yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Magisk] dimm0k:
can someone detail more about busybox and Magisk? before Magisk came about I've always had the BusyBox Pro app installed and installed to /su/bin... then Magisk came along and I've never uninstalled/touched BusyBox Pro since. Never knew busybox was part of Magisk until v6 and now I'm wondering if bits and pieces were left behind through all of this. can I go back to my BusyBox Pro? any downsides?
[Magisk] bttcp12:
Since the update some apps are unable to detect root.

I have tried with Magisk v7 and with phh's systemless root v17 and v259.

When I revert back to Magisk v6 they detect root again.

At the moment the apps with problems are Termux and Secure Settings.

Anyone with the same problem?
[Magisk] AmyClaraRose:
I have same exact issue with es file explorer and a few other apps had to revert to v6 so everything works again
[Magisk] Philnicolls89:
This makes sense from googles point of view, to give developers the tools and choice on who can use there app especially if it requires a high level of security, eg banking apps.

Let's just hope that developers can use common sense, as in a lot of cases peoples phones no longer receive security updates and it is actually safer and more secure to use a customer rom with up to date software.

Therefore it wouldn't make sense to allow an app to run on outdated software that is open to potential security exploits, but not run on updated firmware just because its not stock.

Anyway I guess time will tell...
[Magisk] renegade:
Unfortunately that did not work for me. Even after selecting the custom update channel and selecting the 284 version it still downloads the latest 286 version when hiding manager.
[Magisk] MoL_82:
I understand that. The idea came from the fact Google is supportive to custom ROM's.

But I understand that although Google is supportive to custom ROM's you still won't pass SafetyNet, because it's a 'trade off' as said in the earlier post: https://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=82941997&postcount=40397.
[Magisk] Didgeridoohan:
Just hide 286 and then replace current.apk in /data/user_de/0/<random package name>/dyn with the 285 apk, and don't forget to set the same permissions.
[Magisk] manish11165:
please explain what is recover mode option in magisk
[Magisk] mrmrkmail:
If you are patching a recovery image, manually check “Recovery Mode” in Advanced Settings!

source: https://topjohnwu.github.io/Magisk/install.html
[Magisk] martyfender:
287 fixes the issue.
[Magisk] pndwal:
Quite, but I think the real issue is competition.

In the post I linked, I said:

I still think Google is worried about how it's platform security is perceived by businesses, corporations, government departments etc, and are doubling down on security to increase market share. PW
[Magisk] Wishmasterflo:
Yes just installed it and the issue is fixed now. Magisk Manager is showing all the installed modules again now.

One thing I recognized now when downloading the latest ZIP file: Magisk-a0b47f3c(20418).zip and installing through TWRP recovery, when

it installed it still showed (20417) and after a reboot to system it seemed that I had Magisk 20417 still installed (and it was showing that 20418 is available which actually is the exact same file I just installed) but the Magisk Manager was updated correctly and all my installed Modules are showing up again.

Then I just did a download and install of the latest Magisk (20418) via direct install and now I have the latest one installed and working!
[Magisk] few__:
delete
[Magisk] zgfg:
SAR A & A/B supported, look to the Wiki about installation (for the matter of fact it doesn't really install to read-only System, but doesn't mater, that's systemless approach):

https://topjohnwu.github.io/Magisk/

https://www.didgeridoohan.com/magisk/HomePage
[Magisk] Shtiff1:
Did this not help?
[Magisk] zgfg:
Thanks but at the time of asking the original question I thought that spoofing fingerprint could help to pass CTS Profile. Apparently no luck in that direction

You may try to test yourself if CTS attestation goes Basic or Hardware backed (must be tested on your real LG device), instructions were posted on Friday or Saturday
[Magisk] zgfg:
You cannot install to read-only system. You must check on your device do you really have boot partition or not - if you have, extract boot.img, patch and flash (it works eg for MIUI, being also SAR A only, and thus having both TWRP and Magisk)

Btw, did you mention what is your device and firmware?

