yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[SuperSU] Phil3759:
Maybe a little 2 lines in op asking devs not to request info on hack methods until you mention it will reduce these posts. Well, most noobs won't read op...

Anyway, the current hack documentation made me and Note 4 users happy, at least those like me that hate bling-bling modding.

So, thank you for having continued the dev, else we'd all be still on permissive generic kernels
[SuperSU] fhem:
I understand guys --- I have read, done, and tried all many numerous times and ways. I am an old retired guy and this is my hobby. I am truely sorry if I have offended or overreached. Just trying to get some help from the XDA community. I will keep follwing the progress and wait. Thanks to all.
[SuperSU] IronTechmonkey:
Would it also be relatively safe to flash on top of ROM running latest stable SuperSU (experienced "flasher" - well backed up).
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
Actually yes, it is safe to do that. I know you moved on from the AHD, but with me on CM11, i had 2.46 on it, updated to 2.49 up to 2.52 with no issues, no bricking, bootloops, etc.
[SuperSU] TR2N:
No problems here, my few little things like LMT, Root Explorer, Flashify and some other goodies are working as they should. I can live with a kernel / SuperSU combo.

Was on Marshmallow stock (Shamu), flashed TWRP over fastboot, flashed the modified stock kernel with encryption from here

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3218958

[Kernel] [Marshmallow] [MRA58K] Custom "Stock" kernel with root and color control

rebooted TWRP and flashed SuperSU. Rebooted my device without any wipe. Works perfectly.

Thank you once again Chainfire!!
[SuperSU] Capt4Chris:
Just wanted to provide some feedback for others. I have a Nexus 5 on Marshmallow 6.0. I flashed Chainfire's boot.img then flashed TWRP 2.8.6.1. Then I sideloaded SuperSU 2.52. After all that, my data was still there. It wasn't wiped. To provide some context: My device is not encrypted. My bootloader was already unlocked. I was rooted on 5.1.1 before this.

Hope this helps others coming from the same place. Thank you Chainfire for all the work you do!!!
[SuperSU] IronTechmonkey:
On Moto E/US/3G/XT1511, CM12.1 recent nightly previously running SuperSU 2.46 flashed from TWRP 2.8.7 at first ROM installation; flashing 2.52 with Dalvik/Cache wipes before and after yielded a seamless transition. Tx [MENTION=3776758]Capt4Chris[/MENTION] and [MENTION=4895937]palmbeach05[/MENTION] for reassurance.
[SuperSU] jackeagle:
Mod Edit

Thread Cleaned.

Members this thread is cleaned twice with more than 2 pages of flaming posts within a day. this stops here. follow the wishes of OP and stop asking ETA's of any kind.Anymore if flaming posts/off topic or any such activity is found in this thread serious actions will be taken against offender.

Consider this has FINAL WARNING.
[SuperSU] Rakeesh_j:
Actually I did search, and I've read that already. What it doesn't answer (and what I asked) is what Google's intent is for rooted users. On the one hand, they specifically mention that they know root users are their most enthusiastic customers and don't want to step on their toes too much. On the other hand, they want more device security, as outlined in that piece you linked.

That's why I'm wondering whether or not they've hinted at taking steps to provide both (and yes, you can have both; a good suggestion for that has been to allow the end users to load their own signing keys while keeping a locked bootloader.)
[SuperSU] Evo_Shift:
If my phone seems to be working fine is there a reason to update SuperSU when a new version drops? Like should I go into TWRP and flash SuperSu 2.52 over 2.50 for any reason?
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
2.51 - support for x86

2.52 - more M support (see changelog)

If you need both, or want to have the most up to date, update.

---------- Post added at 02:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:18 PM ----------

