yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
I got 'em. Which ones do you need? I wasn't sure which one I was supposed to download, so I got them all.

Now all we need is root for 4.4.2 and I'll be super happy :D

Edit- looks like Dank beat me to it...
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
Gotta be quick on the draw with matters like this :cowboy:. Haha. 'Dnak'... hmm... I like. :D

Side note: if anyone needs me, I'll be here frantically refreshing this page. lol.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
Sorry, that was a typo. Stupid fingers :mad:
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] imnew214:
Keeping my fingers crossed on this one. Even though I'll just stay rooted on 4.3 until this is confirmed to work.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
Well it's got to be something interesting!!!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
Thanks dank. I'll DL them later. We got designgears in on it. Hash should be coming in soon as well. This is epic!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jerrycoffman45:
hope it works for 4.4.2
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
Would unlocking the bootloader allow us to downgrade to 4.3 so we can root?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] RUNNERX:
No
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
:crying:
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
This makes me moist
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
Yes it would. What would we have stopping us from downgrading?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
I would just like to add that at any point I'd be more than happy to be involved in the testing process at any stage. I'm on official NC2 and have a pretty good grasp on things, albeit not super adept with python
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jpcdeux:
Just when I was about to get rid of this!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] majortaylor:
I will test as well if needed
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
I'm willing to test as well.

If this works he will become a very rich man.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] RUNNERX:
What would make the downgrade possible?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
Apparently my dad is familiar with Python. I'll see what he can do for us.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
Not having locked bootloaders
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
hahahah
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
*facepalm* ........
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] tropazr:
Don't want to interrupt here but...uhhhh...holy -----!!!!!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Walter.White:
I'm so ready for some custom Kernels and some ASOP goodies (Mostly PAC)
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
I just want custom kernels for speed and battery. I prefer TW on the Note 3.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] _Burst_:
Custom Recovery is a big one too.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] majortaylor:
An actual recovery like twrp would be nice too! But a custom kernel that can match the battery life of the t mobile variant would just be awesome
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
That is what we would need to flash custom kernels.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jpcdeux:
I'm not greedy. Plain old root would be nice
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] majortaylor:
I know. Just stating that having an actual recovery and not ss would be the biggest thing for me
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Namelesswonder:
If we potentially are able to unlock the bootloader, would it be possible to go back to stock after doing so? Would it just be as simple as flashing back the stock bootloader? Sorry, just don't really know much about it.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Walter.White:
You can flash kernel without twrp. Simply need unlocked bl. But yeah recovery would be nice. Personally I'm looking forward to Temasek's N3 kernel. Battery life on that one is just ridiculous.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] lildoggs:
If this works. This would be sooo sweet. Keeping my fingers crossed.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
Either way... This is a huge step for all locked bootloader Qualcomm Samsung phones.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jpcdeux:
Wonder how long till any things known...
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] gtshiftin6:
I want full recovery kernels and aosp/cm11 so tired of touch wiz!!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jjr3211:
I would be happy with just about anything no root really stinks
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Walter.White:
And there it goes. Dreams crushed lol Oh well.

https://twitter.com/TeamAndIRC/status/456972152198033408
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jpcdeux:
Yep. Time to ditch it
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
Well jdjdjhhfirbjidjdjjf!!!!!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Walter.White:
Oh well. Now only if someone could leak that private signing key.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
So it doesn't work or what?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Walter.White:
Most likely it won't since we still need samsung's private signing key to resign a file or hash checking will fail.

Those two are well-known devs, so I would believe with what they said.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
Well ****. My day is ruined :(
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
I'm not gonna give up hope until designgears and the ones working on it come out and say otherwise. I mean, they've been working on it all day now, I think they would have realized that simple of a problem pretty quick.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] omeomyo:
Can't follow link
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
Yeah, that was his response when I asked about the keys. They've got it. Don't believe the nay-sayers just yet. :good::fingers-crossed:
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] mrkhigh:
I don't know what will happen here.

But evil potato man is the one that showed us how to go to mj5 for flashing which makes me wonder if his n3 is unlocked now and we were missing something... I have to admit I've been annoyed at all this full unlocked boot loader stuff when a work around is just as good and a million times more likely then something like this happens and sparks my belief in anything can happen again.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] carl1961:
evil potato man, did what he could for MJ5,

NC2 is another world, with adb and Heimdall blocked and security checks stronger and biggest problem bootloader locked at A3
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] mrkhigh:
I realize that. I'm just stuck on the fact he owns an n3 and is the one who brought us this exploit.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] carl1961:
This is not a exploit, it is signing tools
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
Legit == yes

Useful to unlock samsung devices == no, not at all, by any reach.

