yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Ornate TrueSmart] Agent.:
I realized you meant dollar store shortly after posting lol, unfortunately I have even seen nicer chargers at the dollar store. $10 isn't bad but I guess at that price it makes sense to get a new charger if possible. I love how I am fortunate to have a semi-working watch but can't even use it because I don't have a working charger. Thanks for all of your help Omate -.-

I had the back off of the watch once, after putting it back on it worked fine up until I dropped it. The watch will turn on, it just won't charge. I will try your suggestion anyway when I have my watch around though. The assembly of the watch is disgustingly poor, there is what looks like dried glue seeping out of the SIM slot of my watch. Very lucky to have no issues with buttons or pin contact and etc.
[Ornate TrueSmart] rhineymac:
the problem ive had with the charger is the female usb port. its very loose. i wonder if we will ever see the xtra things we paid for, xtra chargers, tshirts sd cards. its bad enough that the watch is a mess, but to have a propriatiery charger is just icing on the cake. theres not way of fixing it. well there is,but it only lasted a week. the guy who fixed mine laughed at me and told me you get what u pay for. This is only partly true, the charger was $5 but isnt worth $1
[Ornate TrueSmart] trent999:
You could make a charger with a dollar store USB charging cable you cut up to expose the +5 and gnd wires, then tape them to the right pins on the back of the watch, carefully.
[Ornate TrueSmart] Agent.:
I'm pretty sure mine is the female USB port too, as my watch was plugged in when it fell so I assume the shock of the male USB caused it to break. Your guess is as good as mine as to if they ever plan on actually fulfilling their promises, they have done a pretty crummy job thus far. The charger is absolute junk, at least if we had the charging cable they initially promised we might be able to work with it a bit more.

That isn't a bad idea for a temporary fix but the fact that it even comes down to doing something like that is absurd in my opinion, the charger should have been done and ready while they were dealing with all of the other BS issues.
[Ornate TrueSmart] trent999:
Well, remember that for most owners the charging cradle they received works fine. It is not that poorly designed - mostly failures reported have been due to shoddy assembly. Similarly careless assembly has been reported on the watch itself in various areas.

I got my extra charger I ordered via Kickstarter, included in the package, but have never tested it nor needed to. I also figured out a way to charge the spare battery with an Anker universal charger, just in case. That charger came free with a couple of VGNexus batteries I bought from Amazon.

You might have better luck with the USB port repair staying fixed if you support its attachment to the board, such as it is, with an application of SuperGlue prior to resoldering the connections.

Holding a cable connector in place via only the contact solders would always be a bad design though.
[G2 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] muffinflesh:
Somehow I always manage to accidentally swipe over to the camera shortcut or the shortcut page to the left of the lockscreen and then I have to hit swipe back to the lockscreen page and press the arrow on the bottom to be able to unlock. Is there a way to disable the screens on the left and right so this won't happen?
[G2 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] AyDee:
You can disable the camera by swiping to the left then tapping to add widget. You will see a list of widgets w camera at the top. Just uncheck it. But the left swipe will still be there...

Maybe ask in the G2 Tweaksbox thread if the option to disable swiping to another screen can be added?
[G2 Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] muffinflesh:
That is exactly what I needed, had no idea you could disable that in that menu. Thank you!
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] bkwas:
currently have cwm 6.0.1.2-siyah. trying to install 6.0.4.4 so I can use kitkat rom but it wont install. install complete message shows but when I reboot old cwm still there. Help please.
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] cyril279:
What kernel are you using to achieve cwm 6.0.4.4?

Please describe the method that you are using to install the kernel.
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] bkwas:
kernel version 3.10.0-R93-AJK_v4.9_NoSwap-

root@DevDistro #1

copied sgh-i777 cwm v6.0.4.4zip to ext card and internal card then installed from ext and internal pulled battery then booted to recovery. Neither worked.

Thanks
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] cyril279:
I assume that the AJK kernel is your current kernel?

