Related
Just out of curiosity, how would one go about "virginizing" a rooted G1.
My best bet would be restoring using the RC28 DREAIMG.NBH right?
If not, a more "manual" method, would be to restore using a stock RC30 update, wipe the phone, restore the original recovery image, and finally restore the original SPL.
right?
Yea both should work. But why?
It makes sense to me that there would be a step-by-step stickied post detailing the vigrinizing of a G1, in addition to all the "rooting your G1" information.
neoobs said:
Yea both should work. But why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the case comes up that one would need to return the device to HTC or T-Mobile, you can't present a rooted G1
haykuro said:
Just out of curiosity, how would one go about "virginizing" a rooted G1.
My best bet would be restoring using the RC28 DREAIMG.NBH right?
If not, a more "manual" method, would be to restore using a stock RC30 update, wipe the phone, restore the original recovery image, and finally restore the original SPL.
right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All that you have to do is flash back to RC29 or 28 using the dreaimg.nbh through bootloader. it flashes completely removes all custom splashes and bootloaders. I just did a replacement and this is what I did works perfect
haykuro said:
If the case comes up that one would need to return the device to HTC or T-Mobile, you can't present a rooted G1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually you can. In the FCC rules it states that we are allowed to do so, and that is why the iPhone is allowed to be cracked as well. Basically the FCC has to follow copyright laws, and those laws state that a user of copyrighted material is allowed to alter said material to suite their needs as long as they do not distribute said changes.
Yes, but in the warranty contract it states that any modification that is not natural or intended by the consumer (T-Mobile, HTC, Google) is a breach of contract, thus voiding your warranty.
Or in your example, the iPhone, any sort of modification to the baseband (unlocking), or to the NAND (pwning), you void your warranty. Apple specifically states this various times.
Personally I rather not pay $460 for a replacement
EDIT: Just another example of big companies locking you down, and why companies like Apple can go f**k themselves.
haykuro said:
Yes, but in the warranty contract it states that any modification that is not natural or intended by the consumer (T-Mobile, HTC, Google) is a breach of contract, thus voiding your warranty.
Or in your example, the iPhone, any sort of modification to the baseband (unlocking), or to the NAND (pwning), you void your warranty. Apple specifically states this various times.
Personally I rather not pay $460 for a replacement
EDIT: Just another example of big companies locking you down, and why companies like Apple can go f**k themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do realize that a contract can not circumvent a law right? This is why this was brought up originally, people said the contract was nullified because it circumvented the law. Court ruled that contracts can say whatever but law takes priority.
neoobs said:
You do realize that a contract can not circumvent a law right? This is why this was brought up originally, people said the contract was nullified because it circumvented the law. Court ruled that contracts can say whatever but law takes priority.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, but the warranty is what gives you free servicing. That's all warranty is. A "good consumer" contract. If you play by their rules, they will be more than happy to fix/replace your product for you, free of charge. If you get down and dirty and rip the thing apart, they rather not deal with you and thus void your warranty. In doing so, they do not refuse to give you service, they simply charge you for it.
It is not illegal if the company is offering said service, but is charging for it. It's up to the consumer to agree to this charge, or not accept it.
T-Mobile doesn't offer any warranties.
Huh? T-Mobile has a one year warranty coverage of your device (in store replacements, ect). HTC covers your device for two (or three?) years. I've used my T-Mobile in store replacements a couple of times.
T-Mobile sneaks "rootkit" into G2 phones - reinstalls locked-down OS after root
Not that there haven't been preventative measures before, but it looks like the G2 will be "unrootable" to start. Might be something to consider before jumping in with the G2. Very sad as this phone looks like a winner in all other ways.
Here is the original article on BoingBoing.
Hmmm... I'd be interested to know where the original OS ROM is stored, as that would take up a lot of space...
If it's true, then we next find how it "decides" it's rooted, and look at fooling that. If not, look at changing the image to be flashed with a custom ROM or dummy one.
Still failing that, perhaps looking into what calls this chip, and if boot process could be made to skip this.
Something seems strange about this, though I've not researched it properly yet... anyone seen it reported on other sources yet?
pulser_g2 said:
anyone seen it reported on other sources yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://gizmodo.com/5656921/t+mobiles-g2-rootkit-will-reinstall-stock-android-after-a-jailbreak
Master™ said:
http://gizmodo.com/5656921/t+mobiles-g2-rootkit-will-reinstall-stock-android-after-a-jailbreak
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, that links back to XDA, so I had a quick read of the latest... I was considering buying the G2/whatever it's called, but I have now changed my mind.
Yes folks, I just made a purchasing decision based on some silly little security chip, and I encourage others to do likewise. I am sure the security will be broken on it, at which point (if it's a permanent root/custom flash) I would re-consider my position, but as it stands, I refuse to buy it.