The keys provided are qualcomm test keys, not production keys, and no OEM keys are included. The leak isn't even from Samsung, anyone willing to look will notice it is a Sony leak.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] TTLayland:
Jcase your killing my dreams. But on a serious note thank you. Still I see that others feel it could still be useful in figuring out what to do. Do you believe this to be the case.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] rebel1699:
Whats the deal with the included aboot.mbn included in the upload? Its an mj5 aboot from samsung. So, is it legitimately signed and open?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
Its an aboot that has been resigned
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] omeomyo:
So it will in no way work for us
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] gtshiftin6:
I'm giving this til the one plus one launches then im selling
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] omeomyo:
Yea if the bootloader can't be unlocked then I won't be keeping the phone no matter how much I like it
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] RUNNERX:
On the same bandwagon, the note is nice but I have had enough of the lock down.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
I have had the same thoughts as yall. I don't see these signing tools as working out for the end users anytime soon, so i said screw it. I just ordered a T-mobile note 3, gonna put TWRP on that hoe and change the APNs to AT&T, and shove my AT&T sim in her and boom. Then resell my AT&T note 3 and im good to go. Cause even if we were able to unlock this bootloader, once AT&T finds out, they'll just release an update to kill it and the process starts all over again.

Will still throw in pot for this bounty, but graydiggy, if you could reduce my pledge on full bootloader unlock from $25 to $10. thanks in advance. and retract $10 pledge for root.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] hipporun:
May I ask where you got your T-Mobile note 3 and how much it was. Im considering this path...
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
I just ordered off swappa. Was another $500 but I'll make most of that back when I resell my at&t note 3
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] tonyd371:
The t mobile note 3 is locked down to

with the update to kitkat it is not able to do anything but be a phone like the note that at&t has i have both and i am very disappointed that i get a t mobile and it is locked with kitkat. just my luck though i guess.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
T mobile note kitkat is not locked down lol. Full root and full recovery on 4.4.2. Only limitation is that currently unable to downgrade bootloader from 4.4.2 to 4.3. Yes a hiccup, but can overcome it
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] tonyd371:
Thanks where can i find this info

i have looked everywhere that i know and could not find a root for kitkat
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Face_Plant:
Any word from the devs yet?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] TTLayland:
They deleted the thread.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jjr3211:
I am tired of every thing being locked down I might just go buy a nexus 5
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
Due to copyright infringement claims, I have (rightfully) removed mirrors for the copyrighted material from this thread.

Further posting of mirrored links come with a free infraction and closing of the thread.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Honeybadger:
So can you tell us how to coordinate in here with files and information so we can accomplish our goal without copywrite violations?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
I don't coordinate community efforts, not part of my duties nor do I enjoy it. The files are not going to unlock your device. In fact, they are files from Sony and Qualcom, not even Samsung. Barking up the wrong tree on both fronts.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Honeybadger:
Then I completely agree with your advisement and actions. Thank you.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
I had no idea that the files were copy written, I'll delete my mirror right now.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] TTLayland:
Jcase I'm curious if the files will end up helping any device? Those files are out in the open now. Your thoughts?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
It says proprietary, confidential and copyright Qualcomm all over them.

No opinion
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Dankchild:
Awwwww $%&#!

If you mirrored these files, I suggest deleting them now.

Yeah, that's what I get for not paying attention to the headers. #noobmove
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] SpikeyPsyche:
Too bad.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Jakman85:
This was the most exciting and disappointing thread I have seen in a long time... Not that I have any say, but I personally think this thread should be locked and forgotten.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] inneyeseakay:
You can unlock bootloader on n900t, you can flash rooted KitKat roms all day... I sold my N900A in favor of an N900T for this reason as well and now love the phone! :)

Swiftkeyed from my SM-N900T on AT&T
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
Yeah to anyone on kitkat, if you want to unlock your bootloader, sell your at&t note and get a tmobile one lolol. seriously the only option
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Rukbat:
Aside from the grammar (it's copyrighted - it's the right to copy), in the US, anything anyone writes is copyright protected according to the copyright laws, unless specifically stated otherwise. (I think we agree, when we sign up ere, that our posts become property of the forum. Otherwise we'd each retain copyright to our own posts.) This includes not just the written word, but songs, speeches, videos, etc. So if the information was published, we can legally talk about it (but maybe not according to the forum rules - I don't know), but we can't post copies of portions (or the whole) unless it falls under fair use. So saying "Qualcom says that any file can be xxx etc. when they say xyz" is fine, but posting a part of a copyrighted document just to get the document out in public is a violation.

(IANAL, so I may have missed a few fine details.)

