be able to root later, or do a backup starting twrp once, but not touching anything until I have a good reason to do so. The reason for root was that OTA did not work, then I said "then I can root and try topjohnwu method".
WoKoschekk said:
All logs will be cleared when you reboot the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I did not boot normally, but instead started TWRP and searched for the logs. But didn't find them where they used to be.
Try to flash a clean ROM and boot it up. Then you will be able to download and install the OTA. Or as an alternative download the ROM on mirrors.lolinet.com
tag68 said:
That's why I did not boot normally, but instead started TWRP and searched for the logs. But didn't find them where they used to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you look at? In /sys/fs/pstore?
WoKoschekk said:
Where did you look at? In /sys/fs/pstore?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The G7plus is my first a/b device. Before it was somewhere in /cache. Next time I'll try to look in /sys/fs/pstore, thanks for the hint.
tag68 said:
The G7plus is my first a/b device. Before it was somewhere in /cache. Next time I'll try to look in /sys/fs/pstore, thanks for the hint.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I asked because you won't find logs in this directory with a A/B device. It was only a usual path for non A/B devices. I just wanted to point it out to you.
Since A/B devices don't have a /cache partition (it's now /data/cache) the logs are stored in /persist/cache/recovery.
Anyone knows how to fix this issue?
What exactly do you mean?
Hola! si no me equivoco eso pasa cuando desbloqueas el bootloader y para entrar en modo fastboot o recovery, debes presionar los botones de subir y bajar volumen mas encendido
I am super new to rooting I mainly use it for PokemonGo. I am following this video on YouTube.
Basically when I flashed via Odin, I then install Magisk. Then everything is working and rooted BUT when I restart my phone my Magisk is then magically unrooted (I dont know if this is the right term) it says 'Magisk is not installed' and underneath that is says 'Magisk Manager is up to date'
So why does it keep doing this? Everytime this happens I need to Flash again via Odin and do the whole procedure again. This only happens when I restart the phone. Why does it keep doing this and how do I fix this? I will pay someone who can fix this for me. Ive been trying to figure out for the past day and Im going insane. I have no knowledge about rooting etc like i said i just want to play Pokemongo location spoofing.
Appreciate everyones help.
What did that guide say on how to boot up your device? On devices like yours, that matters...
Here's what the official docs/instructions have on that:
https://topjohnwu.github.io/Magisk/install.html#magisk-in-recovery
Didgeridoohan said:
What did that guide say on how to boot up your device? On devices like yours, that matters...
Here's what the official docs/instructions have on that:
https://topjohnwu.github.io/Magisk/install.html#magisk-in-recovery
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi it says bixy, power and volume up I believe.
littlepuppies said:
Hi it says bixy, power and volume up I believe.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean from the guide? Yes, as far as I understand that's the combo that you'd need on an s10 (I don't do Samsung). If you look at John's instructions he's covered that prety well.
Are you sure that you are doing the button combo properly? Because if you don't you'll just end up with Magisk not loading during boot and the system will seem to be unrooted.
But, as I wrote above I don't do Samsung so I'm not the best person to give advice about this... You might be better of asking for advice in your devices forum (because there you'll find people who knows the ins and outs):
https://forum.xda-developers.com/s10-plus
Thread closed as duplicate of https://forum.xda-developers.com/s10-plus/help/samsung-s10-plus-everytime-restart-t4099659
This was my first attempt at ever trying to put custom rom on a phone, so don't laugh too hard at me. I used the the twrp.img found in this forum, had it going right but when I did something trying to go back to stock for an update, it went into bootloader, but nothing else, no system no recovery. I tried to use the fastboot tool on here, and it reached this and stopped. Any help or is it done for?
PS, I did manage to follow one tutorial to a T, and did great my second time around.
btflyrose said:
This was my first attempt at ever trying to put custom rom on a phone, so don't laugh too hard at me. I used the the twrp.img found in this forum, had it going right but when I did something trying to go back to stock for an update, it went into bootloader, but nothing else, no system no recovery. I tried to use the fastboot tool on here, and it reached this and stopped. Any help or is it done for?
PS, I did manage to follow one tutorial to a T, and did great my second time around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So your second round where you stuck at..?
Have your tried getting factory file...boot img..flashing boot img through fastboot..?
have you tried...fastboot boot " fastboot getvar current-slot " see what slot you on...change to other slot ...see if it boots up...?
What model do you have..?
the more details you give to more people can help you..just saying
I'm sorry, I've not been back online. Single mom, busy. Kids getting older, I have a little more spare time during school hours but this past week has been hectic.
I tried to flash the original boot.img with no luck. It goes black when it connects to a computer but vibrates but isn't recognized on my adb or the fastboot tool. So far nothing.
My second time was another phone, same phone though. OnePlus 10 pro NE2015 model.
The issue also could be that there are no real custom ROMs for this phone yet... you might have flashed a malicious file and killed the phone. Unless you were hopping to GSI. Only real suggestion is to try a complete flash from TWRP or pay for MSM.