I have no idea who decided this was needed, but I certainly will not be buying from them in future. If it's T-Mobile, I will switch network (despite the fact they're a good network in the UK), if HTC I will look to other manufacturers.
[/rant
It's not that much different to what Motorola is doing with the Droid X, Droid 2 and Milestone, where if it detects any meddling it will brick the phone.
But in the long term, it's OUR phones, we can do whatever we please. Trust me it will be bypassed, if a lock can be made by a human, it can be BROKEN by a human. Look at the Desire for example.
They should do what they did with the N1, if the user unlocks the bootloader, and meddles with it until they bugger the phone, and they try sending it back for warranty, it's the users fault.
Just_s said:
Not that there haven't been preventative measures before, but it looks like the G2 will be "unrootable" to start. Might be something to consider before jumping in with the G2. Very sad as this phone looks like a winner in all other ways.
Here is the original article on BoingBoing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Explain to me how write protection == rootkit. In fact, it's quite the opposite - a rootkit (of sorts) allows us to exploit our way into a rootshell and install su to /system/bin/. This is nothing more than clever write-protection in the mmc.
And as usual, HTC is late on delivering the kernel source so we can really see what's up...
pulser_g2 said:
Yes folks, I just made a purchasing decision based on some silly little security chip, and I encourage others to do likewise. I am sure the security will be broken on it, at which point (if it's a permanent root/custom flash) I would re-consider my position, but as it stands, I refuse to buy it.
I have no idea who decided this was needed, but I certainly will not be buying from them in future. If it's T-Mobile, I will switch network (despite the fact they're a good network in the UK), if HTC I will look to other manufacturers.
[/rant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would HTC look to other carriers?
I ranted about this back in the WinMo days, but XDA is essentially picking up the slack for manufacturer/carrier actions. You said so yourself; you're not considering the G2 for a purchase anymore....until XDA or another dev forum finds a way around the security measure. And you will not buy from them...so long as HTC doesn't work with the carrier anymore, but if sales remain the same, they'll have no reason to stop.
So manufacturers/carriers don't need to change the way they implement security measures, they just need to keep making desirable phones and so long as others pick up the slack, they'll be able to capture the sales of the userbase that likes rooting their phones. This is going to continue being the case -- Android manufacturers will create phones and users will buy the phones on the promise that forums like XDA will make it better.
For real change to occur, sales have to be greatly affected.
Looks like the anti-root movement is beginning to snowball into a full fledged avalanche. I currently have a Droid X and it seems its locked bootloader has cause many devs to give up. Sure we have root and a few roms and themes to get rid of bloatware, but it isn't as great as a full unlock, not to mention lack of a true SBF for OTA 2.2 users.
HTC was going to be my next choice after I got bored with my X in about a year or so (more like 6 months). But it seems now that they've developed this tech for the G2, I'm sure all other carriers will want it on all future HTC devices. As soon a Samsung steps it up and creates their own locked bootloader, we'll all be SOL. What's left? Dell? Sony Ericsson?
Seems like all carriers will only be selling phones with locked bootloaders. I thought HTC was on our side, but the G2 is proof of the contrary. We need a manufacturer that embraces devs. With the recent bootloader unlocking failures seen with the Droid X and the difficulty seen with the Milestone, does anyone here think the development community can overcome the bootloader challenge?
HTC response to G2 complaint
emailed HTC to voice my displeasure. rather than ignoring my email, they felt compelled to reply with some low level, non-commital, and utterly moronic dribble especially in light of t-mobile already having released its lame-o statement. i also find it rather questionable that google had any part in this. too bad that HTC is following the Motorola model of duping folks into thinking they bought a device when all that money actually just buys time-limited, pre-defined functionality.
Without root Android wont be the same, looks like I'll be going back to Winders if this is the direction they are going to take it. They are taking all the fun out of it.
Just posted a pretty lengthy message on the T-Mobile forums... Post replies there if possible.
http://forums.t-mobile.com/t5/T-Mobile-G2/T-Mobile-Why-I-m-returning-my-G2/m-p/502593
Dear T-Mobile,
I thought I would write you this little note to explain why I have returned my G2. You see, Google created the Android Operating System to provide an Free, Open-Source alternative to proprietary Smart-Phone Operating Systems such as Windows Mobile and the iPhone. Google has done this to untangle the Smart-Phone ecosystem from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. The mantra of Open-Source software is: "If you don't like something, you can download the source and change it yourself!" Evidently, you do not understand this concept.
In case you were somehow unaware, the Linux kernel is protected by the GNU Public License (version 2). You can read the full license here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html
By selling a locked-down device (such as the G2), you defeat the capability of developers to contribute to the Android platform. Many features in the mainline Android project have come from the "modder" community. Furthermore, your supplier, HTC, refuses to comply with the GNU license. Numerous attempts to contact them about this violation are met with the following form response:
"HTC will typically publish on developer.htc.com the Kernel open source code for recently released devices as soon as possible. HTC will normally publish this within 90 to 120 days. This time frame is within the requirements of the open source community."
