Database Info

Global Unlock for VZW GS3?

Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-

ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.

Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.

AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?

ancashion said:
Have you by chance read the law?
You don't actually believe the "future update" crap do you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.

ancashion said:
You have a legitimate complaint to file with the FCC. On behalf of all those who own an S3, please contact them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??

AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon IS screwing us though, again! Look at our bootloader and everyone else's, the rest of the world. And if this phone is a world phone with gsm capabilities, why lock it to begin with then promise to unlock it soon "in the future"? Do you actually believe that crap?
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456, that should unlock it. If it doesn't ask for a code, don't worry about it, root the phone (at your own risk) using the "Root66" method on this forum. Then go to this thread, whether you were able to unlock it with those generic codes or not.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566
Read all the instructions. You should be able to get voice and SMS working for any gsm carrier, and you should be able to get 2G (maybe also 3G and HSPA+ on some gsm carriers) working, you'll have to find their APN settings and manually switch to those using the instruction in the linked page though. 2G has been confirmed working on AT&T and t-mobile, no one has been able to test 3G and HSPA+ on AT&T yet. Good luck.

AlexDeGruven said:
If they have said they will send out the update and they don't within the reasonable lifetime of the phone (2 years) then there would be an FCC case. But to state that right now is just plain "Oh man, look! Verizon is screwing us AGAIN" propaganda bs like 1/2 of everything else on this forum.
Edit: Even if you're in the "Screw Verizon" crowd, there is much more incentive for them to unlock the GSM capabilities than to not. It would allow them to say "Hey look! We have the best coverage in the US, AND you can use it all over the world!", which is fantastic marketing.
For them to say they're going to unlock that and to not do it is marketing suicide. And if Verizon does one thing right, it's their marketing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jmorton10 said:
Legitimate complaint??
Are you kidding me, where do people come up with this BS??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AlexDeGruven said:
Wait... What? This is so completely and utterly off-base, you're not even on the same field.
Verizon has stated that this phone's global GSM capabilities will be unlocked at a future time, just not right now.
There is no expectation from the FCC's viewpoint that a phone on a CDMA network should automatically be able to connect to GSM networks out of the box.
OP - There is a thread in development with some information that might be helpful.
Currently, the phone is not unlocked officially, but it will work with foreign SIM cards. As of right now, testing is pretty limited, as the APN configuration is not very easily edited on ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
§ 27.16 Network access requirements for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787
MHz bands.
(a) Applicability. This section shall apply only to the authorizations
for Block C in the 746-757 and 776-787 MHz bands assigned and only if
the results of the first auction in which licenses for such
authorizations are offered satisfied the applicable reserve price.
(b) Use of devices and applications. Licensees offering service on
spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the
ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their
choice on the licensee's C Block network, except:
(1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical
standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the
licensee's network, or
(2) As required to comply with statute or applicable government
regulation.
(c) Technical standards. For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this
section:
(1) Standards shall include technical requirements reasonably necessary
for third parties to access a licensee's network via devices or
applications without causing objectionable interference to other
spectrum users or jeopardizing network security. The potential for
excessive bandwidth demand alone shall not constitute grounds for
denying, limiting or restricting access to the network.
(2) To the extent a licensee relies on standards established by an
independent standards-setting body which is open to participation by
representatives of service providers, equipment manufacturers,
application developers, consumer organizations, and other interested
parties, the standards will carry a presumption of reasonableness.
(3) A licensee shall publish its technical standards, which shall be
non-proprietary, no later than the time at which it makes such
standards available to any preferred vendors, so that the standards are
readily available to customers, equipment manufacturers, application
developers, and other parties interested in using or developing
products for use on a licensee's networks.
(d) Access requests. (1) Licensees shall establish and publish clear
and reasonable procedures for parties to seek approval to use devices
or applications on the licensees' networks. A licensee must also
provide to potential customers notice of the customers' rights to
request the attachment of a device or application to the licensee's
network, and notice of the licensee's process for customers to make
such requests, including the relevant network criteria.
(2) If a licensee determines that a request for access would violate
its technical standards or regulatory requirements, the licensee shall
expeditiously provide a written response to the requester specifying
the basis for denying access and providing an opportunity for the
requester to modify its request to satisfy the licensee's concerns.
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
(f) Burden of proof. Once a complainant sets forth a prima facie case
that the C Block licensee has refused to attach a device or application
in violation of the requirements adopted in this section, the licensee
shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate that it has adopted
reasonable network standards and reasonably applied those standards in
the complainant's case. Where the licensee bases its network
restrictions on industry-wide consensus standards, such restrictions
would be presumed reasonable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
(e) Handset locking prohibited. No licensee may disable features on
handsets it provides to customers, to the extent such features are
compliant with the licensee's standards pursuant to paragraph (b)of
this section, nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
nor configure handsets it provides to prohibit use of
such handsets on other providers' networks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.