The recovery of these devices is a part of the kernel, so you will need to install a complete kernel to install the recovery -UNLESS- you are using an s959g.

1) Are you using an sgh-i777 or sgh-s959g?

2) Which KK firmware are you interested in installing? almost all of them link to a recommended kernel in the OP.
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] bkwas:
AJK kernel is my kernel

using an sgh-i777

AoCP-72-i777.zip

would that kernel be RenderBroken CM-11 Kernel.zip?
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] bkwas:
AJK kernel is my kernel

using an sgh-i777

AoCP-72-i777.zip
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] cyril279:
Honestly, I'm not sure which kernel aocp uses.

I recommend trying to flash render's cwm kernel, then reboot to recovery and see what happens.
[AT&T Samsung Galaxy S II SGH-I777] SteveMurphy:
I think you should read the OP of the AOCP rom you want to run. Read it thoroughly before you attempt anything at all - it tells you exactly what kernel will work with their rom.

Conversely, AOCP is no longer supported for our device! So that means you'll be on your own should you run into any problems.

There are several KK roms around that are current and fully supported - you'd be better off going with one of those.
[Upgrading, Modifying and Unlocking] bsimpson1:
There are plenty of apps that offer the ability to disable and re-enable services and receivers of other apps, and I know it's possible to do this via command line through the package manager, but is there any way to make a backup of the state (whether a particular component is enabled or disabled) of the receivers and services of an app? Is there an xml file somewhere or something that keeps track of these states for each app?
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] WebertRLZ:
Hi all,

I have my phone as it came from the store. All stock, not rooted, and I have a 32 GB Class 10 SD Card in it.

Through the Settings / Application Manager / On SD Card I have the option to thick what apps I'd like to move to the SD Card.

If I check any apps it acts like it was moving the app (even if I click on "Move to SD Card") but actually it stays in the device memory.

I can "move" all the apps to the SD card, the phone will tell me that they are on the SD card and it gives me the option to move them back to the device's memory, but for real there's nothing in my sd card, and device's memory is full.

Any ideia what's the problem? That feature works very well in my old Galaxy Y Duos.

Thank you!
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] fburgos:
It's a known issue the apps are moved to the internal (emulated sdcard) not the external sdcard
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] osvanberg:
Oh that sucks! I was just wondering the same thing..... :(

Skickat från min GT-I9195 via Tapatalk
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] :
You're completely wrong bro....

That is not a bug. When you move app to SDCard, it doesn't move large data. If you want to move the data and the game still works, go to the Play Store and search for FolderMount (NEEDS ROOT). Read the instructions carefully and use it. Thats what I do to move 10GB of data and still the game works. Good Luck.

Press THANKS if I helped!
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] WebertRLZ:
Thanks but it seems like there is something wrong. It doesn't move ANYTHING, though it says it's moved. That's an issue.
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] osvanberg:
It's like fburgos wrote earlier, it's an know bug on the Gs4mini. It sucks!

Skickat från min GT-I9195 via Tapatalk
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] fburgos:
That's the workaround I use folder mount, works nice as expected when moving obb, picture, downloads, music, and documents folder to the extsdcard.

I haven't moved apps to the sdcard lately but I'm pretty sure the apps data where in the emulated when I try that option the first time.
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] TNCS:
GL to SD also works: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.slf.ListglApp
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] WebertRLZ:
Do you guys think Samsung will provide a solution? I can't root it, I still need guarantee. My phone is still locked.

Maybe Kit Kat will solve this problem?
[Galaxy S 4 Mini Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] TNCS:
I doubt it, as this function isn't available in custom ROMs as well.

