So I emailed LG at [email protected] the following message:
Code:
Hello, I need the instructions to unlock the bootloader for my H810. Please send them. Thank you!
Five days later they responded:
Code:
Hello,
We are sorry to inform you that currently we have no plan to support bootloader unlock on LG H810.
Currently, the LG H815 (G4) for the European market supports unlocking the bootloader.
We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause.
For more information on unlocking the bootloader, please refer to the link below:
http://developer.lge.com/resource/mobile/RetrieveBootloader.dev?categoryTypeCode=ANRS
Best Regards,
LG Developer site Team
So when they said on their site here
Code:
We will add more devices with unlockable bootloaders unlocking permission progressively.
After giving instructions on how to unlock the bootloader for the H815, it seems a bit... misleading.
What's the confusion here? At the directive of the carriers, LG isn't about to give us full control of our device. At least not voluntarily.
You act like this is some how news that we hadn't already known for years... AT&T doesn't want us to unlock our Bootloaders END of story.
ATT has always been about locked bootloaders.
We've never expected to get one offically....
What about the new rule on unlocking devices recently approved? Can rhat be used in our favor and force an official unlock from them?
Your talking about carriers having to domestic unlock a device. That only applies to carrier usage. Doesn't help us in this case.
Sent from my LG-H810 using XDA Free mobile app
AT&T wouldn't even give me a carrier unlock code till I had completely paid off my phone. I wanted to pay it off completely, so I went to my online bill payment. There is NO option to pay for the phone. I must call customer service and give someone my credit card #. They found some loop-hole to get out of unlocking 2 of my phones now. Bad AT&T!!!
I don't know if it is going to do any good, and I don't know if this applies to other carriers, but it certainly can't hurt...
I just typed this up and submitted it to the FCC Consumer Complaint Center: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
I purchased a phone from AT&T outright (not through a contract). This phone (LG V20) uses LTE B17 (700Mhz). As part of the auction of the class C spectrum, it was stated that:
"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."
By AT&T locking and signing the bootloader of my phone, they are in violation of that clause.
I am no longer an AT&T customer, and am not using the phone on their network. I would like them to provide me with the OEM unlock code for my phone.
Please keep in mind that this is NOT the carrier unlock code so that the phone can be used on other carriers ...
this is the boot loader unlock code so that I can install a ROM that matches the carrier I am using (T-Mobile).
Lastly I would like to point out that AT&T does NOT make it clear that their boot loaders are locked with no way to unlock them or
I would never have purchased the phone from them.
Thank you,
-- Brian
I encourage anyone that has an AT&T v20 to submit something similar. I don't have the money to sue them, or I would because they ARE in violation since they use LTE B17.
I've been planning on getting the US996 anyway. Maybe others should do the same if they use AT&T or any of its MVNOs. Its also much cheaper: the H910 is $830+.
runningnak3d said:
I don't know if it is going to do any good, and I don't know if this applies to other carriers, but it certainly can't hurt...
I just typed this up and submitted it to the FCC Consumer Complaint Center: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
I purchased a phone from AT&T outright (not through a contract). This phone (LG V20) uses LTE B17 (700Mhz). As part of the auction of the class C spectrum, it was stated that:
"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."
By AT&T locking and signing the bootloader of my phone, they are in violation of that clause.
I am no longer an AT&T customer, and am not using the phone on their network. I would like them to provide me with the OEM unlock code for my phone.
Please keep in mind that this is NOT the carrier unlock code so that the phone can be used on other carriers ...
this is the boot loader unlock code so that I can install a ROM that matches the carrier I am using (T-Mobile).
Lastly I would like to point out that AT&T does NOT make it clear that their boot loaders are locked with no way to unlock them or
I would never have purchased the phone from them.
Thank you,
-- Brian
I encourage anyone that has an AT&T v20 to submit something similar. I don't have the money to sue them, or I would because they ARE in violation since they use LTE B17.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You may want to do some more research on this as from what you posted this applies to locking it to their Network. Basically, they can lock the bootloader or whatever but they can't lock the device to their Network. Verizon entered a similar deal when they got B13 LTE. That's why any Verizon phone thinking B13 has to be able to run on other networks as well, but they lock their bootloader's as the two have nothing to do with each other. Also, companies are not required to make it known that they lock their bootloader's and don't allow you to unlock them, that's where you have to do your own research before buying a phone. If you've been on XDA for a good amount of time, you'd have known to stay away from at&t as they have a long history of bootloader locking. Your best bet is usually unlocked devices (Nexus, HTC unlocked, etc.) or even most T-Mobile devices (and btw T-Mobile devices pretty much share same bands as at&t). But anyways, hopefully you get something from them although I highly doubt it. Like I said, from the wording it appears this only applies to Network locking not being allowed.