If you can't get into recovery, can you flip the boot slot with the hardware combo and get in then? May be your last hope besides EDL/MSM.
This issues happend to Oneplus 9 series with bad update (F.19), but I see this issues for the first time on Oneplus 10 Pro. Is it really on OP10P?
Prant said:
The issue also could be that there are no real custom ROMs for this phone yet... you might have flashed a malicious file and killed the phone. Unless you were hopping to GSI. Only real suggestion is to try a complete flash from TWRP or pay for MSM.
If you can't get into recovery, can you flip the boot slot with the hardware combo and get in then? May be your last hope besides EDL/MSM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How exactly do I do a flip? If it's even possible to get into recovery. So far, I've not had luck.
kouzelnik3 said:
This issues happend to Oneplus 9 series with bad update (F.19), but I see this issues for the first time on Oneplus 10 Pro. Is it really on OP10P?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it's the 10 pro. I was too eager to root a phone and must have missed something, or done something somewhere. I've done several tablets, but not any phone. I've always had Samsung phones through carriers, so I couldn't figure knox out. But I've been researching and reading for months about rooting a phone, and decided that the OP 10 pro would be my first try. I'm not sure where I went wrong. I managed to get a second one, and followed the guide again, and well, that is the one I'm on now, and it seems fine.
btflyrose said:
How exactly do I do a flip? If it's even possible to get into recovery. So far, I've not had luck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK, according to @g96818 as well, you have to hold all three hardware buttons down, let it attempt to boot, continue holding the buttons and it should like shut off immediately right after the boot logo and switch to the other boot slot.
btflyrose said:
Yes, it's the 10 pro. I was too eager to root a phone and must have missed something, or done something somewhere. I've done several tablets, but not any phone. I've always had Samsung phones through carriers, so I couldn't figure knox out. But I've been researching and reading for months about rooting a phone, and decided that the OP 10 pro would be my first try. I'm not sure where I went wrong. I managed to get a second one, and followed the guide again, and well, that is the one I'm on now, and it seems fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, the key to this device is basically do not flash anything to it, just boot from images. You CAN flash TWRP but I would personally recommend against it for daily use right now until data decryption is fixed fully. Just BL unlock, root it, and play with some Magisk modules like V4A, that's all we got on 10Pro for now.
Just some pics of the device...
But @Prant I'm curious to know, what is the difference between having the TWRP and not having it installed regarding rooting? Luckily, OP makes rooting for easier with unlocking the BL. But honestly, the confusion I've had the most understanding in the rooting process at this point is the whole difference between having TWRP and not having it, while installing Magisk.
(Y'all have to excuse me for my not having as much knowledge. I'm just basically a bored at home Mom with kids getting older, and tries to find something to get interested in that wasn't so old lady like. I've never been one to enjoy sewing, knitting, gardening, etc... HA!)
btflyrose said:
But honestly, the confusion I've had the most understanding in the rooting process at this point is the whole difference between having TWRP and not having it, while installing Magisk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a bit of a dated thing from 6-8 years ago or so, TWRP used to be the gold standard for recovery on a phone. However, nowadays companies have gotten smarter and want more control over their device, so they add things like Knox (in Samsung) to keep the device "safe." OPPO/OnePlus has started doing this with the OP9 and the OP10 is their first attempt at keeping the device "basically" locked.
Long story short, TWRP is useful to do backups but I've even seen cases of backups on this device in particular failing when restored. And it used to be the main entry point, the first step to rooting any android device. However in recent years, it's become less and less necessary as you can do almost everything you can do in TWRP, through ADB and fastboot. Flashing is still a no go (on this device, thanks to OPPO magic) , but booting a patched image works for now. In the next years I'm sure even that will be secured somehow.
And, haha, there's nothing wrong with getting into tinkering, it's a helluva rabbit hole that's for sure.
Good luck and feel free to reach out if you have any questions.
Prant said:
This is a bit of a dated thing from 6-8 years ago or so, TWRP used to be the gold standard for recovery on a phone. However, nowadays companies have gotten smarter and want more control over their device, so they add things like Knox (in Samsung) to keep the device "safe." OPPO/OnePlus has started doing this with the OP9 and the OP10 is their first attempt at keeping the device "basically" locked.
Long story short, TWRP is useful to do backups but I've even seen cases of backups on this device in particular failing when restored. And it used to be the main entry point, the first step to rooting any android device. However in recent years, it's become less and less necessary as you can do almost everything you can do in TWRP, through ADB and fastboot. Flashing is still a no go (on this device, thanks to OPPO magic) , but booting a patched image works for now. In the next years I'm sure even that will be secured somehow.
And, haha, there's nothing wrong with getting into tinkering, it's a helluva rabbit hole that's for sure.
Good luck and feel free to reach out if you have any questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a reason that the OP10 doesnt have any roms but the OP9 has lots?
w_tapper said:
Is there a reason that the OP10 doesnt have any roms but the OP9 has lots?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easiest answer is that there is no free / public MSM tool. Which means no way to recover from a bad flash without paying OPPO, essentially. That's not very developer friendly.