This is not acceptable. Read the license - it is clearly states that source code must be made available to those who ask for it.
Adding insult to injury, you have also misrepresented the device by being less-than-honest about its specs and capabilities. Many users are surprised to find they only have 1.3GB available on a 4GB phone. Say what you will about "reserved space" - this is not the case on *any* other Android handset. Meanwhile, you have taken cash on the side to pre-load certain "useful applications" (crapware such as Photobucket) - which cannot be removed by the user. And to no one's surprise, you have removed built-in features of Froyo (such as Tethering.)
It's unfortunate that you have chosen this path for your Android handsets. Neither HTC nor T-Mobile own Android, Linux, or the numerous other software components contained therein. You cannot simply do with them as you please. Hopefully you will release future handsets without these restrictions - until then I will continue to support the efforts of those who unlock your software protection.
Regards,
An ex-G2 owner
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
SuperFly03 said:
Personally, I think you are blowing this "anti-root" debacle out of proportion.
G2 will be rooted, just give it time.
I will give you the 4GB w/ 1.3GB free space argument. No argument here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
How do you REALLY about htc and t-mobile?
I'm sure they're all getting out their tissues for you.
You can get off of the soapbox now.
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
The 4GB, as I said, I have no argument against because it is a bit misleading but then again there is an 8GB SDHC card.
The useless applications can be removed when rooted. Until then, I haven't seen an Android phone not come with at least a few useless applications. They suck but they can be removed eventually.
I agree with you that is your device that you paid for... I'm not a fan of content protection. I, in fact, hate it but the 1000 people who don't buy a device because of it don't compare to the 2million people who do buy the device so I don't get too worked up about it.
I think you are being a bit dramatic.
I totally agree with this letter root is my deciding factor on wether I'm purchasing this phone. And I'm purchasing it out rite. The whole 500. It irritates me I'm told what to dob with something I spent so much money on. I purchase a mts because I assumed I could root and write to system and what not because I wanted a phone with a keyboard and this was all that was out but I hated the espresso ui. Granted I can change roms but the lack of system writeable acess and no kernel has killed our mts development. The forum is a ghost town. I have a rooted g1 and let people use it as a loaner. Not one person has ever messed it up with root acess. Who is anyone to tell me what I can do with something I purchas. Would you buy a house and let someone tell you you can't changes the drapes or carpet. If your into cars or motorcycles you wouldn't purchase one and be told you can't upgrade the parts. I've never bought a computer I couldn't change my os on. And wasn't jailbreaking and unlocking made legal. So technically aren't anti root methodes illegal
Phone just came out dude give it time... there will be updates
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
HamNCheese said:
So wait... They should put all phones on read-only lock-down, refuse to provide source when obligated to do so by the GPL, mislead customers with specs (not just the 4GB), tear things out of the OS, fill my limited memory with useless applications that I dont' want, and cannot delete, etc....
I think it's safe to say, root aside, that they have failed on all these fronts. I'm not expecting them to just hand over persistent root - but it's my goddamn device. **** Tmo and HTC for all of the above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Misleading specs = bad, and possibly illegal
Bloatware = effing annoying
Not providing source = annoying, but the source requirement is worthless unless someone higher up in the chain enforces it
Removing things from the OS? Guess what: that's the other side of open source.
The G2 has its issues, and I don't fault people for returning it. I also personally prefer open hardware - the freedom to break what I have bought. But I agree with SuperFly03 that you are blowing things out of proportion. T-Mobile and HTC also have a right to make money and protect themselves from perceived customer abuses.
I like your letter and agree with you, if you were to create an electronic petition I would sign it as a 7+ year T-mo user paying $140+/mo for the last 3yr. I did sign such a petition 2yr ago after the g1 release, "keep android open" as I recall. Truth is your only other options are much more restrictive outside of the android OS. So much focus of Devs is on keeping android free and open that nothing the coperations do can stop them IMHO. Just keep the Devs beer/coffee coffers full and rejoyce in all that android was meant to be. BTW "Bandit Splash"
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
I would agree with you. Bloat ware is becoming popular with htc. I moved to the G2 from the EVO because of the non sense ui. Further more I think your letter is appropate for tmo. I decided to buy the phone out right from my work (Radioshack) without any service and running on wifi I have no disappointments yet. Besides spending the $500+ for the phone...
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk
ezcape said:
Buy a Moto Razr and call it a night.