jeffsga88 said:
You may want to do some more research on this as from what you posted this applies to locking it to their Network. Basically, they can lock the bootloader or whatever but they can't lock the device to their Network. Verizon entered a similar deal when they got B13 LTE. That's why any Verizon phone thinking B13 has to be able to run on other networks as well, but they lock their bootloader's as the two have nothing to do with each other. Also, companies are not required to make it known that they lock their bootloader's and don't allow you to unlock them, that's where you have to do your own research before buying a phone. If you've been on XDA for a good amount of time, you'd have known to stay away from at&t as they have a long history of bootloader locking. Your best bet is usually unlocked devices (Nexus, HTC unlocked, etc.) or even most T-Mobile devices (and btw T-Mobile devices pretty much share same bands as at&t). But anyways, hopefully you get something from them although I highly doubt it. Like I said, from the wording it appears this only applies to Network locking not being allowed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did do some research, even had a lawyer look at the wording. It is ambiguous, and in contract law, any clause that is ambiguous benefits that signee. Now, this is not contract law, but there is hope
Yes, I will be getting a reply from AT&T -- received this from the FCC today:
Hi William,
Your Ticket No. XXXXXXX was served on AT&T Wireless on Apr 13 for its review and response.
AT&T Wireless will likely contact you in an effort to resolve your issue.
A response is due to the FCC no later than 30 days from today. AT&T Wireless will respond to you directly by postal mail.
You can view a list of frequently asked questions at: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/205082880.
We appreciate your submission and help in furthering the FCC’s mission on behalf of consumers.
I will update this post when I get the reply from AT&T. It would be in their best interest to just give me the OEM unlock code. What is funny is that I don't even want to run a custom ROM, I just want to remove the AT&T bloatware (#1 - it is bloatware, #2 - I am not on AT&T anymore so I couldn't use it if I wanted to).
Also, yes, I have been on XDA for quite some time, and am very familiar with AT&T and Verizon A-Hole policies concerning bootloaders. This was a deal that I just couldn't pass up.
Also, I know that there is a debug boot loader for the US996 that can be flashed using dirty santa, but that is NOT acceptable without a KDZ. I got a good deal on the phone, not a GREAT one
runningnak3d said:
I did do some research, even had a lawyer look at the wording. It is ambiguous, and in contract law, any clause that is ambiguous benefits that signee. Now, this is not contract law, but there is hope
Also, yes, I have been on XDA for quite some time, and am very familiar with AT&T and Verizon A-Hole policies concerning bootloaders. This was a deal that I just couldn't pass up.
Also, I know that there is a debug boot loader for the US996 that can be flashed using dirty santa, but that is NOT acceptable without a KDZ. I got a good deal on the phone, not a GREAT one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, the wording is ambiguous. Hopefully you get a good resolution out of this, but I wouldn't be surprised if they just responded stating that it has to do with network locking, but again hopefully that's not the case as it would be a major step forward if they just unlocked the bootloader. However, is not as simple as giving you an unlock code unless things really changed from G5 to V20. On G5, fastboot was completely disabled on AT&T. So, if that's the case with the V20, they would have to push an update to enable fastboot and allow using the unlock.bin file lg provides (and lg would have to add support for it to be unlocked from their site) or they could just be nice and push an update to enable fastboot oem unlock
As far as the kdz for AT&T, did you check this:
http://csmg.lgmobile.com:9002/csmg/b2c/client/auth_model_check2.jsp?esn=YOURIMEMHERE
Just try putting your imei in and see if it gives you a kdz file key or not. Can't try as I don't have an imei for at&t.
Anyways, best of luck and hopefully you get a good resolution from your complaint against them
jeffsga88 said:
Yes, the wording is ambiguous. Hopefully you get a good resolution out of this, but I wouldn't be surprised if they just responded stating that it has to do with network locking, but again hopefully that's not the case as it would be a major step forward if they just unlocked the bootloader. However, is not as simple as giving you an unlock code unless things really changed from G5 to V20. On G5, fastboot was completely disabled on AT&T. So, if that's the case with the V20, they would have to push an update to enable fastboot and allow using the unlock.bin file lg provides (and lg would have to add support for it to be unlocked from their site) or they could just be nice and push an update to enable fastboot oem unlock
As far as the kdz for AT&T, did you check this:
http://csmg.lgmobile.com:9002/csmg/b2c/client/auth_model_check2.jsp?esn=YOURIMEMHERE
Just try putting your imei in and see if it gives you a kdz file key or not. Can't try as I don't have an imei for at&t.