Unless it system apps you want to move, otherwise the GL to SD app I provide above will work. It just the free version only allows you link up to 5 apps.
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 3] rosystreasures:
can the sprint note 2 be flashed to t-mobile?
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 3] wizky911:
No. T-moble is a GSM carrier. Sprint is CDMA the radios won't pick up each others signal
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 3] Epix4G:
Yes they will as this is a world phone ie gsm too.... but sprint has to internationally unlock it and then you need to do the domestic unlock hack ... and before you waste my time responding again no the only way to have it unlocked is by sprint doing it ... they will not do it if it's a bad esn phone or if the phone doesn't meet certain criteria ....ie on a account for last 90 days etc

Sent from my SM-G900P using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 3] insane209:
Read this:

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2593305
[Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note 3] kaos420:
Hope of means note 3

Sent From My 0x1 Note 3.i love tep....
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Note: This is not asking how to unlock. Please do not tell me how to unlock it.

This thread is for discussing the Nexus 5's bootloader.

Current available bootloader versions:

hhz11d

hhz11k

Looking to work out the exact differences in these.

On a side-note, Is anyone aware of a way to accurately/successfully decompile the Nexus 5's bootloader in order to look into these?
[Nexus 5 General] simms22:
i wont tell you to unlock your bootloader, or explain how to. but i will tell you that questions go into the q&a section, not general. people dont look to answer question here, but they do look into q&a.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
This isn't really a Question thread. It's a discussion thread on the Nexus 5's Bootloader, which does unfortunately start with a question :/
[Nexus 5 General] simms22:
"Is anyone aware of a way to accurately/successfully decompile the Nexus 5's bootloader?"

is 100% a question, and the only real subject in your post. "EDIT: This is also for discussing the Nexus 5's bootloader." isnt really a way to start a discussion about bootloaders.
[Nexus 5 General] JunDavis:
I haven't seen it done but I'm pretty sure it might be possible? Just a guess.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Yeah, Took your feedback and applied it; note the better OP. How else would you start a discussion on bootloaders without mucking about in them, eh?

This thread is to discuss the bootloader on the Nexus 5; It's constraints, it's features and it's modifiability.
[Nexus 5 General] simms22:
the possibility to decompile the bootloader is there, but one of extreme difficulty. i have never seen it done on any android device since the very beginning of android. the bootloader is there to provide the phone security, and because of that it isnt made to be easy to do. it is nearly impossible, nearly because it was developed by humans, and humans make mistakes. will someone from xda be able to do it? most likely not.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
On the one hand, I'd actually say that the bootloader is not there to provide the phone security. Quite the contrary, in fact. Most bootloaders allow overflashing of the current stored data with the stock/factory data. This is a security flaw, in my eyes.

On the other hand regarding your 'developed by humans' comment: "Anything made by human can be torn down by human" - Source unknown.

The bootloader is a simple program of 2.44 mb of ARMv7 bytecode, hardly 'nearly impossible'.

In the long run, I'd like to see a boot-loader/Recovery pairing that does provide the security.
[Nexus 5 General] JunDavis:
The Optimus 3D
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Do you have some more details on this? A cursory google is contaminated with 'plshow2unlock'
[Nexus 5 General] JunDavis:
I think the RSA keys were leaked for that device which allowed for for custom u-boot images.

Edit: http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1971014

Yep
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Thanks for this, looks interesting!

Found some more resources regarding the boot.img file, so going to go digging.
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
Boot.img is the kernel/ramdisk not the bootloader.

As for the bootloader It CAN be decompiled, but is pretty pointless as we have fast boot and access fully.

The reason to decompile was for things like LG which it has been disabled/blocked from access and the only way to access it is to decompile the bootloader and find a exploitable flaw to unlock it like how the nexus is.

If for any reason you still wanna try you need to know c language and know hex and hashes.

IDA Pro + hex + C language is your friend.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
I know all this.

I would like to lock the bootloader and Recovery in a root-friendly way, and it seems like the bootloader is the place to start.

What I meant by 'resources' was links to the required tools. Nosying inside them now.
[Nexus 5 General] vin4yak:
What do you mean by "Lock bootloader and recovery in Root Friendly way" ?? :eek:
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Such that the bootloader will always boot to the (secured, with tracking applications) Android instance underlying it if someone attempts to enter fastboot/recovery mode without authorisation from the owner of the device.