- Fly like a G2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
SuperFly03 said:
The requirement is 90-120 days after release right? We are 5 days into release.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They can do what they choose with Android, Google backs them as they did officially state that limiting Android to a vanilla, untouched build would essentially violate the fundamentals of having an 'open' OS.
Its up to the consumer to decide what they like and they don't.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
SmartHat said:
I'm disappointed (and fairly angry) that I had to sign a 2 yr contract & pay cash out of pocket just to get a Device that has been been falsely advertised and has Disabilities...
T-mo always comes out w/ BS devices that suck, ones no-one else wants, and it seems they shafted us with their flagship Android successor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
EDIT: if this rumored OTA includes wifi tethering, I'll be happy. Also supposed to have a radio update...I guess I will wait and see!
seancneal said:
To be fair, you didn't HAVE to sign a 2 year contract. It's really not worth it to save a couple of hundred bucks off the initial cost of the phone. Heck, I've seen unopened G2s on craigslist for around $400 already...
That being said, I still have until tomorrow to decide if I'm going to return this POS. I bought it outright, and my money is on this phone never being rooted. I know it hasn't been long yet, but it's not gonna happen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HamNCheese said:
Or, never buy this bull**** from a carrier again. Instead, buy un-subsidized, or un-locked phones direct. Like my Nexus One.
I don't doubt that it will be rooted within a month... That's not the point. Hell, if it is, I might just buy it again. But I won't support either T-Mobile or HTC with this crap as-is.
Wrong. There is no specific time requirement (this was addressed in GPLv3, which has some other issues.) The GPL went into effect the moment the executable code was "distributed" (technically late September, when the first people got their deliveries - maybe earlier - depends on definition of "distribution"...)
I don't expect a next-day turn-around, but HTC pulled the 90-120 days out of their ass. If I ask for source, and they do not provide it, they are non-compilant. Period. End of story.
The point of all this? Call attention to the fact that they are abusing the GPL. All of the Android manufacturers see Android as a cash-cow. They are taking Linux and doing whatever-the-**** they want with it.
It's wrong, and I'm calling them on it. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Wow... this is sad.
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is licensed. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall the "Android" parts are covered by ASL v2.0 not GPL.
Clackamas said:
Please read this license page:
http://source.android.com/source/licenses.html
under which Android is license. Android is released under the Apache Software License 2.0. Some parts may be GPL, such as the Linux Kernel, but overall it is covered by ASL v2.0.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Good god... the phone has been out less than 6 days and there is so much negativity.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're entitled to your opinion. And I'm entitled to mine - which should be clear by now.
The time issue has to do with the 14 day "buyer's remorse" return period. My tracking number has to be visible by Thursday to be accepted, as I got the phone 2 weeks ago Friday.
HamNCheese said:
When I refer to the GPL, I'm referring to Linux - the kernel. The Android license does not cover the kernel. I could care less about the source of dashboard and all that. The Apache license allows some bits to be closed. But Linux is the problem here - the kernel source does not fall into that category at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And like many, you don't understand the GPL either.
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/COPYING
As Linus points out: Software using the standard interface and derived works are excluded. So, companies such as NVIDA and ATI can release drivers for the kernel without having to release the source to their "derived words". I am also unclear exactly where in the license it says source code must be immediately available. Surely it is a market disadvantage to require the release of such immediately with the product. That would be a significant liability to companies wishing to use GPL based code. 90 - 120 days isn't unreasonable. And the fact that the kernel version being used is publish means that > 90% of the source code is available at product release shows the spirit of intent.
As most of you would know, we have learned quite a bit about Defy bootloader during the last week.
We always thought that Motorola don't have a method to unlock production defys (defys shipped to end users). Well we have sufficient information now to prove that Motorola have a method, and that it converts production defys to engineering defys (Phones used by Motorola engineers to make ROMs and other stuff)
This is actually better than a simple unlocked boot-loader because eng defys have unlimited applications (because we have direct access to MOBO/CPU) like overclocking gpu, installing other OS like Ubuntu, Debian, WP7 etc. into NAND and a lot more.
So the problem here is that the tools required for ENG switch is only available to Motorola employees. Till now we have no further information on it. The tools are TI OMAP BOARD CONFIGURATION TOOL and a 16MB .bin file. Other significance of this method is that it might also unlock other phones with OMAP(3xxx/xxxx?) board. Also this method seems to be very stable.
So the good news is that this software is available for most Motorola repair centers. That means it would be easier to get a leak. Of course the highly paid Motorola engineers with 6digit paycheck wont leak it but we should consider low level repair executives (they already leak sbfs and RSDlite).
So my suggestion is we start a bounty thread in XDA to tempt them.
If you have a solution and if you are concerned about anonymity, please PM me.
PS : There are lots of bounty threads in xda.
Hi,
Setting a Bounty would be cool, but is legal ?