I have a huge problem with Samsung/AT&T/Verizon locking the phones up so tight, but I have no problem with mods keeping the forum from breaking the law, even if breaking the law would let us flash ROMs to our phones. The law doesn't end with "unless it's inconvenient".
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
The removed files were not even Samsung in origin, they were from Sony. They were nothing new, nor useful for Samsung.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Rukbat:
Okay, so that's an additional reason for you to remove the links, even if it's a big disappointment (no, not finding the toy in a Cracker Jacks box is a big disappointment - this just plain sucks) that we don't have a possible way to break the lock on the BL.

But as a software developer for over 40 years, I'm just against theft of IP in general, and posting links to something like this at least comes close to that, if it doesn't step over the line completely.

Bottom line, I'm bummed that I can't root 4.4.2 and flash kernels to it, but (not that my vote counts very much here) I support you 100% in being against posting what shouldn't be posted. Even if no one could get in trouble for it, it's just not right, and if we can't open this phone up without being the "bad guy", so be it. We just vote against it with our wallets next time and let Samsung eat their bootloaders.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] inneyeseakay:
Isn't it more AT&T/Verizon than Samsung...?

Swiftkeyed from my SM-N900T on AT&T
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
No, my reason for removing the link was entirely this: https://github.com/xda/Notices/blob/master/2014/Cyveillance-2014-04-20.md

Yes vote with your wallets, buy the developer/unlocked variants of the device if you want root. They will make more of what sells well.

Good security is just plain good for the average consumer.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Rukbat:
I have no problem with a legitimate takedown notice either. If I did, I wouldn't argue here, I'd email the guy who made the request and present my case for withdrawing his request. (Or don't right and wrong matter any more? Sometimes they don't seem to.)

I haven't looked into this one too deeply because, since I don't work for any big company whose network I want to connect to, it doesn't concern me directly, but from what I've read in passing, Knox and Swiss cheese have a lot in common. And wouldn't something like Safestrap be a lot easier if the company wanted to wipe company stuff from your phone when you left? Just wipe that ROM (and make sure that the company data was in a part of storage that got wiped with the ROM). From what I've read (and my sources could be complete idiots or total geniuses) Knox is more marketing than well-thought-out security. I'm sure they could have done it without hurting our ability to fully customize our phones. (And, from what I understand, the EU doesn't allow rooting and ROMing to kill the warranty. If it works for the entire EU, it could work for the US too. There are plenty of modders in Europe.)
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
There is no legitimate case for width-drawling the request. It was material taken/stolen from an improperly secured server from a partner corporation who paid for access to it. Its piracy, and theft of trade secrets.

I'm not sure the point you are making, root in and of itself is a lapse in security, so is safetrap by default
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Rukbat:
Oh, I didn't mean in this case, I meant that if I had an issue with a takedown request, this isn't the place to discuss it. An email (or f2f meeting or phone call, etc.) with the requester is.

Again, just from what I've been reading, Knox isn't secure. But I think an approach more like SS would have been a better way for them to have started with, and at the same time, made those of us who like to tinker with our phones consider Samsung for our next phone.

Rooting has always been an issue. It's a security issue, it's a warranty issue and it's (with some companies, at least, and I say this as an ex-insider) it's a "macho" issue - "you don't need root, we know what you need and we put it on your phone".
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jc2470:
I'm sorry while I don't condone piracy, there is a fine line between what everyone does on xda, and piracy/ taking other peoples property or plain giving out their trade secrets as u say. I am sure u and a lot of people on here will disagree, but I can almost promise u the phone manufacturers don't agree with half the stuff going on here. I see apk's from other phones ripped and deodexed from other models / brands of phones and made available to all on here, while it may have not been for sale doesn't mean it isn't stealing. Those features / apps on those phones are only available on those phones, and some of u guys take them because u feel u should have them and other people also.

What is the difference?

One of these examples beats audio apk That is exclusive to htc phones and hp laptops yet, it is available on here or at least it was. Its ok because it wasn't for sale somewheres? htc had to pay for that right to use it, so should go without saying that the people that ripped it, and the people that use it should also pay.

Anyways not trying to start a argument, I just read a lot of stuff on here, and some stuff is oh no that is wrong remove it, and others in almost same circumstances is condoned / allowed. I am pretty sure the manufacturers wouldn't be ok with taking their property.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
There is a difference in a compiled available apk, and confidential source code / tools never publicly available.

Also well, they asked. When an OEM asks for removal, and the request is legit we do it. We have removed leaked builds, and source in the past from multiple OEMs, Qualcomm isn't special.

It's the law, and we kinda want XDA to stay around.

Also, again, these files had no reason to be where they were. They were previously leaked by Sony (not Samsung). The poster lied to us (me directly) about the origin.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] badler6545:
Hey I hope this isn't too noobish of a question, but I'm trying to gain a greater understanding. From my understanding, it is impossible to root 4.4.2, however I'm running the XNOTE 12 4.4.2 ROM. Does that mean I'm not rooted despite running a custom rom with Xposed tweaks and other things?