Additional idea could be to lock out control to the power switch if a 'stolen' flag is set.
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
So to say you want to make a replica of the samsung knox but even more secure to the point of making the device useless if needed.

For this you would decompile the bootloader edit the source Code then create a working img since you do not have the keys... Then you have what you want
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
On the contrary, the device will still be unlockable by an authorised user/owner, therefore the device is useless to a thief for example, but when recovered it can be re-activated.
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
Download mode has full read & write access to the bootloader which would make your idea useless again.

Samsung created a key system which download mode was custom made to check the key in the bootloader to see if the bootloader could be written or not.

Without this type of system any user could replace the bootloader back with the original..

Even then further down the line you still would have a useless system since the hardware is completely open which samsung has changed in a way to make changing the bootloader impossible.

Jtaging the device would defeat your idea.

Im not trying to kill your idea but i am showing you the reason why its just not worth it.

Basically to get the perfect system the jtag,bootloader,download mode would all have to be modified then a 2nd operation like multirom would need to be made to secure it the exact way you want it as android os is in user mode and not boot mode like recovery is.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
The aim isn't to 100% secure the device, but to buy the time required to locate and recover the device. The idea would be to trick a device thief that the device will be an easy one that they can simply use fastboot/recovery to de-protect.

What would be a nice possible solution would be for the bootloader to boot android as normal allowing location/recovery processes to work, but preventing a false fastboot screen.

It's not about 100% security, but about a better chance of recovery.
[Nexus 5 General] Citizen_Snips:
[MENTION=422124]looney[/MENTION]cgb2 why are you raining all over this guys parade? Seriously...

So he wants to try to make a more secure boot loader and fastboot. Just because you think it might not be possible or even worth it doesn't mean he shouldn't. If everyone thought like that then this site wouldn't even exist right now!! Its not like he's wasting any of your time (no one forces you to keep commenting!). This sounds really interesting to me. I don't mean to be rude, you seem knowledgeable on the subject, but if all you're going to do is shoot him down instead of help maybe you shouldn't comment here anymore. He's just trying to make a contribution to the forum, man. Relax...
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
If you actually took the time to understand my comments then you would know im just trying to help.

If your making a security type of anything you need to know the ins and outs of what could or might happen.

So if he does create it he knows what type of ideas to keep in mind. Also most devs will not get into this subject most of the time because this could be interpreted to illegal subjects as virus making, hacking, illegal source code viewing.

Which is why i left my last post as my LAST post.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
That's a nice list of perfectly legal things you've listed right there.

Thanks for your contributions though, you're helping steer the ideas about to fit a realistic possibility.

I still really don't understand why developers don't do some basic security to raise the skill/knowledge threshold to steal a device.
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
:p because companies created a killswitch in android long ago and are thinking about really activating it towards theft soon. Money over customer satisfactory
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
That doesn't even make any sense.
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
There is an unfinished embedded killswitch code which if activated it will make the android device totally unusable.

Google created the code because ATT requested it to be made and it became a default added code in all android versions.

Many companies like ATT, Verizon, T-Mobile requested for it to be enabled to fight against theft, but it was not allowed because of the risk of someone exploiting the code and causing chaos.

Now they are trying again to have courts agree to enable the feature which was once created for the purpose of theft.

So to make this short the companies basicly made this to fight against theft, but after it is enabled the phone is unusable causing the real owner & theif to be forced to purchase a new phone.

Makes sence now? Money over customer satisfactory...
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
But they'd just take it out and reflash the boot **** with JTAG
[Nexus 5 General] efrant:
Yes, you can disassemble the bootloader. [MENTION=2343796]rolle3k[/MENTION] did it for the Nexus One using IDA Pro back in Jan/2011. (His thread is here.) The problem then became to find a way to flash it, given that it was not signed.