Cause it is not like "I pay you a lot of money if you steal this software for me"
the|gamer said:
Hi,
Setting a Bounty would be cool, but is legal ?
Cause it is not like "I pay you a lot of money if you steal this software for me"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmm. It depend's on which country you are from.
I'm quite on it. Minimum/maximum fee could be set (like US$2 min and 20 bucks max, or anything like this). And someone with access to Motorola's employees (I think the user racca works on a Moto distributor, but I'm not sure of it, I think he mentioned it in some thread a few months ago) could rush and "bribe" them. If people could be a bit more clear about which kind of employees should have access to this software, I could try and convince one of them (you know, people here in Brazil aren't that much into honesty, but are a lot into money) about heading us a leak from TI's software. I'll have to take my phone to MOTOAssist soon ("menu" and "back" keys' backlights are weaker than normal), so I'd have at least an actual reason to talk to an assist technician (assuming they have access to the board configuration tool).
Yet, since I'm no hacker (yet, I'm planning on getting a Nook Color - which community here in XDA seems to provide all you need to start your own ROM - and starting messing around with it) nor coder (know only a little about C programming), I would not try and mess around with TI's software, but only upload it somewhere and give you guys a link for it.
K3n bH1mur4 said:
I'm quite on it. Minimum/maximum fee could be set (like US$2 min and 20 bucks max, or anything like this).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We could even promote it with ads. The best way would be to set up our on website, maybe in Brazil(or with some webhost who would like to host this) where you could bribe your way out and then promote it with ads. There is a remote chance that XDA might not approve a bounty thread here (of illegal implications), but we could publish the website here and all other major forums (chinese forums as well).
royale1223 said:
We could even promote it with ads. The best way would be to set up our on website, maybe in Brazil(or with some webhost who would like to host this) where you could bribe your way out and then promote it with ads. There is a remote chance that XDA might not approve a bounty thread here (of illegal implications), but we could publish the website here and all other major forums (chinese forums as well).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dunno, since it's illegal, it may not be the best option to promote it. Obviously, it's still not immoral, but we all know that morality and law often do not converge, so it may be better to go rogue, talking in private with motoassist technicians and stuff like that, because, even if we're just fighting for our rights, we're still using non-legal ways, and risking to be sued for it.
I don't think promoting a website is illegal. What's illegal is hosting an illegal one.
Promoting a website who promises cash for employees of a corporation who leak internal software used by that corp. might be considered illegal in most places. Fortunately (or not, I'll explain why), we have jurisprudence to embase of: in september 1st, last year, a judge here in Brazil condemned Moto to update a customer's Dext/CLIQ to Android 2.1 (Moto did not provide this update here in Brazil, even though it did in many countries) without voiding the warranty.
I know it's just one case, in just one country, and updating an android version is way different than providing unlocked bootloaders (or the tools for users to do so). And, yes, I agree with placing a bounty at the tool. Yet, if we get caught, Moto can still argue that we had other ways to pursue our rights, and we should have used the justice system to do so, if we believed we were that right. Yet, they're a multimillion-worthy company (even bigger after being purchased by Google), and we're a bunch of broke users, at most devs making a couple thousand dollars, and would have little chance against their lawyers. Last, but not least, employers who help us may get caught and fired because of us, and I sincerely want nobody (ok, maybe a few of the highest executives) to get fired just for me to get an unlocked BL.
So, my point is: let's make this a stealth action. Get a reason for your phone to be taken to Motoassist (no intentional bricking, please! You must flash an official SBF before taking it there! - at least if your phone is still under warranty), get to talk with one of their technicians, and mention - indifferently - that some guys are giving alway big money for any Moto employee who leaks that TI OMAP software. Something like this: "hey, did you hear that crazy devs at this dev forum are paying the first moto technician to hand them some sort of software? Something OMAP-related, I don't know for sure. All I know is that the reward is some nice cash."
When the word spread, we could have an unlocked bootloader within a month.
Yet, we got a single issue to deal: how to ensure the person who gives us the SW first will actually receive the cash? I've seen a few bounties here before, but them all were settled by XDA devs (so the bounty keeper could just donate the sum to that dev), never saw something like paying "outsiders".
One of my friends (Defy+ user) has a contact with a Motorola service guy. He says that that guy knows everything about Motorola software and he's with us because he himself uses custom ROMs and controls an entire service center. He's ready to take my device under warranty though it's rooted along every single hack/MOD for Defy installed
Will try contacting him
And let's post this in the forums of all other locked Motorola devices with OMAP 3xxx chips.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
swapnil360 said:
One of my friends (Defy+ user) has a contact with a Motorola service guy. He says that that guy knows everything about Motorola software and he's with us because he himself uses custom ROMs and controls an entire service center. He's ready to take my device under warranty though it's rooted along every single hack/MOD for Defy installed
Will try contacting him
And let's post this in the forums of all other locked Motorola devices with OMAP 3xxx chips.