Anyways, best of luck and hopefully you get a good resolution from your complaint against them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know I didn't check to see if fastboot was disabled, but as you said, if they are going to grant my request they WILL find a way even if that means me taking my phone to AT&T and them giving me a US996
As for the KDZ, thanks, but that is the first thing that I did. From what I understand, due to the contracts that LG has with AT&T and Verizon, they aren't allowed to distribute the KDZ. After this experience, even with a GREAT deal, I will never do business with AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint ever again. I have NEVER had a locked boot loader on T-Mobile, and their network coverage is getting better and better (just had a fairly major auction win).
runningnak3d said:
You know I didn't check to see if fastboot was disabled, but as you said, if they are going to grant my request they WILL find a way even if that means me taking my phone to AT&T and them giving me a US996
As for the KDZ, thanks, but that is the first thing that I did. From what I understand, due to the contracts that LG has with AT&T and Verizon, they aren't allowed to distribute the KDZ. After this experience, even with a GREAT deal, I will never do business with AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint ever again. I have NEVER had a locked boot loader on T-Mobile, and their network coverage is getting better and better (just had a fairly major auction win).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
check the dirty elf thread i was able to convert my h910 to the us996 model
runningnak3d said:
You know I didn't check to see if fastboot was disabled, but as you said, if they are going to grant my request they WILL find a way even if that means me taking my phone to AT&T and them giving me a US996
As for the KDZ, thanks, but that is the first thing that I did. From what I understand, due to the contracts that LG has with AT&T and Verizon, they aren't allowed to distribute the KDZ. After this experience, even with a GREAT deal, I will never do business with AT&T, Verizon, or Sprint ever again. I have NEVER had a locked boot loader on T-Mobile, and their network coverage is getting better and better (just had a fairly major auction win).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, have to agree never will get a phone from AT&T, Verizon or Sprint, and even T-Mobile might not be a great choice in the future. With the G5, V20 and now the G6, even though T-MOBILE allows you to unlock the bootloader via fastboot, they've disabled the fastboot boot and flash commands. On G5 and V20 there were still options using dirtycow or flashing unsigned tot files for the G5, although that appears to have been patched by LG. The G6 T-Mobile version has the same thing fastboot oem unlock, yet they can't root or install twrp because the fastboot flash and boot commands were disabled and dirtycow was patched. Looking like only way to go is completely unlocked non carrier phones, sucks because there's usually no deals on those phones :crying: Another thing for the kdz would be to try using lg bridge and see if it finds the software, if it does it should create a log file with the web address of the kdz (although you may have to use something to monitor web traffic to see where it's connecting for the file). Hopefully that works, if not though not sure how else to get one (technically they're not distributing the kdz using this method as it is only to restore or update the device and doesn't give you the location unless you know where to look).
jerrycoffman45 said:
check the dirty elf thread i was able to convert my h910 to the us996 model
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That isn't a typo? I thought Dirty Elf was only for the h915 not the h910 (unless the us996 kdz has been successfully tested on the h910). Will have to give the thread a read again.
jeffsga88 said:
Yeah, have to agree never will get a phone from AT&T, Verizon or Sprint, and even T-Mobile might not be a great choice in the future. With the G5, V20 and now the G6, even though T-MOBILE allows you to unlock the bootloader via fastboot, they've disabled the fastboot boot and flash commands. On G5 and V20 there were still options using dirtycow or flashing unsigned tot files for the G5, although that appears to have been patched by LG. The G6 T-Mobile version has the same thing fastboot oem unlock, yet they can't root or install twrp because the fastboot flash and boot commands were disabled and dirtycow was patched. Looking like only way to go is completely unlocked non carrier phones, sucks because there's usually no deals on those phones :crying: Another thing for the kdz would be to try using lg bridge and see if it finds the software, if it does it should create a log file with the web address of the kdz (although you may have to use something to monitor web traffic to see where it's connecting for the file). Hopefully that works, if not though not sure how else to get one (technically they're not distributing the kdz using this method as it is only to restore or update the device and doesn't give you the location unless you know where to look).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using LG bridge is an awesome idea *smacks head*. Yea, setting up a sniffer isn't a problem. I will test that as soon as I get home.