More directly related to the thread, is there even a remote chance here onward of our AT&T model having a cracked bootloader? I don't want to make a jump to the T-Mobile version, but I also don't want to be frustrated the next year and a half.

Thanks!
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] Gearshift:
All custom kitkat ROMs are pre-rooted. The difference is that these ROMs make use of previous or the the leak (MLG) bootloaders, which is not the same 1024 bit fort knox bootloader that NC2 (official kitkat) has. You will be able to flash different custom 4.4.2 ROMs and whatnot, but you'll likely never be able to update from here on out, and if you do update to any official firmware, you'll be boned. Honestly I don't see anyone figuring out a workaround anytime soon, if ever. My t-mobile note 3 comes in the mail in a few hours
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] carl1961:
I feel that AT&T will soon have to come out with a Full NC2 or newer KitKat, because for even any odd issue from a OTA update fail after the aboot flashed, you cannot get back to previous builds because of the A3 bootloader. If they had a Full update they would have very few soft bricked phones returning, right now the [ROM][GUIDE][4/21][AT&T][NC2_Bootloader][N900A MGL KITKAT][Stuck Download-Mode FIX] is the only way to get your phone usable if you took the A3 bootloader and had a incomplete install.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] mrkhigh:
A full bootloader unlock is unlikely without Samsung knowledge a secondary boot loader is what I think we'll likely see. It is done by finding an exploit in the boot process then hijacking it. It is what we have for the kindle fire HD and it is just the same to us as a boot loader unlock.

I am by no means a Dev but this I'd what I think is likely. PS. How similar is the gs5 vs note in these aspects?
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] graydiggy:
That is what loki did as well as what SS does.... Unfortunately, loki was patched with the S4 and the patch was implemented in the Note 3 before release.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] raduque:
I don't believe in the current concepts of intellectual property or copyright*, but I applaud you for staying on the correct side of the law.

Flaunting the ability to store and download everything is what gets websites taken away.

The fact that corporations and people have the ability to buy enough of our government to be ABLE to take away websites, well that's another matter for another thread.

*(note that I am not a pirate and I don't think it's OK to simply take everything without compensating the creator, but the current concepts of IP and copyright and their laws need to be thrown out)
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] evilpotatoman:
Whoa, I never lied to anyone regarding the source. In fact only 1 person asked about the source (not including the nice dmca notice), and I told them.

The info posted publicly was a legit qualcomm tool, it is used across vendors.

I'm very sorry to get hopes up, but calling me a liar is unnecessary. I've helped countless people with my restore method and defaming me isn't appreciated and only scares futures users into using unproven, possibly more dangerous, methods.

Moving forward, I'll refrain from hysteria releases. I won't ask for help from developers, I'll just work on my own when I have time like I've done in the past. It may not be "as juicy" as your preferred security bulletin leaks, but my contribution will help someone. Hell, it may even contribute to some of your future efforts, and that was the whole point.

Edit-

To the whole stepping over the line on sharing this info - the information contained in the qpsa tool isn't new information. We all know how to sign images. Releasing that info would not affect QCom's bottom line. It does not make them money, therefore I felt okay with posting it. The real issue was the certificates posted. I understand QCom's issue with those being shared (they'll just update remotely to recover from the loss). It just gave us a bit of a head start.

Note - Trade secrets are only trade secrets if a reasonable attempt at security is performed. I found all the files through a friggin Google search.

If anything I feel that the ethical issues surrounding this conversation is the real concern. I'm the one who that will ultimately have to deal with it though. I promise you'll sleep soundly after all is said and done. I promise that I'll continue to use the limited resources I have to force my equipment do the things I want it to. If I have to use proprietary code to get it to that state I'll still do it - my device is mine, doesn't that make it an IP?

Tell me you wouldn't unlock your Note 3 even if you understood that the method utilized close sourced code.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
I questioned the source on the 18th in a PM to you, I can post the PM if you wish. I don't normally like posting private communication, but just tell me that your ok with it and i will.

[MENTION=2348906]designgears[/MENTION]
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] evilpotatoman:
ok- 2 people asked. I still told you both where I got them. A NAS (network attached storage) was indexed by Google. Jesus, you want to hear "I was excited to talk to justin case. I look up to his accomplishments and what he's done, and hope we can work together to get an unlock method going. Maybe I'll withhold the whole 'how I got to the NAS (Google search) and just tell him a NAS."

I never defended that it wasn't from an apparent Sony server. Moreover, I never LIED about it.
[AT&T Galaxy Note 3 General] jcase:
- evilpotatoman April 18th 2014

I don't want to hear anything