Angling it that way, it seems like they're trying to do both. Obviously the security side of things has been implemented (verity, google pay, stagefright and other issues being patched). Its for the best not just for their reputation, but also for the consumers/device users. In this day and age where things are more and more digital, a weakness or a vulnerability that is exploited (for bad purposes of course), can be crippling to an individual, group, company, etc. On the other hand, having root grants a user rights they normally don't have on a pure stock, un-modded device. Google knows that if they lock it down, they will have a mess on their hands. They seem to want to allow root, but are trying to keep the secure environment for everyone's benefit. Exact plans are unknown from what I've seen so far.
[SuperSU] andy hall:
2.52 working fine on latest LP ROM by [MENTION=4329165]ivanich[/MENTION] for sensation.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
My apologies for the drama, and thank the mods for cleaning it up. Could've been prevented on my end, probably. Back to work!
[SuperSU] osm0sis:
Apologies for self-quoting, but I feel this got missed over the weekend, especially after all the hubbub.. :eek:
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
I didn't miss it, I put it on the to-do list.
[SuperSU] zerosum0:
Rooters maybe the most enthusiastic, but we are a small group, in the scheme of things. They make no money from most of Us, due to Adblock etc. They want rooting gone IMO even though we are a great source of bug finders etc. Rooting is going to be harder and harder. I won't entertain any phone other than Nexus due to this. Samsung is way too much trouble.
[SuperSU] shaggyskunk:
Yet the Note 5 has been rooted for at least a couple of weeks - And with the Exynos chip - I'm not so sure that I would give up on Samsung devices just yet - Even though rumors are just that - Some leaks are suggesting that Samsung will have the Qualcomm chip in the Note 6 - Along with an External sd card?

Sent From my SM-N910W8 Running SlimRemix V5.1
[SuperSU] Srandista:
Yes, here in EU are phones also unlocked. But that KNOX tripping thing still stays...
[SuperSU] shaggyskunk:
Yeah I think that for the vast majority of people on xda - Root - SuperSU & TWRP are what they can't do without - Knox.... Meh -The Locked Bootloaders on the other hand - Are not likely to ever get Root (other than that crappy temporary "root".....

Sent From my SM-N910W8 Running SlimRemix V5.1
[SuperSU] paulkono:
Quick questions since I'm planning to upgrade to 6.0 from 5.1.1 on my N5 as well:

1. Can you share the link for the boot.img? I'm not sure where to look for it.

2. I don't remember having to manually flash an altered boot.img for supersu. Does SuperSu normally perform this step as well? I've only run it through TWRP since it usually prompts me on a newly flashed ROM.

Thanks!! Also, many thanks to Chainfire as well !!! :)
[SuperSU] springer.music:
1. There you go:

http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3219344

2. Please read Chainfire's notes/comments at the link above.
[SuperSU] lePoMo:
relocking bootloader

A general question regarding root via modified /boot:

How do nexus devices behave when relocking the bootloader after rooting via the current method?

Are there any that require a signed boot-partition when the bootloader is locked again? If so, which ones?

(context: having read up on verified boot, that seems to be google's general goal, though no idea on how it behaves on nexus devices. And I like having my bootloader locked (i know there's encryption, but a locked bootloader has no overhead and can easily be toggled via some dd or the bootUnlocker app))

source: source.android.com/devices/tech/security/verifiedboot/verified-boot.html

edit: ignore this, the answer is on the same page (and assuming google sticks to its own guidelines)
[SuperSU] Stephen:
I have got an android M rom up and running for my Nexus 6. Latest TWRP Chainfire's kernel and latest version of SuperSU included. I used VTS10 to decompile the settings.apk and add the entry in for SuperSU, like how I have done on previous roms. It compiles with out any issues. I can use root explorer to push the app across into the system partition and set permissions. The modded settings apk works 100% after reboots etc and hides the SuperSU app in the app drawer.

The problem I have is, when I add the same apk into my rom and flash the rom. I use aroma installer, to allow users to choose what they want during install. Everything will flash fine, but when rom boots, the settings apk, is in the folder but doesn't load. Any ideas on what I am missing?

I am using stock factory image as source for the rom. I can provide any logs etc as needed.

EDIT: Worked it out. I updated my apktool to version 2.0.2 and re-did my mod. Full wipe and sorted out the issue.
[SuperSU] Taomyn:
Has anyone managed to get this to work with Marshmallow on a Nexus 9 LTE? My Nexus 9 went ok, but for some reason TWRP can't get my encryption password right (which again had no issues with my N6 encryption) - a normal boot of the tablet works fine with the same password so maybe the tweaked boot-image is not quite right.
[SuperSU] fhem:
You can't stay encrypted on N9 on M w/twrp ------ known issue w/twrp ------ check the last few pages of this thread.
[SuperSU] Taomyn:
Thanks, will have to keep an eye on that thread and hope that TWRP is fixed soon.
[SuperSU] mbirth:
You can. You just have to install SuperSU from an USB-OTG drive. (Click "Cancel" when TWRP asks for the password.)
[SuperSU] Khaon:
[MENTION=631273]Chainfire[/MENTION]

Using sepolicy from latest nexus 10's factory image(5.1.1) and patched with your binary causes reboot on 6.0 on this device.