If the US996 KDZ has been tested on the V20, and I can get the location / copy of the H910 KDZ then I will no longer have any issues rooting. Great thing about LG phones -- can't brick them as long as you have a KDZ
runningnak3d said:
That isn't a typo? I thought Dirty Elf was only for the h915 not the h910 (unless the us996 kdz has been successfully tested on the h910). Will have to give the thread a read again.
Using LG bridge is an awesome idea *smacks head*. Yea, setting up a sniffer isn't a problem. I will test that as soon as I get home.
If the US996 KDZ has been tested on the V20, and I can get the location / copy of the H910 KDZ then I will no longer have any issues rooting. Great thing about LG phones -- can't brick them as long as you have a KDZ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not a typo i have done this only thing you probably would not be able to use lg website to unlock the bootloader because the imei would be for a h910 edit: and i am not sure if you would get otas when i tried it said the phone was not registered
runningnak3d said:
Using LG bridge is an awesome idea *smacks head*. Yea, setting up a sniffer isn't a problem. I will test that as soon as I get home.
If the US996 KDZ has been tested on the V20, and I can get the location / copy of the H910 KDZ then I will no longer have any issues rooting. Great thing about LG phones -- can't brick them as long as you have a KDZ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, hopefully that will work for getting the kdz. Oh, and most times you can't brick LG phones, but... It is still possible to do and even a kdz won't help (Qualcomm 9008 mode or whatever it is).
I went through this same thing with ATT when I had a GS5. Basically their reply was no we aren't going to do anything. Then one of their managers called me, and they gave me a free LG G3.
Interesting, I have 2 H910s on T-Mo network since 3/30/17
runningnak3d said:
I don't know if it is going to do any good, and I don't know if this applies to other carriers, but it certainly can't hurt...
I just typed this up and submitted it to the FCC Consumer Complaint Center: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
I purchased a phone from AT&T outright (not through a contract). This phone (LG V20) uses LTE B17 (700Mhz). As part of the auction of the class C spectrum, it was stated that:
"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."
By AT&T locking and signing the bootloader of my phone, they are in violation of that clause.
I am no longer an AT&T customer, and am not using the phone on their network. I would like them to provide me with the OEM unlock code for my phone.
Please keep in mind that this is NOT the carrier unlock code so that the phone can be used on other carriers ...
this is the boot loader unlock code so that I can install a ROM that matches the carrier I am using (T-Mobile).
Lastly I would like to point out that AT&T does NOT make it clear that their boot loaders are locked with no way to unlock them or
I would never have purchased the phone from them.
Thank you,
-- Brian
I encourage anyone that has an AT&T v20 to submit something similar. I don't have the money to sue them, or I would because they ARE in violation since they use LTE B17.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Our problem exactly! I have 2 H910s on the T-Mobile network. It would be great to receive the bootloader unlock code or even if they could unlock it for us and allow us to go on about our business. Have you gotten a response?
wayne8821212 said:
Our problem exactly! I have 2 H910s on the T-Mobile network. It would be great to receive the bootloader unlock code or even if they could unlock it for us and allow us to go on about our business. Have you gotten a response?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I received a phone call, and the guy was actually knowledgeable. Basically he said AT&T's interpretation of that clause is exactly what we have assumed -- prevent locking to a carrier. That is just messed up since there was already a law in place to prevent them from doing that if the phone was paid for and the contract satisfied. It really sucks I don't have the money to fight this in court or I would.
They have 10 days in which to send me something in writing stating their reasons, and I have not received it yet.
However, I have opened another complaint and this one might have some more teeth. Because I am on T-Mobile, I can not receive any updates for my phone (H918 update won't work on an H910), and that most certainly is locking out functionality. I am not going to buy an AT&T Go Phone SIM just to update my phone. We will see where that goes.
I was informed that they couldn't give me an unlock code even if they were instructed to, because fastboot isn't even in the bootloader -- it is not just disabled (so no fastboot oem unlock blah.bin).
-- Brian
I think about the best I can hope for is they get tired of me and give me a refund even though I purchased the phone from a third party.
Wow why you all quoting so much???
A little editing makes the thread easier to read...
I was tempted to swap our H910s for 2 H918s but understandably T-Mobile wants $480 (down from$679) for the H918 and are only offering like $160 per H910.
Sent from my LG-H910 using XDA-Developers Legacy app
It's really not vague, it's telling you that this is pursuant to paragraph b which says
(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.
in other words, it has nothing to do with bootloaders and everything to do with restricting network access. I'm guessing your lawyer friend doesn't work with this kind of law or maybe you just showed him section e without section b or something. try not to clog up the fcc with your misunderstandings though, we are trying to clog them up with net neutrality complaints which are more important than your misreading of fcc regulations.