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talk with this guy. If he has access to a copy of TI's SW, and handle it to us, I'm pretty sure we could him get a nice reward. Not as high as if putting a bounty, but definitely enough to make the effort worth it.
I mean, supposing that this is actually gonna help unlock EVERY OMAP 3 (and possibly all OMAP-based phones) out there, and that this way the process is reversible (at least to me, it looks like no eFuse is being blown there, you know, assistance technicians can't just blow eFuses like that - taking the phone to the assistance under warranty shouldn't void it, and that's what a blown eFuse would do), loads of people would help. Imagine a single dollar from every OMAP 3 XDA user (take a look here for an INCOMPLETE list of OMAP 3 devices with ~30 ANDROID ONLY phones/tablets), that would make a lot of money.
this is good....and i think it will be best to not mention the location,identities,or any hint of similarities of the perosn source once you guys get contacts & manifests from that guy(source). so as not to compromise his profession.
he could be fired & worse can be sued by leaking private details.
best discuss it in private,after getting in touch w/ him...
just a tought of CAUTION...
hailmary said:
this is good....and i think it will be best to not mention the location,identities,or any hint of similarities of the perosn source once you guys get contacts & manifests from that guy(source). so as not to compromise his profession.
he could be fired & worse can be sued by leaking private details.
best discuss it in private,after getting in touch w/ him...
just a tought of CAUTION...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah we would ensure him that.
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
hemil said:
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
do u know motorola mobility service center in mbai?
we only hav private shops with motos certificate...
i dont think they can help...
all they say is we'll send it to factory(?)
Sent from my MB525 using xda premium
@hemil Please pm me.
hemil said:
I'll help u out....juzz tell me what to get from moto officials
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey buddy... just wait for my call today...
Sent from my MB525 using XDA App
Putting up an ads offering money for violation the law may be a bit problematic. No website will be excited to host it. Another issue is that in the end someone will have to actually post it, someone in particular. And that one person will be in danger of being a subject of interest of various law enforcement agencies. You know, at the end of the day they always want someone to put the responsibility on, the culprit, a scapegoat. So you make heat and you put some particular person into it even before there is any result.
I would prefer to focus more on personal face to face private communications with the service guys. It's harder to prove and if something goes wrong (the guy records it etc.) our guy can always say he was just kidding, bullshitting, bigmouthing.
Anyway, if you are thinking about this seriously, here are few remarks.
don't offer the particular sum, it's not tactical; not even here should be mentioned any particular number; instead, let the service guy ask his price
if the first contact with a potential source is established, ask first for a proof; specify what the proof is supposed to be (a screenshot? a video recording of the software in action?)
figure out a way how to actually collect the money; people are willing to donate but they will not donate to anyone, only to someone trustworthy (but Epsylon will surely want to have nothing to do with everything even remotely questionable, let alone illegal); the "collector" will be under the lights, he may get attention of people we don't want to deal with
who actually will be allowed to donate? anyone? how to avoid an agent to donate and then simply track where the money is going?
figure out a way how to actually make a safe and smooth deal (money <-> software); will it be in person or electronically? how to verify we are given what we paid for? classical problem: no one of both parties is willing to make his move first, but we can't give away the money for a software we would start verifying not until the money is gone
figure out how to avoid being robbed (fake offers from people who would want to grab the money and run away) as well as being caught (fake offers from the dummy guy - LE agent); in both cases the correct proof might be given, though, but the intentions are wrong
For the particular mechanics of the exchange in person, one of numerous possible ways may go like this:
our guy comes with an intentionally bricked Defy repairable only with the software in question together with the ordinary USB cable (or without, if special USB cable is needed; in that case the cable must be part of the deal), and with an empty flash drive recognizable at the first sight; no money on him
our guy passes the flash drive and the Defy (and the USB cable, if no special cable is needed) to the "source" and watches closely
the source copies the software onto the flash drive, runs the software from the flash drive, connects the Defy via the cable provided and actually unbricks the phone (this must be more elaborated on; what if the software uses some libraries from the windows directories etc. which are not copied onto the flash drive? he may or may not have the installer, but just copying the installer isn't enough, he would have to copy the installer on the flash drive, then run the installer from it and install it back onto the flash drive and run it from there)
our guy gets the phone (and the cable) back, the source unplugs the flash drive and keeps it for now, our guy watches the flash drive is not connected to anything from now on
now the software is copied onto the flash drive and verified it's working, thus ordinary hand-to-hand exchange may proceed; our guy didn't bring the money to avoid being robbed, they both now may go grab the money or our guy may call his buddy with the money etc. (also needs to be heavily elaborated on)
Sensitive parts must be detailed in-depth, I am just indicating the outline, one of many possible. Still it's very far from perfect.