Also could anyone tell me what I have to add to the sepolicy files to authorize supersu's binary to work ?

I couldn't find the answer to my question.

Thx.
[SuperSU] mrRobinson:
If you don't have OTG, adb sideload worked for me.
[SuperSU] miggsr:
Is this new beta specific for marshmallow? Or can it be use on LP
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
The changelog shows that 2.50 and up added MM support. If you had searched the last few pages, you would have seen that we on this thread already got comfirmation of up to 2.52 working on as far back as 4.4.4.
[SuperSU] miggsr:
I haven't been on xda in about 6 months I've been busy running stock roms for OEMs for work. I'm gathering my tools again. And started getting back on xda this week...
[SuperSU] ashyx:
I just want to confirm and thank Chainfire that patching the Sepolicy on the Samsung tab S2 works on LL 5.1.1 to get root with Samsungs root restricted kernels.

As a side note could anyone give me a hint or point me in the direction of a tool or some info of how to patch the Sepolicy manually as I need to do this to get a custom Samsung kernel booting on a Qualcomm device?
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
You need to patch the 6.0 sepolicy, not the 5.1.1 one.
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
http://xdaforums.com/apps/supersu/wip-android-6-0-marshmellow-t3219344

Everything is in flux right now, but I'll probably build an automated service this sooner or later.
[SuperSU] Khaon:
Sorry I expressed myself badly.

I took 6.0's sepolicy and pushed it to a newly formated and rooted 5.1.1 factory image.

Repacking the ramdisk with the patched sepolicy causes a hardware reboot loop.
[SuperSU] Phil3759:
Are there any potential issues using 2 different devices but same platform : S4 Qualcomm i9505 and Note 4 Qualcomm for example?

Until now, i assumed we must use same reference device as the target!

No need to give much details, just what you recommend for now
[SuperSU] scanno:
[MENTION=631273]Chainfire[/MENTION] for source build M roms (including source build kernel / ramdisk), are there any changes to the SELinux policy that we can use to enable root by supersu?

Verstuurd vanaf mijn AOSP on Manta met Tapatalk
[SuperSU] Taomyn:
Confirm this worked for my N9 and I'm now happily rooted - I didn't install TWRP just booted it seeing as for the time being it's next to useless if it can't decrypt my data.

Curious that on the N9 "system" has far more free space than on my N6, as I wasn't able to get Adaway to update the hosts file and it had to use a symlink on the N6
[SuperSU] ashyx:
Well not from my experience. I patched the Tab S2 sepolicy on its predecessor the Tab S. Exynos 5433 64bit device vs Exynos 5420 32bit device.

---------- Post added at 11:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 AM ----------

Thanks for that, however that is the procedure I used to patch the Tab S2, but I don't know what gets patched.

I'd like something I can use to patch the Sepolicy myself. Not only for root, but for other stuff.

I don't want to take the thread off topic so if it's going off on a tangent don't bother too much. :)
[SuperSU] Ritize:
I got a quick easy question. To allow an updated app that needs SU to authenticate automatically should reauthentication be checked or checked? The wording is throwing me off.
[SuperSU] ashyx:
I think reauthentication is for every time the app is started.

Updated apps should still remain authenticated once given permission.
[SuperSU] vt0r:
It should be unchecked. You'll notice the text changes when checked vs unchecked to better describe the current state.
[SuperSU] jwoody86:
Do we still need to flash modified boot.img for root? I attempted when 2.50 came out and ended up bootlooping so I am a little hesitant.
[SuperSU] TR2N:
Ban him please...
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
Do we still need to search for the wip thread about root and 6.0 more like it. But its ok, its ok to not follow the xda rules about searching and reading before asking a question such as this.
[SuperSU] jwoody86:
Sorry man, honestly I did not mean to stir up any trouble. I figured it out, cheers.
[SuperSU] IronTechmonkey:
Perhaps we should also ban people who use twice as much thread space as the post they are complaining about while offering nothing constructive ;).