These things are very specific from device to device (it makes no sense that somebody with device X gives you instructions for your Y, causing you potentially to brick your device)

Also, you are probably not the first installing to your device, hence check on your device forum for the best practices
[Magisk] HippoMan:
I was just hoping that if enough people wanted microG instead of gapps, then a sufficient number of developers could be persuaded to provide microG-enabled versions of their apps. I guess that is too much of a fantasy. And an even bigger fantasy is my wish that some hardware provider(s) might decide to provide an alternate device (or some way to flash a change to an existing device to make it behave differently ... perhaps even for payment of some kind of extra fee), which works with microG.

Hope springs eternal ... but I won't hold my breath while waiting for either of these outcomes.

.​
[Magisk] zgfg:
It reminds me of Huawei back in 2018. They had great phones and still relatively affordable

They had a portal and you could obtain a Bootloader code in 5 minutes and for free. There was a strong community here on XDA, 4pda and all kinds of regional forums, developers providing tweaks, custom ROMs, etc

They first closed the portal for Bootloader codes. Then they changed Bootloaders making it practically impossible or too risky, complicated and expensive (varying among devices and over time) to unlock Bootloaders - on new phones and in parallel on older phones they were still supporting with EMUI upgrades.

People were writing petitions, begging for unlockable Bootloaders - no avail

Users eventually moved to other phones. Did it hurt Huawei - probably only a tiny fraction and they certainly made assessment in advance, planing to profit more from moving to business and premium arena, by mainly selling phones worldwide through operators (operators are the first in ecosystem who don't like root and custom ROMs, pressing to Google and then to the phone vendors)

If Mr. Trump did not happen to Huawei, they would have been laughing out loud now for the total number of all hackers and modders they lost ?
[Magisk] palmbeach05:
If you read what magisk is, you'll realize its a systemless install, and that it patches the boot.img. so you are going on about where it will install for what reason besides the fact that you don't read?
[Magisk] curiousrom:
topjohnwu: Hardware-Backed SafetyNet Attestation Confirmed Deployed in the Wild

FYI post on Reddit r/Android by topjohnwu: Hardware-Backed SafetyNet Attestation Confirmed Deployed in the Wild:

***
[Magisk] zgfg:
The same article that twit is about:

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/safetynet-api-clients/lpDXBNeV7Fg

was already cited here two days ago:

https://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=82935207&postcount=40370
[Magisk] curiousrom:
Yes and topjohnwu credited [MENTION=6345368]Displax[/MENTION] as the initial source of the info and linked to his post so what is your point?

***
[Magisk] zgfg:
Point is very simple, oeople are lazy to read previous discussions and ask for things that have already been mentioned dozen of times

Even you pointed the same thing again, next days new wheel re-inventors will come yelling the news that CTS is failing, blaming Magisk for and dreaming about resolving it by fingerprint spoofing, using EdXposed modules or something
[Magisk] curiousrom:
This part of the quote in my post above by topjohnwu the Magisk developer was not in the excellent post by Displax & is relevant IMO because of who wrote it:

***
[Magisk] zgfg:
I'm stopping, it makes no sense quoting back and forth half a sentences... GN8
[Magisk] Eng.Raman:
On realme x2 pro with stock android 10 and may security patch 2020, rooted with magisk 20.4 and edxposed installed.

Successfully passed the safetynet. ( both: basic integrity and cts profile ). :)
[Magisk] HippoMan:
I'm running stock Android 10 on my OnePlus 7Pro. It's OOS 10.3.3 with the 2020.05 security patch, and it's rooted with Magisk 20.4.

I also pass CTS and SafetyNet. I am even running a couple of Xposed modules ... but via TaiChi. It didn't use to pass CTS/SafetyNet when I was

installing the same Xposed modules via EdXposed.

.​
[Magisk] pndwal:
Point is [MENTION=4122877]curiousrom[/MENTION] pointed to John Wu's helpful post (via Reddit), where he thanks [MENTION=6345368]Displax[/MENTION]. (His XDA 'information distillers' must be keeping up / informing him as he has said.)

