yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[HTC EVO 3D] Coaxs94:
Hello guys. First to mention that maybe my English is bad since i'm form Serbia. I've tried to unlock bootloader, "How to Root HTC Evo 3D GSM!" on HTCEVOHACKS

To downgrade hboot from 1.53.0007 to 1.49.0007 and to s-off "How to Downgrade to HBOOT 1.49.0007 on HTC Evo 3D GSM!" on HTCEVOHACKS

I did every single thing that needed to be done, with first method, i got stuck on this

"sending 'unlocktoken' (0 KB)...

OKAY [ 0.144s]

writing 'unlocktoken'...

FAILED (remote: unlock token check failed)

finished. total time: 0.157s", and then i've tried solution with RUU.exe, i think i found right one for my phone, finished rooting successfully, and i've tried again to unlock bootloader, but bum, the same thing with command prompt fails to write unlocktoken. With second method for downgrading i have changed CID as it says to HTC__001 i think, but on next steps i had no luck, it just finishes all work with command prompt, but on phone won't show that it's installing rom as on the video, just shows htc logo and then just boots up to android, hboot still 1.53 and S-on.

Other info:

ICS 4.0.3

Software number 3.28.401.1

SHOOTER_U PVT SHIP S-ON RL

HBOOT-1.53.0007

eMMC-boot

may 22, 2012,01:06:07

I know there are other threads for this, i saw them all, and i just can't see my way out, so please, please help me. Thank you!
[HTC EVO 3D] SheshanTec:
Hey Friend You Can Root any android device by Using this method. Work On every Android Device in the world. [emoji41] Check out by This Link sh.st/c7z8I
[HTC EVO 3D] Coaxs94:
The app is useless, don't work at all, it says it's rooted, but it's not -.-

Guys, anyone here for real help?!
[HTC EVO 3D] Coaxs94:
Please, anyone???
[HTC EVO 3D] gursewaksinghsandhujatt:
Use kingoanderoideroot. To root your device.

And if you want to unlock bootloader I will tell you a simple trick

Just connect your device with your pc in fastboot USB mode.

Open kingoroot.

Start root process .

It will take some time or may be fail many times but not more then 6 Time .

After this you will see a bootloader unlock screen if you click yes it will unlocked or no means no.

Enjoy. I personally root and unlocked my HTC EVO 3d x515m with kingoroot.

Don't forget to hit thanks .so we can help you more.
[T-Mobile Samsung Galaxy S6] Powell730:
Back in my s4 days modded stock Messenging apps were all over the place, I've tried searching for one for the s6 but no luck.. Am I missing it or are people just using other apps?

I actually prefer the stock app but I can't stand the screen coming on with every text I receive.
[Note Edge Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting] Guccimaine:
Anyone got an unlock method for note edge I am on root and anyone got some kind of hack for the tmobile unlock device app?
[Mi 3 General] Skullpluggery:
What are your thoughts on the "Anti Piracy Support" being implemented into their ROMS

ROM Developers are now starting to implement this "Anti Piracy Support" . Many of them do and some of them don't.

So what is AntiPiracySupport?

Meaning, this will block the installation of pirated apps, malware and patchers.

For you, is it good or bad? :)
[Mi 3 General] Bitti09:
Roms that have AntiPiracySupport builtin:

+ ACIP:

Commits in Github: YES

+resurrectionremix

Commits in Github: YES

+ Exodus:

Commits in Github: YES

+ BrokenOS

Commits in Github: YES

+ My Rom Builds(if no other info is added):

Commits in Github: YES

Roms that

don't

have AntiPiracySupport builtin now:

+ AOSPA

Commit in Gerrit: NO

+ Official OmniRom:

Commit in Gerrit: NO
[Mi 3 General] Mr.201:
For me it is very bad. Because in my country many of the apps I need are blocked and some of it wasnt compatible with mi3. So big no to Anti Piracy Support for me. Sorry developers.
[Mi 3 General] Skullpluggery:
This might help guys :thumbup:

Any it should be AICP not ACIP hahaha!
[Mi 3 General] CrashTestDroid:
Here's my take on this blacklist idea.

At least 40% of the reason I bought my first Android after years of iPhones was for ad blocking. I just don't get the reason for clumsily trying to turn a custom rom into iOS. So I did a little digging and found a discussion about this blacklist from an Exodus dev who wrote "The only real reason not to support this is if you support piracy and stealing from developers."

Maybe someone can tell me whether it's a joke or Dave doesn't understand the issues. It takes little brainpower to deduce that app names can be trivially changed, as we've already seen and can even be seen in the blacklist code. So blacklisting apps by name and hardcoding that in your rom is a losing proposition from the start, right?