newuser134 said:
Put in an AT&T or T-Mobile sim in your phone first BEFORE rooting, it'll ask you for a sim unlock code, enter 000000 or 123456.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?

roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't work the other way around.

roachkv said:
If this works, then why aren't folks buying non-VZW phones and putting VZW SIMs in them? That'd circumvent the whole locked bootloader thing, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not as simple as just switching the sim card on Verizon. Unlike the GSM networks, Verizon only allows devices that already have their ESN/MEID in the system.

Yes, should be working with proper steps..
ahanecurren said:
Is there currently any way to unlock a VZW GS3 so I could use a local sim internationally? I'm going to Spain at the end of August and need a data connection while away from the hotel. Verizon offers 100MB for $25, while Vodafone offers locally a pre paid sim with 1GB of data for around $23 USD. So obviously I want to use a Vodafone sim. I called both Samsung and Verizon who said each other were the ones responsible for globally unlocking the phone. So I was wondering if the Dev community has already found a solution or is currently working on a solution for this problem. Otherwise I will have to use an AT&T Blackberry Bold while there -shutter-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thread: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1775566&page=10 has a lot of information. My post #95 details the steps that I have taken, and I can confirm that I was able to get it to work with a T-Mobile card. I am heading to Russia and will test it there in GSM mode with a local card. I have an HTC Incredible 2 world phone as backup which I know works.
The key is that you must use HiAPN to be able to edit/change the internal APN setting to allow for other Sim cards. ALso load Phone Info to change the radio setting. I've already loaded APN's for three different Russian companies and hope that I can just pop them in, change the APN, change the radio and be good to go.
Hope this helps.

Great Post!
My friend do you hang out in the irc channels too?
I have a question:
I am currently using the verizon samsung galaxy s3 (SCH-I535) and will be moving to Japan in September, what can you recommend me to do? I want to be able of use the s3 with either 3g, LTE oe 2g with any carrier in Japan. I know if I unlock the phone via root and unlock I can use the softbank (japan carrier) for call/text 2g not data plan though. But If that is the only thing I can do I will get a pocket wifi so I can have data wherever I go that way.
Any recommendations? I still can't understand about the global unlocking update coming to verizon s3 ?
Thank you in advance!
ancashion said:
BS, you say? Off base, you say?
Here's the regulations regarding any device sold by Verizon as a "4g capable" phone...
If that's too much to read, or too hard to comprehend, let me point out the specific part of those regulations...
Still too much.. let me make it a little clearer...
But Verizon says, and admits, no, you cannot have the unlock code to make your device available for use on other networks like they did for the OP.
But Verizon says, and will supposedly, release an "update" to allow this feature. Mind you- a feature it was required by the above regulation to come with out of the box. So exactly when, will Verizon comply with the Regs? When someone complains loudly enough, that's when.
I'm open to discuss this, and it's meaning and how the FCC will interpret it but from where I'm sitting, it's pretty clear. The OP does, infact, have a legitimate complaint. I ain't full of **** nor off base.
How many other devices has Verizon released that do not comply with the above regulations? It isn't just the S3, that's for sure. It won't end here either unless we petition the powers that be to force them to comply, or, give up the block C frequencies for re-auction to a company who will comply.
Frankly, I'm disgusted with the pro-Verizon rhetoric that's invaded XDA recently. Are they astroturfing for Verizon? How does anyone find Verizon's business practices acceptable? I like Verizon for the pipe it offers me, not for meddling with my phones and rendering the software on my phone obsolete because it's locked out third party developers and the powers that be decide it "isn't worth putting the newest OS on" is a good enough excuse to scam you into purchasing a new phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Verizon S3 Global Root Unlock
Can anyone tell me if i did this root and global unlock does that mean i can put a international verizon wireless plan and use it overseas or is this just to be able to use international SIM's?