---------- Post added at 02:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:35 PM ----------

Well... people will jump on those who haven't done basic research. I'm as big a harda$$ as anybody about that but like to wrap up the gripes with some help when possible... which I would gladly be doing now if I properly understood the question:). Glad you found an answer.
[SuperSU] dgy1990:
I'll test it in my Nexus7 2013 with marshmallow

I'll test it in my Nexus7 2013 with marshmallow
[SuperSU] marc.ientilucci:
im using Chainfires modded boot.img with SuperSU 2.52 and i'm unable to write to system. any fix for this?
[SuperSU] flar2:
On Nexus 6, the stock image fills up the system partition. The problem is not enough disk space.
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
Besides reading this thread in regards to apps not recognizing root even though root has been achieved you mean? You can contact the app developers to get proper root support on the app you're using
[SuperSU] ashyx:
Root Explorer
[SuperSU] Ingenium13:
I couldn't get Root Explorer to remount /system as rw. It would say it's rw, but running mount in a shell showed it as ro. I just used a root shell to manually remount it as rw then Root Explorer worked fine:

mount -o remount,rw /system

Then when you're done:

mount -o remount,ro /system

Sent from my Nexus 6
[SuperSU] marc.ientilucci:
all i want to do is add one string of text in build.prop to allow tethering. is space still the issue?
[SuperSU] Ingenium13:
I had like 12MB of free space in the system partition

Sent from my Nexus 6
[SuperSU] flar2:
Probably not for that small change. It may be that the app you're using is not fully working with Marshmallow, like the others mentioned. See if you can mount it manually.
[SuperSU] jovy23:
Samething happened to me i couldnt get root explorer to copy and paste files to my internal storage even while it was mounted as r/w. I was thinking it was SuperSU v2.52 BETA that was causing the problems, but it wasn't it was actually the toolchain that was used to compile a custom kernel that i was using while having these similar problems.

I was on my Note 5 custom kernel while these similar problems started happening such as DCMProvider has stopped error messages while taking screenshots, root applications not working well with SuperSU, in-call reboot issues, and etc. Then once i have changed the toolchain and the cross_compile path everything worked right after and everything is now stable.

So in other words for SuperSU to work properly you must have a custom kernel that was compiled properly as well based on the toolchain that was being used.

I have used this toolchain to compile my kernel based on my ARM (64Bit) device:

http://releases.linaro.org/14.11/components/android/toolchain/4.9/

If you have a ARM (32Bit) device:

http://releases.linaro.org/14.10/components/android/toolchain/4.9/
[SuperSU] gladiac:
Hey there,

yes, it seems like this is still needed. I still get

W init : type=1400 audit(0.0:19): avc: denied { execute_no_trans } for path="/system/xbin/daemonsu" dev="mmcblk0p29" ino=104419 scontext=u:r:init:s0 tcontext=u:object_r:system_file:s0 tclass=file permissive=0

after installing marshmallow, disabling forced encryption as well as dm-verification and flashing supersu 2.52 afterwards. The error shows that SeLinux still prevents daemonsu from starting resulting in a bootloop.
[SuperSU] springer.music:
As far as I understand from this post from Chainfire, Root Explorer may need to be updated to work correctly on Marshmallow. http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?p=63216557

ES File Explorer seems to be working just fine (with r/w access to system).

Someone else in this thread also reported Solid Explorer as working correctly.
[SuperSU] :
Hello.

Does anybody know how to backup SuperSU's settings? I update my devices using the stock images published by Google and obviously I have to re-root them afterwards. This is not a big deal. What I find annoying is that then I have to start every single application requiring root, grant them access, then individually disable logging and notification for each one (I want to keep them enabled by default).

I tried to backup SuperSU settings with Titanium Backup but it doesn't work. Using tar to backup the directory in /data/data does not work either, even if I assign the files to the right group and owner.

Suggestions?

Thanks!
[SuperSU] Ubichinon:
Here is my story of rooting my N5 with Android 6.

- installed Android 6 from 5.1.1, flashing through adb without losing data

- booted up once normally

- installed the modified boot.img from chainfire

- installed twrp

- flashed SuperSU 2.52 BETA

- rebooted and everything is working

Everything went great!
[SuperSU] WhiteTitane:
I'm making a friend buying a used Nexus 5 but the only one available in her area is rooted. I'd like to help her go back to factory so that she will get the ease of OTA updates as she won't have any use for the root.

So...how would you go about unrooting a Nexus 5 running Marshmallow?
[SuperSU] teddy0209:
Just download and flash the android m factory img... =)
[SuperSU] mdamaged:
To add to what teddy0209 said, if she will never need custom recovery (and the things it allows, like custom kernels or roms) either, you may also want to relock the bootloader to make it more secure.
[SuperSU] WhiteTitane:
Newbie question:

Can I relock the bootloader with an app (since the device is rooted), THEN flash a factory image?
[SuperSU] savantist:
why not flashing without relocking instead? :)
[SuperSU] springer.music:
This is probably not the best thread for this sort of questions. Anyway, you need to flash a factory image

first

and only afterwards relock the bootloader (you won't be able to flash any image if your bootloader is locked).