As you can see it's not that easy and there are many potential points of failure so this action may never really come to the practical realization.
What about a little bit different or alternative ways? Are there any? It would be useful to ask Epsylon what he would actually wish for the most - had he been able to wish for anything.
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
rishi2100 said:
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
huh !! think about moto when they actually ditch us with promises ? whats wrong if what we are screaming for last 1 year . and didnt get any updates ? huh think about tht before u speak about illegal stuffs . if moto is doing all sought of ways to keep us away from our rights . what we do undercover to get us right can no way be questioned when we have told thousands of times that we need updates .
more over the authority can question us only and only when they are themselves self guilt free .... but instead they are pretending to be saint sitting behind the curtains and doing all sought of locking stuff to deprive us of our rights
@jhonsmithx Let's not get ahead of ourselves. First of all lets concentrate on getting the source. Also I urge users to use a bit of social engineering to do that(using fb/g ). We'll put together a plan according to the situation after that. Also note that this is a pretty long shot. We might not get a source after all.
rishi2100 said:
isn't it illegal to post copyrighted stuff and also its against forum rules..
i mean that if someone gets his hand on that super tool, then how can he shares it with us???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could think of atleast 10 ways to share anonymously. Though I wont be posting them here.
With the signing key or certificate we could just sign our own kernels and wave knox goodbye while keeping the warranty, right?
Can't this be cracked somehow? or maybe someone from samsung is nice and leaks? =)
I sooo want to get rid of knox completely but don't dare to purposely trip the flag yet....
I think the only way to succeed would be to be able to sign our own kernels for knox or find some other exploit to break out of the boundaries of selinux enforcing mode. (or to get this thing turned off..)
But to run custom recoveries and kernels without tripping knox we'd still need to be able to sign those.
---
One time, cmon!
EDIT: Ohh forgot to say that I would put 20$ into the "samsung knox root cert leak fund" - maybe we can get smth started hehe
(like in the thread where people collect for a method to restore knox to 0x0..just with a lil different approach *evilgrin*)
You don't "crack" digital signatures like this, you'll be at that until the end of time. You're also not going to get some Samsung employee selling it, either, because the only people that have access to this stuff will be higher-ups getting paid a lot more than this bounty will ever reach. Not just that but it's not worth being blacklisted from the entire industry.
neoKushan said:
You don't "crack" digital signatures like this, you'll be at that until the end of time. You're also not going to get some Samsung employee selling it, either, because the only people that have access to this stuff will be higher-ups getting paid a lot more than this bounty will ever reach. Not just that but it's not worth being blacklisted from the entire industry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to Sony or the movie industry., Microsoft, direct TV, bell, dishnet.
Sent from my Telus SM900N-W8 via XDA Premium App
JohnnyRebel said:
Tell that to Sony or the movie industry.
Sent from my Telus SM900N-W8 via XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sony failed at their implementation of RSA, I very much doubt Samsung has made the same mistake. As for the HDCP leak (I presume that's what you're referring to), that was reversed through a weakness in the algorithm. RSA has no such weakness if done correctly.
neoKushan said:
Sony failed at their implementation of RSA, I very much doubt Samsung has made the same mistake. As for the HDCP leak (I presume that's what you're referring to), that was reversed through a weakness in the algorithm. RSA has no such weakness if done correctly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know your stuff better then me, but I'm praying your not right. No offense but I'm trying to remain the optimist. Everything man made can be broken. I like to think with time a way will be found to fake or mimic the signature. Obviously if that day comes Knox will probably long since been comprimised. Since this is their first implementation of Knox I'm sure there's flaws that hopefully get stumbled across. I'll be more worried about Knox 2. The only thing that might stop man from trying would be if Samsung proved it irrelevant. Eg. Honoring warranty with Knox tripped, or reseting Knox for a small fee.
Sent from my Telus SM900N-W8 via XDA Premium App
JohnnyRebel said:
You know your stuff better then me, but I'm praying your not right. No offense but I'm trying to remain the optimist. Everything man made can be broken. I like to think with time a way will be found to fake or mimic the signature. Obviously if that day comes Knox will probably long since been comprimised. Since this is their first implementation of Knox I'm sure there's flaws that hopefully get stumbled across. I'll be more worried about Knox 2. The only thing that might stop man from trying would be if Samsung proved it irrelevant. Eg. Honoring warranty with Knox tripped, or reseting Knox for a small fee.