I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.

ahanecurren said:
I'm going to say it would be for local pre-paid SIMs only. If you call into Verizon and try to get international data on your line, it will throw up serious red flags for them. Verizon doesn't support (officially) this device to be used abroad yet. So if you call in saying you got it unlocked, you may get into a bit of a sticky situation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:

ancashion said:
Alternatively, one could do it, get into this sticky situation with them and invite the FCC in on the conversation.
I would love to have VZW chew my ass for some **** that they agreed to not block, just to turn around and use their information against them.
Oh, wait.. that's what I did with my FCC complaint! :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?

Imatoasta said:
I never read anything about a grace period in the block c regulations so I wonder how vzw can get away with dragging their feet with the damn global unlock? I don't get why it's taking them so long. You won't be able to use it on say at&t or T-Mobile when it gets unlocked will you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be able to provided your radio is compatible with the others network. That was the nature of block c's "openness" or the idea behind it anyways.
Vzw challenged the block c regs in court, after they made the purchase, and lost. I think they are being defiant on purpose.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

How to unlock and set up your SGS3 phone for world use.
I fyou have not yet seen this, go to this post: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1809314 and it will walk you through the steps that worked for me to use the Verizon Galaxy S3 overseas in GSM mode.
If it helps, give a thanks!

Poll: Would Verizon changing their bootloader policies make you return to them?

I'm writing a paper on Android bootloaders and security, profitability, and network performance and would like to get some of the enthusiast community's opinion.
The paper is framed as an internal proposal to Verizon Wireless management proposing further investigation into their current policies. Part of the paper involves investigating if Verizon Wireless (or ATT even) changing their locked bootloader policies and generally being more dev friendly would encourage those of us who have left them to return. This could provide a profit incentive by gaining new customers. While this would certainly not be a scientific poll, it should do for the purposes of a college paper.
So, again, the question is, would Verizon Wireless changing their locked bootloader policies cause those of you who left to return?
Please clarify your response below, and tell me if there's another option you'd like added to the poll.

JesusFreak316 said:
So, again, the question is, would Verizon Wireless changing their locked bootloader policies cause those of you who left to return?
Please clarify your response below, and tell me if there's another option you'd like added to the poll.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me to return to Verizon they would have to:
Allow bootloader unlocking.
Allow carrier unlocked phones on their network.
Allow their phones to be carrier unlocked to work on other networks.
Not charge so damn much.
Honestly, I don't think that your proposal would make any difference in profits. You could ask 100 random smartphone owners about the bootloader on their phone and maybe one or 2 could even have a clue what the bootloader is/does, and what an unlocked one means vs a locked one.

Planterz said:
For me to return to Verizon they would have to:
Allow bootloader unlocking.
Allow carrier unlocked phones on their network.
Allow their phones to be carrier unlocked to work on other networks.
Not charge so damn much.
Honestly, I don't think that your proposal would make any difference in profits. You could ask 100 random smartphone owners about the bootloader on their phone and maybe one or 2 could even have a clue what the bootloader is/does, and what an unlocked one means vs a locked one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your input.
Hopefully carrier unlocked phones will happen with VoLTE only phones, but that's still speculating now as to whether the FCC band 13 restrictions apply to other services and not just data.
Little known fact, but Verizon is the only carrier that has to have all their LTE devices be carrier unlocked due to the aforementioned FCC rules.
Heh, that last reason is mostly what I meant by other reasons in the poll.
Certainly, I know the enthusiast community is barely a drop in the bucket compared to everyone else, but what I'm wondering is if they are not only missing out on revenue, but are also spending money on extra locks for the devices that don't really protect the network, as nothing on XDA can touch the modem. It's a case of why not, with possibly good publicity in the influential tech community.
Sent from my VS985 4G using XDA Free mobile app

SamsungIME remote code execution vulnerability

I preemptively apologize if someone already posted on this.
This is ludicrously bad. If only Samsung cared so little about the bootloader ...
https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2015/06/16/remote-code-execution-as-system-user-on-samsung-phones/
The only workaround requires--you guessed it--rooting the phone. We should really write Verizon and Samsung a scathing group appeal. Needless to say, I'm done with Verizon after the contract is up.