See the instructions at the following link:

https://developers.google.com/android/nexus/images

Follow points 1-6 in order to flash a downloaded factory image, then execute the following points 1-2 to lock the bootloader.
[SuperSU] WhiteTitane:
Alright, thanks a lot guys!

Because I thought using an app (which needs root) would be easier than fastboot. Never mind.
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
Apps lock bootloaders?
[SuperSU] WhiteTitane:
This one I thought:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.segv11.bootunlocker&hl=fr
[SuperSU] palmbeach05:
I see. Never knew about that one. Its for pre-2014 models though. But you don't really want to re-lock your bootloader once you unlock it
[SuperSU] bb709394:
Save yourself the trouble and hassle, don't re-lock the bootloader since you will be the one on the hook for providing tech support to your friend.

If you flash to stock 6.0, the phone will still get OTAs with an unlocked bootloader as long as you don't modify any of the system files.
[SuperSU] The-Kevster:
Hi [MENTION=631273]Chainfire[/MENTION],

Any chance you could work your magic on the bullhead kernel? I'm happy to help test. It's a Nexus after-all, what's the worst that could happen :D

Kev
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Just posted in the WIP thread. Not tested though, obviously.
[SuperSU] The-Kevster:
Thanks for the quick response. Unfortunately I forgot the Nexus 5X is only supplied with a USB-C to USB-C cable and I left my stock of Chinese A-C at home. Shame as I'll have to setup the device again after unlocking it.

Will post results later today though.
[SuperSU] Manh_IT:
[MENTION=631273]Chainfire[/MENTION]

Test Root with sepolicy modifications:

G920S: work perfectly

N920T: Not boot, stuck "Samsung Galaxy Note 5" logo

Commit: https://github.com/ManhIT-CMB/SpaceX-Pure
[SuperSU] garyd9:
[MENTION=5116431]Manh_IT[/MENTION], I have it working on nearly all N920 variants. Check the script posted here to see exactly the changes I'm making: http://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=63250893&postcount=26

What's interesting is that while this is confirmed working for several variants, it does NOT work for the "8" (only one person tested.) In that case, the kernel panics on filesystem failures (which seem unrelated to seandroid.)

All other reported failures resulted from mixing different kernel and firmware types. (For example, using an "i" variant kernel with a "t" variant system firmware.) Those "mixed" failures all failure from zygote restarting too many times (and this DOES seem seandroid related as everything works fine in permissive.)

I don't know if anyone has tested for the "t" variant I posted. (You know how that goes.. everyone screams when it doesn't work, and not a sound if it works fine.)
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Ugh, didn't I specifically ask not to try and automate this at this stage?
[SuperSU] garyd9:
Sorry. I pulled it down. The script was for my own use while working out the changes needed on the n920 platform (changes to fstab, etc) and I ended up posting in response to the dozens of requests coming from various people (and even one demand that I share the work.)
[SuperSU] Chainfire:
Well at least put some big bold red letters on it or something that it is likely to break the next SuperSU update.

EDIT#1: I would like to get this fixed for all but I'm simply not there yet with my end of the code, and if everyone goes and grows their own scripts, I fear we're going to end up with a big incompatible mess, where some scripts will work on some kernels and others won't, etc. At which point the average root user will not know where to look anymore.

EDIT#2: Sorry my head is on wrong today. If your script is just intended to fix the Samsung 5.x kernels, that's fine. I was thinking of 6.0
[SuperSU] garyd9:
This is a samsung platform. If a carrier in some far off planet decides to sneeze, it's likely to break everything regardless of root.

Edit: okay, I'll put it back when I get home tonight (with additional warnings.)
[SuperSU] ikelos:
If it's of any help, I just flashed the bullhead-mdb08i boot.img from the WIP thread on a new 5x (that had been updated to mdb08i first) and it all seems to boot ok. I don't have any immediate way to flash the SuperSU updatable zip yet so I can't confirm whether root will actually work, but at least there's no boot loops or other immediate problems. Let me know if there's any tests or logcat output I should be keeping an eye out for that might help...