To stay up to date somebody would need to track package names and add them manually and hope everyone conveniently forgets the past 3+ decades of battles between malware writers and AV guys, eg when viruses started creating their own pseudo-random names to avoid the crummier scanners which Exodus is trying to emulate. We've already seen this simplistic blacklist approach can't possibly scale. Check the google+ link and you see that Kessler is trying to crowdsource a list of app names to blacklist. What happens when somebody maliciously or mistakenly adds a commonly used, objectively benign app? Who is the final arbiter of which apps get the boot? Quid custodiet ipsos custodes?

Factor in Exodus blocking my fave ad service disabler (probably an Irish app ;) ) and debating whether to block Xposed and you have a powerful user motivation to bypass or completely avoid the blacklist and stop it from removing/disabling legit functionality. It seem likely that roms with Exodus' Anti-Adblock anti-feature will be forked if they're worth using. Not to mention, this blacklist only works if the blocked apps play along & their package names never change, and if the user has no motivation to bypass the blacklist. Extra bonus: v2 of the blacklist will be more like real malware, with obfuscated & closed source libraries.

Dave's false dichotomy is basically saying if you don't want spam or ads or closed source crapware clogging your device then you support piracy. I think Dave should've added, another reason not to support this endeavor is because poorly conceived code that goes against user wishes should ALWAYS be turfed.

tl;dr Why would anybody let this guy decide which apps are ok and which aren't, and using an old-school blacklist too? SMH.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
XDA fully supports this. IF you cant pay for an app then you dont need it.
[Mi 3 General] ashish289:
What if you want to use app but first want to check the quality of app or you don't have money for every app?
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Well then you wait to have the money or use a free version. If there is no free version then you save up the money
[Mi 3 General] ChazyTheBest:
Is this gonna be a requirement for rom developers?

I'm not against it. But I think it should be something optional. If the rom developer wants to implement it, that's ok. But I think the consumers should have a right to decide whether the rom supports this or not. I mean, like a democracy, the consumers vote, that's something fair...

Can you speak for the whole XDA community? hehehe Anyways you've got a point there.

But I don't see the point of doing apps developer's job. If they want anti-piracy security for their apps they'll get it (built in), unless it's an offline app. So I wouldn't bother trying to prevent the inevitable... :)
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Well your first mistake was thinking you are a consumer. Not in the least. Nor do users have a say in what rom devs put in their roms. Roms are built by people for personal use and then shared to be nice. If you dont like it then you are more then welcome to build your own rom.

Second mistake was thinking it is a democracy. Its not. Users really dont have a say in what rom devs put in their roms.

All I can say is that XDA stands behind this and anything that is used to get around it is banned from the site for good.
[Mi 3 General] ChazyTheBest:
Sorry for the misunderstood, but I said it because I read rom developers ask for features and bugfixing. So I'll take it as it depends on the developer... some devs are like you said and some others "really care" about what users need/want.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Have you really ever seen Real developers ask this? No. The only ones that do are the ones that do nothing more really then cherry pick other roms commits. There are very few real developer teams around. The rest are what we like to call winzip wizards or compile wizards.

The ones that "really care" As you say are only really doing it for donations. I know it is hard to understand in this forum as there are none of the big teams here as none of them are willing to touch Xiaomi Devices. Heck I know I am not even allowed to use one due to my job.

In the end it is up to the dev to add this if they wish but ill let you in on a secret. Most devs are working closely with each other to make this better. There is even a commit that blocks xposed frameworks.

As XDA stand completely behind it and against warez most of the things that this targets are already banned on the site. Things like lucky patcher and freedom. Both are forever banned on the site.
[Mi 3 General] ChazyTheBest:
Very good explanation. Now I see it from that point of view, you are right.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
[MENTION=1140856]zelendel[/MENTION]:

I certainly have supported and I am prepared to support more app developers who provide me free software (free as in freedom not free beer), and I'm not interested in buying closed source apps from the playstore, so I'm not really affected by this issue, but seriously? Preventing users from running the software they want on their phone? These opinions are grossing me out. Thankfully (and this might have been one of the most important advances in whole history) the creators of the software that most of our Android world is based on, have shown more wisdom and created the GPL, that forces everyone who wants to be part of this world to open source and to free their own variations of it, so thankfully people will always be able to remove components that restrict the user.

This is not a stance to enable privacy. This is a stance to oppose everybody who wants to place technical faculties in my OS that are able to prevent me from running whatever code I want (because at that precise moment, I do no longer own a personal universal computer). If enabling piracy is a side effect of preserving the freedom of an OS, then it's a small price to pay to preserve freedom. Thankfully again, it will always be possible to remove components from GPL software, even for "compiling wizards".
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
See you are missing one thing. The fact that android is not licensed under the GPL. Only the Android kernel is under the GPL. The rest is apache, which means they can close source any part of the os they want. This is why things like Sense, Touch wiz, Zen, miui and all the others are closed sourced.
[Mi 3 General] vishal24387:
Guys whenever you create something with so much hardwork then you expect something in return of it. But if someone stealing those things then obviously you will oppose rather than allow it.