blair.sadewitz said:
I preemptively apologize if someone already posted on this.
This is ludicrously bad. If only Samsung cared so little about the bootloader ...
https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2015/06/16/remote-code-execution-as-system-user-on-samsung-phones/
The only workaround requires--you guessed it--rooting the phone. We should really write Verizon and Samsung a scathing group appeal. Needless to say, I'm done with Verizon after the contract is up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The carriers (Samsung's customer) control the locked bootloader, not Samsung. Samsung would not shoot themselves in the foot and refuse to build the phone to the customers' specifications. And since Verizon and AT&T went for the corporate and military sales, plus the 99.5% who never heard of XDA or could care less about a locked bootloader purchasing what they heard is the most secure phone...our please would make the same wave as dropping a pebble in the ocean. The best that could be done is what you said..choose your next device and carrier based on what you have learned. A lot of us deal with the crappier coverage that Sprint and T-Mobile have to avoid being locked down.

KennyG123 said:
The carriers (Samsung's customer) control the locked bootloader, not Samsung. Samsung would not shoot themselves in the foot and refuse to build the phone to the customers' specifications. And since Verizon and AT&T went for the corporate and military sales, plus the 99.5% who never heard of XDA or could care less about a locked bootloader purchasing what they heard is the most secure phone...our please would make the same wave as dropping a pebble in the ocean. The best that could be done is what you said..choose your next device and carrier based on what you have learned. A lot of us deal with the crappier coverage that Sprint and T-Mobile have to avoid being locked down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I suspect you're right. Nevertheless:
http://www.androidcentral.com/it-wi...mericas-top-carriers-heres-what-you-need-know
These guidelines could be [broadly or narrowly] adapted for bootloader unlocking as well. As it stands, I don't even have the option to unlock the bootloader at any time in the future. Do I _never_ own the phone outright, even after I've fulfilled my contractual obligations? This is the frontier beyond which all of the arguments in favor of the practice cannot be sustained.

blair.sadewitz said:
Yeah, I suspect you're right. Nevertheless:
http://www.androidcentral.com/it-wi...mericas-top-carriers-heres-what-you-need-know
These guidelines could be [broadly or narrowly] adapted for bootloader unlocking as well. As it stands, I don't even have the option to unlock the bootloader at any time in the future. Do I _never_ own the phone outright, even after I've fulfilled my contractual obligations? This is the frontier beyond which all of the arguments in favor of the practice cannot be sustained.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That article is regarding unlocking a phone to use on another carrier...SIM unlocking basically...not bootloader. The security put on the phone is the business of the carriers requesting from the manufacturer..including Verizon blocking access to HTCDev to unlock HTC devices. Owning a phone outright does not give you rights to having the security software removed. But of course if you figure out how to do it, kudos...no one can stop you. Just because you buy and own a satellite box does not give you rights to have it unlocked to give you free PPV or programming. The fact that you can sell the phone to another person proves you own it. But you have more knowledge now when you choose your next phone and carrier.

KennyG123 said:
That article is regarding unlocking a phone to use on another carrier...SIM unlocking basically...not bootloader. The security put on the phone is the business of the carriers requesting from the manufacturer..including Verizon blocking access to HTCDev to unlock HTC devices. Owning a phone outright does not give you rights to having the security software removed. But of course if you figure out how to do it, kudos...no one can stop you. Just because you buy and own a satellite box does not give you rights to have it unlocked to give you free PPV or programming. The fact that you can sell the phone to another person proves you own it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oops, I had two different articles open in different tabs and somehow melded them together. That sure isn't helping my buzz.
You do have the right to unlock the cable box or dispose of it in any way you wish. It is a basic property right. You do not have the right to employ it to "steal" service, though. Similarly, they cannot stop you if you figure it out because it is your property, and as such your property rights trump their desires--such is my layman's understanding, anyway, heh.

blair.sadewitz said:
Oops, I had two different articles open in different tabs and somehow melded them together. That sure isn't helping my buzz.
You do have the right to unlock the cable box or dispose of it in any way you wish. It is a basic property right. You do not have the right to employ it to "steal" service, though. Similarly, they cannot stop you if you figure it out because it is your property, and as such your property rights trump their desires--such is my layman's understanding, anyway, heh.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup...just as you are free to figure out how to unlock the bootloader on your phone...and collect that bounty!!!! $$$$$