From there, [MENTION=3983823]dla5244[/MENTION] found an exploit to be able to flash unsigned bootloaders to the Nexus One, and Blackrose was born. dla5244 was able to add features, for example, among others, removing the ability to use fastboot unless you enter a password, changing the partition sizes, etc.

However, you always have to remember that there are other utilities that are lower-level than fastboot. For example, for OMAP SoC's there is OMAPFlash, which has direct access to the NAND memory, and can completely by-pass fastboot. OMAPFlash writes directly to NAND, with the device not even powered on at all (i.e., turned completely OFF). I don't know much about Snapdragon SoC's, but I would assume the QPST (or some other utility) would be able to do the same thing. This makes any "increased security" (that you think you are getting from further locking up the bootloader even more) a complete farce (assuming you would even be able to flash an unsigned bootloader).
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
After the kill switch it corrupts the bootloader. And yes you are correct a jtag could fix it if there is no e-fuses. I dont know that much about the nexus, but LG loves e-fuses.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
Thanks for those links!

Regarding your other comments about increasing security, as I mentioned prior, the main aim of the whole exercise is not to add 'security' per se but to buy time to recover a lost or stolen device prior to it being fully reflashed.

My current imagining of how it could work is that attempting to boot the device into fastboot/recovery without somehow telling it you want to boot into said modes, it would boot up android as normal, allowing your security apps and what have you to delete/locate/phone home as desired, whilst perhaps engaging in trickery in order to maintain the state of being booted into full android for as long as possible, giving the device owner a higher chance of recovery.

Obviously this will not be perfect, but when it comes to devices, that additional 10 minutes of additional networked GPS when the thief is following online tutorials to reset the device, could mean recovery of that £300+ asset or at least a chance to punish the thief.
[Nexus 5 General] DanseMacabreD2:
For reference:

The bootloader does seem to be an lkernel clone.

IOMAP is here: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/lk/+/caf/master/platform/msm8974/include/platform/iomap.h

Looks similar to this: http://blog.azimuthsecurity.com/2013/05/exploiting-samsung-galaxy-s4-secure-boot.html

Still digging about in the bootloader, it clocks up at about 400 kilobytes, but it's confusing as heck!
[Nexus 5 General] loonycgb2:
http://time.com/64871/phone-makers-and-carriers-agree-to-anti-theft-kill-switches/

This might interest anyone worried about security.
[Nexus 5 General] sours:
When someone brings up the fact that security can be subverted at a lower level as an excuse to not try, it always strikes me as the same existential argument as "Entropy exist so why bother doing anything ever?"

Would altering the bootloader assembly to add jumps to a password screen before enabling download/fastboot mode be possible or is the whole thing hardware signed?
[Nexus 5 General] efrant:
Not sure if you were referring to my comment, but if so, my comment wasn't suggesting anyone to not try to "add security" to the bootloader. I was merely stating that whatever "security" you add to the bootloader, keep in mind that it can easily be bypassed. Just a warning so that the "added security" does not lull anyone into believing it is more secure.

That said, the OP has made it clear that it is not about increased security, just about delaying the time before someone can wipe a stolen device so that there is a better chance of recovery. Making it harder to use fastboot would likely achieve that.

That was done with the Nexus One, as per my link. But, again, as I mentioned, one just needs to use QPST to overwrite the bootloader, and the password feature is gone.
[Nexus 5 General] sours:
Not your post, just that in general when ever someone suggest security enhancements the consensus seems to be that no one should even bother to make things as secure as possible or even more secure because jtag exists or nvram can be de-soldered and reflowed back on the board with $100,000 pieces of equipment, or electron microscopes can alter bits in memory.
[Nexus 5 General] sours:
I am curious though have you confirmed that Qualcomm's developer tools work this way on the nexus 5 or is that speculation? Also would that work through usb or would you need to make a jtag connection?