Open source has its own benefit and disadvantages. We have to decide in what way we have to use these things. Developers are protecting their hardwork. And its their right. We can't tell them what to do and what not to do.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
Yeah with "most" i was referring to the Linux Kernel, which I consider the most important part, as an environment to run APKs could theoretically be substituted. But even the Apache Licence for the Android project is OK for the purpose of retaining the user freedom, although the GPL would obviously be preferable. The most problematic part as far as I can see is the proprietary framework, but at least there are people willing to tackle that issue, like the μg Project..

[MENTION=4085197]vishal24387[/MENTION]:

It's well known, that someone who is giving larger contributions to an important free software project will get hired pretty fast. Please tell me of any disadvantage of Open Source (or more importantly of free/libre software, OpenSource without free licences is problematic of course).

Developers are free to think of ways to protect their software. That must not include having OS developers place restrictions on users who aren't even interested in their software.

A developer who believes that's the right way to protect his software can include those restrictions in his own binaries and use some of the Google API features to identify his paying users. In that case the issue of restricting the users freedom only affects those users who run that kind of non-free software.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Not sure how you see that. The license states that they can do anything they want to the source and completely close it off like the privacy guard. They are making it closed sourced and there are many devs working on it to make it even stronger.

If you agree wit it or not really doesnt matter a whole lot. XDA is against warez and will support anything and everything to prevent the use of it. Like the module that disables the privacy guard which is now banned on XDA.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
The only Privacy Guard I'm aware of is a free software encryption tool, what component are you referring to specifically?

As long as the Free Software part of Android stays usable, closed source components are not an issue and can be removed. I don't care how many devs are making a closed source component stronger, as long as I can remove it from my system.

As soon as that's no longer an option, there'll definitely be forks to continue to be able to have projects like replicant.

Anything and everything? If it's at the cost of the users freedom I'll regret my former donation to XDA and have to hope for it's downfall in the long run, but I'm pretty sure not everybody at XDA shares those drastic opinions.

For the most important and tedious parts, like fixes in drivers that are part of the GPL licenced kernel any work on XDA can be used by those who don't want to use certain other components even if all of XDA would endorse them (and I do not believe that's the case).
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Then what your missing is the new privacy guard which is coded into the base OS which prevents things like freedom, lucky patcher and every warez market known at the time with more being added every day.

Maybe not everyone. Most users in China and India (Where warez are common place) dont really agree with it but all the mods have talked about it and agree Warez is not something XDA has now or ever will support.

This is not kernel based. That is what you are missing. This is coded into the base OS. The part that is not covered by the GPL.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Piracy/comments/3eo8sj/antipiracy_measures_on_android_custom_roms/

Also remember that we are a developer forum. Made for and by developers. So we will back any and everything that rips them off of their rights to protect their software from being pirated.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
I'm aware that this trojan is not kernel based, where did you read that I thought it was? As long as the ROMs are free software I can remove that BS and recompile to avoid it. If the ROM is not free software, I've no intereste in it anyway, but at least its developer will be forced to contribute the changes he makes to the kernel/open drivers back to the free software community, even if he has chosen to forsake his support to said community by creating closed derivates of originally free software and giving it to his user with unwanted components that infringe on their freedom.

>> "any and everything"

Ah, this kind of language again. Why not have a Whitelist of app names and cryptographic signatures then? It prevents any method of pirating apps very effectively and is certainly covered by "any and everything". See? I don't think you mean "any and everything", so please don't say that.

It's not that I'm interested in running any of those blacklisted apps (btw: blacklisting by app name? Cute security concept, I'm pretty sure I can circumvent this with 3 commands typed into a terminal and some basic apk tools in the folder). In fact I haven't heard of any app that's listed. (The first one named freedom looks like something to get in-game coins in freemium games? Who wastes his life developing cracks/warez like this?)

I'm simply against infringing on users freedoms. If XDA endorses this stuff that's sad news, only with regards to my believe in XDA being a part of the free software world, though. But once again, I'm sure not everybody on this board thinks like you, even if many mods do, there's still room for good free (as in freedom) code.

PS: That reddit thread is useful. It contains names of ROMs to avoid.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
It doesnt name them all. Many have added it since then and many more are in the process. There is even a group working with the AOSP team to get it added to the AOSP based source code.

He is not making any changes to the kernel so there is nothing to push back.

By name was just the beginning. Last I heard they are working on other options as well. Doesnt matter to me really either way.

Not sure where you think XDA is part free software world. XDA was built on closed sourced systems. Long before android came about. You want freedom? Then build your own rom. Freedom kinda funny hearing that in this device forum.