Root ***Warning***

For those adventurous ones... might want to read this first before attempting any kind of root. Such a shame... T-Mobile here I come.
“In most of the U.S. devices, if you root the device the device won’t even boot up; if it’s AT&T or Verizon,”
Samsung Galaxy Note 5, Galaxy S6 Edge+ Specs And Features: AT&T And Verizon Models Won’t Boot Up After Rooting

WTF, that's unacceptable

If it's unacceptable, better not buy the phone! Because it certainly isn't illegal, so I don't think anyone can force them to change it if they don't want to.
Of course, that is assuming that this is even true. Hasn't been confirmed by anyone yet...

JasonJoel said:
If it's unacceptable, better not buy the phone! Because it certainly isn't illegal, so I don't think anyone can force them to change it if they don't want to.
Of course, that is assuming that this is even true. Hasn't been confirmed by anyone yet...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I already did lol ordered the white 32gb today
Pretty sure the jailbreak legal case would count for this tho, therefore we are allowed to root with a device that we paid (full price)
I've never actually rooted a Samsung device before, but we kinda need it now because Samsung isn't going to fix the ram issue

Good luck. Not sure what you will do if rooting it actually bricks it... even if you are legally right, that might not help make your bricked phone work any faster. Lol
Maybe a smart developer will find a way around it anyway.

Maybe this http://youtu.be/qCh0QuEwAgY

Here's to hoping for a Developer Edition

Someone will bypass this nonsense. Where there's a will there's a way

Samsung pay for Verizon is disable already ...why would it be a problem when rooting and booting

GreeleyXda said:
I already did lol ordered the white 32gb today
Pretty sure the jailbreak legal case would count for this tho, therefore we are allowed to root with a device that we paid (full price)
I've never actually rooted a Samsung device before, but we kinda need it now because Samsung isn't going to fix the ram issue
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm...being "allowed" to root and being "able" to root are 2 different things. If you figure a method around their security then you can root...nothing in that Jailbreak lawsuit says they have to make it easy.

KennyG123 said:
Ummm...being "allowed" to root and being "able" to root are 2 different things. If you figure a method around their security then you can root...nothing in that Jailbreak lawsuit says they have to make it easy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, verizon is bricking phones.
Locked bootloader would the equivalent to able
while bricking would be the equiv to allowed
I dont understand the need to brick a phone, instead of idk deny service. Since service is what verizon owns, while you own the hardware

GreeleyXda said:
Yes, verizon is bricking phones.
Locked bootloader would the equivalent to able
while bricking would be the equiv to allowed
I dont understand the need to brick a phone, instead of idk deny service. Since service is what verizon owns, while you own the hardware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because you own a device (governed by FCC regulations as a communications device) does not mean you are to be provided with methods to modify it any way you want. The one thing is there is no law preventing you from rooting...nothing says the carrier (the customer) can't ask the manufacturer to make it as close to impossible as possible. If I own a satellite box, it does not give me the right to a method to get all the Pay channels.
You have to remember what drives Verizon and AT&T...$$$$$$$$ and making the phone so secure and locked down will gain them millions more in military, government and corporate accounts...this is not an attack on the amateur modder...we are just collateral damage.

KennyG123 said:
Just because you own a device (governed by FCC regulations as a communications device) does not mean you are to be provided with methods to modify it any way you want. The one thing is there is no law preventing you from rooting...nothing says the carrier (the customer) can't ask the manufacturer to make it as close to impossible as possible. If I own a satellite box, it does not give me the right to a method to get all the Pay channels.
You have to remember what drives Verizon and AT&T...$$$$$$$$ and making the phone so secure and locked down will gain them millions more in military, government and corporate accounts...this is not an attack on the amateur modder...we are just collateral damage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I understand what youre saying im just lost on the part that theyre allowed to brick the phone. It just makes more sense to me for them to deny you sevice on a modified phone rather than bricking it. Wonder what this means for future nexus phones at verizon
Id be kind of tempted to test it, but im assuming there would be 0 chance of being able to get my money back on the phone.