Sent from my Telus SM900N-W8 via XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that nearly anything can be hacked given enough time. I would be surprised if Knox is still an issue 6 months from now, I just don't think we'll see the RSA key signature for it any time soon. I'm hoping we'll just find a way to reset it, or at least stop it from being tripped in the first place. The good news is that it would appear to NOT be a hardware efuse of any kind, so keep those fingers crossed.
neoKushan said:
Oh don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that nearly anything can be hacked given enough time. I would be surprised if Knox is still an issue 6 months from now, I just don't think we'll see the RSA key signature for it any time soon. I'm hoping we'll just find a way to reset it, or at least stop it from being tripped in the first place. The good news is that it would appear to NOT be a hardware efuse of any kind, so keep those fingers crossed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, your belief is correct, the "enough time" is true, but...
To crack a 2048 bit key, with a traditional desktop (2.2ghz CPU), it would take roughly 1.5 million years. I am not sure how strong is the key that Samsung has, but it is going to be way out of our life expectancy to crack anything like that.
The development of quantum computer will reduce that into something that is very well manageable, but we are not anywhere close. And nature of quantum computing is that you will never get 100% correct answer. It will be the best guess (I am WAAAAAAAAAAY over-simplifying this), but still has a chance not to be 100% correct.
Long story short, unless it's a really crappy implementation, or you manage to get a hold of the private key, you ain't going anywhere. Sorry
Meanee said:
Yes, your belief is correct, the "enough time" is true, but...
To crack a 2048 bit key, with a traditional desktop (2.2ghz CPU), it would take roughly 1.5 million years. I am not sure how strong is the key that Samsung has, but it is going to be way out of our life expectancy to crack anything like that.
The development of quantum computer will reduce that into something that is very well manageable, but we are not anywhere close. And nature of quantum computing is that you will never get 100% correct answer. It will be the best guess (I am WAAAAAAAAAAY over-simplifying this), but still has a chance not to be 100% correct.
Long story short, unless it's a really crappy implementation, or you manage to get a hold of the private key, you ain't going anywhere. Sorry
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I know you're trying to be helpful, but I don't think you've read the whole of my post, or indeed the previous post I made on the subject (second post in this thread). There is also an important distinction between "hacking" something and just brute forcing something as well. By "hacking" RSA, I'm really talking about finding a weakness in the algorithm that either allows derivations of the key or much faster brute forcing. Still, a lot of research has gone into this and although RSA is beginning to be considered insecure, it's not quite utterly broken yet for large keys (2048bit and above), but large keys are too computationally intensive. That's assuming RSA is in play here, it could equally be ECC and in that case, we're definitely ****ed.
Meanee said:
Yes, your belief is correct, the "enough time" is true, but...
To crack a 2048 bit key, with a traditional desktop (2.2ghz CPU), it would take roughly 1.5 million years. I am not sure how strong is the key that Samsung has, but it is going to be way out of our life expectancy to crack anything like that.
The development of quantum computer will reduce that into something that is very well manageable, but we are not anywhere close. And nature of quantum computing is that you will never get 100% correct answer. It will be the best guess (I am WAAAAAAAAAAY over-simplifying this), but still has a chance not to be 100% correct.
Long story short, unless it's a really crappy implementation, or you manage to get a hold of the private key, you ain't going anywhere. Sorry
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tbh that's actually a very good example of explaining quantum computing - though unless anyone has 6 months exclusive access to a multi million/billion dollar quantum computer, I think you guys can pretty much rule out either a cracked code or a key being leaked, these private keys are literally the one thing a developer or OEM never, ever wants to be leaked as with it you can sign firmware + do untold mischief. I honestly wouldn't be at all surprised if only one or two Samsung employees have access to this key.
IMO your probably much better off with going down the usual exploit root of finding a security flaw and exploiting it.
Jonny said:
Tbh that's actually a very good example of explaining quantum computing - though unless anyone has 6 months exclusive access to a multi million/billion dollar quantum computer, I think you guys can pretty much rule out either a cracked code or a key being leaked, these private keys are literally the one thing a developer or OEM never, ever wants to be leaked as with it you can sign firmware + do untold mischief. I honestly wouldn't be at all surprised if only one or two Samsung employees have access to this key.
IMO your probably much better off with going down the usual exploit root of finding a security flaw and exploiting it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Back closer to topic a little (though this is interesting!)... in the Knox white paper, Samsung states that it's possible to change the root key on the phone that establishes the whole downstream chain of trust (boot loader, kernel, ...). Apparently this is a legal/security requirement for certain government agencies, but whatever the reason, there is a protocol in place to get one's own root CA cert signed by Samsung and then have that installed at the root level of the phone. Samsung is pretty explicit in saying that this means you will need to roll all of the system software yourself, so I think they really do mean the key used at the lowest level we would care about.
I've idly thought of writing Samsung with complaints about how Knox interferes with some normal operation of the phone, and ask them to either sign a key I can use to install a development FW, or provide a properly signed dev FW, or at least provide a method for hooking and controlling the Knox/SEAndroid subsystem. I realize the likelihood of success is low, but could it really hurt to ask?
p