Understand that for something like the ban to be put in place. 99% of the mods had to agree to it. Guess what happened.

Also understand that this is a site you are allowed to use. You are more then welcome to leave at anytime you like. We are not here to make you happy.

We are a developers forum. Made for developers by developers.

So if you dont like it either build your own rom or deal with it.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
Luckily what can be patched in upstream can be patched out downstream. I'd be surprised to actually see that happen, though, it would be certainly a new low for android. Are there any plans to enforce this BS in all roms? We shall see what happens to a community that starts going down the road of DRM. I was not aware that this kind of defilement was creeping into the aftermarket firmware community, luckily I happened to come across the thread. I have confidence that some level of natural selection works on the level of communities, though.

I was referring to the general case of ROM developers not to the developer of this trojan.

I'm not terribly concerned, so far there has always been a sufficient number of developers to protect the freedom of users to use their devices as it pleases them. If history is any indicator those "other options" won't be effective without locking down the platform in a way that will turn people away from XDA, but time will tell.

I'm aware of that historic fact, but I also have a opinion on the questions what gave XDA the relevance it has today.

Why is that funny? I see the value of aftermarket firmware for the purpose of gaining freedom particularly for devices like the ones discussed in our device forum.

Sad statistic on XDA mods.

Neither am I. I'm here in this thread to discuss issues related to freedom and unless your opinion on freedom with regard to software doesn't mirror your opinion on freedom of speech I guess that doesn't concern you.

Among other thing I'm a software developer as well, so I find some threads and some linked source repositories in this forum interesting.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
Wow freedom of speech. Well 2 things. 1. That doesn't apply here.

2. It's not really freedom as you can still be arrested for words that you say.

Xda was relevant long before android. It was just relevant to a different class of people. Mostly developers. We were modding phones long before a smart phone even was a thought.

I understand true freedom is an illusion.

Gaining freedom for these devices is not as easy with an oem that violates the GPL every chance it gets and cares nothing for others copy rights.

As for turning people away from XDA. My comment above is just as true. We were here before people knew what a smartphone was and will be here long after they lock most android devices down so they can't be modded at all, like the new s6 and note 5 that can't even be rooted.

Now you can agree with it or not. Either way it doesn't matter. Will we force people to add it to their roms? No. But we will stand behind and support anyone that does add it.
[Mi 3 General] TinkoB:
I'm starting to get a feeling you're misreading my posts on purpose.

I wasn't making claiming any rights here or elsewhere. I was making a conditional statement about what I assumed does or doesn't concern you.

As the frame of reference becomes sufficiently flexible, any statement about relevance becomes meaningless. I was specifically talking about it's current relevance. If xda shrinks to 3 users, it can still be called relevant to 3 users.

I'm sorry to hear that, be careful not to project this defeatist attitude on the people who oppose your views, though.

True. That's a difficult political issue, thankfully there are people fighting for the cause. But since you seem to consider freedom to be something of value, at what point do you arrive at the point at which it becomes sensible to restrict the freedom even more by reintroducing DRM into the ROMs that are the result of hard work to actually gain some freedom in the usage of those devices?

And I guess you consider that a bad thing, right? Why do you go down the path DRM yourself then?

Happy to hear you're not forcing anybody. I still don't understand your position on freedom. You are seeing the issues with locked down devices. I guess you consider that a bad thing. Why do you support DRM then? That's supporting a lock down as well. Also it is a failed approach, even the music stores have realized this and they've been selling to the general public. XDA is catering an audience that is already opting for custom firmware, do you really believe that audience can be impressed with guards like that? I couldn't consider your position sensible even if these methods had some prospect of being effective, but it's even more bizarre without that.
[Mi 3 General] zelendel:
I'm a realist. I have been around the block a time or two and know that freedom is an illusion. Unless you own your own private country, you will always be following someone else's rules.

As for DRM, I am a supporter of it and pay for every bit of music, games, apps ect that I get. If someone is selling something you want then you pay for it. Plain and simple.

Xda caters to developers. That is our main goal, second by teaching up and coming developers. This is the sole purpose of XDA. That is who is relevant to the site.

Do I think locked down devices as a bad thing? Well for most people no I don't. Most people shouldn't be messing with their device. (they are the reason for devices becoming more locked down) I and more then willing to pay a premium for a mod able device.

Your issue seems to be you think that android equals the freedom to do what ever you want. This is not the case completely. You are not free to rip off developers. That is the whole purpose of this addition. It's getting the point that even xposed is blocked in some roms and most roms will not even take bug reports if it's installed.

Now we can debate this back and forth till the cows come home and it won't change the fact.

Also have a click on my banner and have a read of the post. Then have a look at the names in the thanks bar. That just may help you understand what this site is about.