GreeleyXda said:
I understand what youre saying im just lost on the part that theyre allowed to brick the phone. It just makes more sense to me for them to deny you sevice on a modified phone rather than bricking it. Wonder what this means for future nexus phones at verizon
Id be kind of tempted to test it, but im assuming there would be 0 chance of being able to get my money back on the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I have to agree with you there...perhaps they are counting on publicity and the fear factor of a few sacrifices to discourage any attempts at finding a solution. I miss the days of the S3 where you can flash just about anything and still recover if you screwed up. This is what keeps me stuck on Sprint. Can't go to T-Mobile because there is basically only LTE literally on the highways here.

KennyG123 said:
Just because you own a device (governed by FCC regulations as a communications device) does not mean you are to be provided with methods to modify it any way you want. The one thing is there is no law preventing you from rooting...nothing says the carrier (the customer) can't ask the manufacturer to make it as close to impossible as possible. If I own a satellite box, it does not give me the right to a method to get all the Pay channels.
You have to remember what drives Verizon and AT&T...$$$$$$$$ and making the phone so secure and locked down will gain them millions more in military, government and corporate accounts...this is not an attack on the amateur modder...we are just collateral damage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that it still has to be FCC compliant and should not give everything for free like your other tv example. But here is my issue. I can buy a computer from bestbuy and put linux on it or modify whatever i want. Secondly I understand it is using verizon bands etc but why is this just verizon & AT&T??? Seems a little bit odd that it is just them. Why do they care unlike tmo and sprint that probably have unlockable bootloaders. I get the military/corporate discounts but at least offer a developer edition. But is there really not a law that says the carrier can shut your phone down? Doesn't there always have to be an emergency call option? I need to do some legal digging and see I find it odd that a carrier can disable a phone for any reason!

oneandroidnut said:
I agree that it still has to be FCC compliant and should not give everything for free like your other tv example. But here is my issue. I can buy a computer from bestbuy and put linux on it or modify whatever i want. Secondly I understand it is using verizon bands etc but why is this just verizon & AT&T??? Seems a little bit odd that it is just them. Why do they care unlike tmo and sprint that probably have unlockable bootloaders. I get the military/corporate discounts but at least offer a developer edition. But is there really not a law that says the carrier can shut your phone down? Doesn't there always have to be an emergency call option? I need to do some legal digging and see I find it odd that a carrier can disable a phone for any reason!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am with you..just trying to explain Big Red's and AT&T's logic....they got the power by having the best coverage in the US..they are #1 and #2 there...I am sure they have worked with the military, government, corporate and all Exchange users to ask what they would need to sign big contracts with them...of course the answer is always that these mini-computers be as secure as possible.....then these carriers worked with Samsung to provide these solutions. I am not sure why T-Mobile and Sprint have not followed suit...we would need to see more of the deal between Sammy and Verizon to know how much engineering costs and exclusivity is in there...perhaps it is out of the lower two's budget.
Now as far as legality..you are attempting to modify the phone against the carrier's instructions which results in a brick...legalwise is that much different than expecting it to be able to dial 911 if you throw it against the wall? Both things are not supported by the carrier or manufacturer. The carrier is not disabling the phone...you are by attempting an unauthorized procedure. (Just devil's advocate here)
With so many hackers out there trying desperately to get at your identity and banking information (all done with cell phones now), and vulnerabilities being discovered daily, expect security to only get tighter and tighter going forward. The point of vulnerabilities may become moot if the phone is so locked down against any root functions and unauthorized use.
You do have options though...a Nexus.

Someone will root the device. To date there has never been an unrootable device

bash_array said:
Someone will root the device. To date there has never been an unrootable device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Verizon note 4
---------- Post added at 08:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:23 PM ----------
KennyG123 said:
I am with you..just trying to explain Big Red's and AT&T's logic....they got the power by having the best coverage in the US..they are #1 and #2 there...I am sure they have worked with the military, government, corporate and all Exchange users to ask what they would need to sign big contracts with them...of course the answer is always that these mini-computers be as secure as possible.....then these carriers worked with Samsung to provide these solutions. I am not sure why T-Mobile and Sprint have not followed suit...we would need to see more of the deal between Sammy and Verizon to know how much engineering costs and exclusivity is in there...perhaps it is out of the lower two's budget.
Now as far as legality..you are attempting to modify the phone against the carrier's instructions which results in a brick...legalwise is that much different than expecting it to be able to dial 911 if you throw it against the wall? Both things are not supported by the carrier or manufacturer. The carrier is not disabling the phone...you are by attempting an unauthorized procedure. (Just devil's advocate here)
With so many hackers out there trying desperately to get at your identity and banking information (all done with cell phones now), and vulnerabilities being discovered daily, expect security to only get tighter and tighter going forward. The point of vulnerabilities may become moot if the phone is so locked down against any root functions and unauthorized use.
You do have options though...a Nexus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know you are and as far as an unauthorized procedure does Verizon list in their statement about rooting phones??

oneandroidnut said:
Verizon note 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Originally it was rootable. Updates have made it locked

bash_array said:
Originally it was rootable. Updates have made it locked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still counts though lol it's current state it isn't

Grain of salt: Bootloader: TMO Rep

So, I like to vent at companies on Twitter and any other social networks if they are not listening to their customers or taking advantage of loyal customers. So last night I started venting to T-Mobile asking about the bootloader and why we haven't heard anything at all. I mean, i'm sure most of us are on JUMP and could jump if we wanted to, but why, theres nothing better out, yet. Anyways to conclude my conversation with the rep, I got a confirmation from the rep saying:
"Good news! T-Mobile is working with Samsung to hopefully unlock bootloader!"
I tried to press for more information, sources etc but did not have any luck. Pretty much the answer I was given was they are limited on what they can see or do as chat reps.
Well, I'll believe it when I see it, but just thought I would share, that there could possibly be a bright light at the end of the tunnel for some of those loyal users. I for one will be jumping as soon as a more improved Android phone comes out, might have to wait till the end of the year though.

A dump truck full of salt and still nothing new.
People need to take their time and understand the underlying situation. Here's a good summary, apologies for reposting again:
mathieulh said:
The CROM lock does not exist on non-Chinese bootloaders
Samsung's Chinese handsets bootloaders have in 3 types of bootloader locks, the carrier lock, the CROM lock (which is enabled if the Chinese bootloader does not find the "KIWIBIRD" string written in the STEADY partition), and the reactivation lock, they are not carrier locked.
U.S. variants only have the Carrier and reactivation locks, there is no CROM lock to unlock on these devices (or any international variants either), U.S. variants are however carrier locked, the lock is hardcoded in the bootloader code (there is just no execution path to load an unsigned kernel on the consumer carrier locked variant bootloaders, there is no "lock" Qfuse anymore, the bootloader itself just has no carrier unlocking/locking support, it is always locked by design) and the bootloader is tied to the device ID, for example SM-G935F (which is One Time Programmable) and will refuse to run on anything but the device id that is hardcoded within it, obviously the bootloader is signed so you can't modify it, there is also a revocation mechanism involving Qfuses to make sure you can't downgrade to a vulnerable version (should one exist).
There are presumably Engineering versions of the bootloader that allow running unsigned kernels but those have not been leaked and they probably won't run on devices for which the production mode Qfuse has been blown (the device is in Engineering mode when that Qfuse is not set).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Um, no......this was not a repost, this was me sharing information that I gained from TMO. I and most tmo users are not active in XDA anymore because of the locked bootloader, so it's news to some people.

DesignGrits said:
So, I like to vent at companies on Twitter and any other social networks if they are not listening to their customers or taking advantage of loyal customers. So last night I started venting to T-Mobile asking about the bootloader and why we haven't heard anything at all. I mean, i'm sure most of us are on JUMP and could jump if we wanted to, but why, theres nothing better out, yet. Anyways to conclude my conversation with the rep, I got a confirmation from the rep saying:
"Good news! T-Mobile is working with Samsung to hopefully unlock bootloader!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully! keyword. Reps dont know jack. We know more then they know. They are out of loop. This isnt even post worthy lol

DesignGrits said:
Um, no......this was not a repost, this was me sharing information that I gained from TMO. I and most tmo users are not active in XDA anymore because of the locked bootloader, so it's news to some people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He was calling his post a repost, not yours.
Sent from my SM-G935T using XDA-Developers mobile app

Please continue this discussion here:
ROOT DISCUSSION - R.I.P. Sticky Root Guide SM-G935T -> SHOW YOUR TWEETS / E-MAIL / FB