You cite John's acknowledgment of this, certainly later than we knew. But his comments are useful, and he does provide other valuable insights, late as these may be. Eg:

As the OP no longer comments here, these may be of interest to those who like to read further. May even save time for those who would re-invent the wheel! ... Others can dream... ? PW
[Magisk] AlexGtll:
I got this , what this means, can someone explain to me please
[Magisk] InsaneNutter:
On some devices it seems you can re lock the bootloader and still run a custom rom if it's signed: Relock bootloader with custom rom on OnePlus 5/5T - possibly a short term solution for some devices anyway.

I wonder if that's an oversight or intentional? as it seems to be possible on quite a few OnePlus devices.
[Magisk] m555888:
It's means on this moment, your device can't pass SafetyNet check, because Google using Hardware-Backed to check your device SafetyNet.

You can read this news

https://www.xda-developers.com/safetynet-hardware-attestation-hide-root-magisk/
[Magisk] totalz:
I'm actually getting my info here: https://github.com/topjohnwu/Magisk/issues/2520#issue-576780295 .

Actually with 2 of my xiaomi phones, both of them have issues with magisk. It could be something xiaomi has done in the rom. The one I'm seriously having issue with is K30 5G on MIUI 12.0.2stable EU...
[Magisk] 81!:
Dug a little...

google api team was talking about signatures and signing them to the correct certificates can the magisk team do something like that on your end with magisk own encryption to make safety net pass?
[Magisk] nri_tech1183:
The only solution is to flash custom rom without UL BL!

Not rooting is perfectly ok for me.
[Magisk] thesingular:
Time to do "jailbreak" on android devices then...
[Magisk] Wishmasterflo:
Ohh that is interesting and good to know. I didn't know that such like this is possible. Perhaps I should try it on my Oneplus 7 and see if I get it done there as well.
[Magisk] Kvipin:
Hide magisk manager

Sir i am facing this problem in magisk manager i m trying to rename magisk name but its failed:rolleyes:
[Magisk] dgunn:
OnePlus 8 Pro bootloader unlocked, latest magisk installed, failed safety net with basic integrity. No Hardware backed found in logcat. All of my apps work just fine accept Google pay. How can I get my CTS and safety net to work properly? I have installed Edx and used a certain module that makes CTS and safety-net pass however it breaks several apps
[Magisk] DiamondJohn:
I think its intentional. I previously owned a Google Nexus 5 and locking and re-locking the bootloader while a custom ROM was installed, was a single adb command. True, the phone is a few years old now, but it was Googles own product.
[Magisk] zgfg:
Magisk Hide enabled in Settings?

Disable EdXposed and try again

Btw, with Canary Magisk Manager 288, it's no more needed to analyze logcat whether CTS use Basic or Hardware attest- thanks
[Magisk] curiousrom:
FYI as seen in https://twitter.com/topjohnwu

https://github.com/topjohnwu/magisk_files/blob/canary/notes.md :

https://github.com/topjohnwu/magisk_files/tree/canary

And in this Twitter post:
[Magisk] AndDiSa:
... I am just wondering and thinking about the situation with hardware backed SafetyNet - checking. Didn't we run into a similar situation as Google Pay was introduced and stopped working on an unlocked bootloader? With the solution described in Working: Magisk with Google Pay as of gms 17.1.22 on Pie we are still able to use Google Pay with a Magisk-rooted device. What's the difference between hardware backed SafetyNet - checks and the checks Google is doing currently with Google Pay?
[Magisk] pratzyushd:
I'd suggest you take a look at topjohnwu's twitter, he details it pretty heavily there.
[Magisk] curiousrom:
Check this XDA portal article for detailed explanations: SafetyNet’s dreaded hardware attestation is rolling out, making it much harder for Magisk to hide root

***
[Magisk] AndDiSa:
This article I've read already ... nevertheless the question remains: Google Pay initially detected an unlocked bootloader and by changing dg.db to read only we are able to use Google Pay on Magisk rooted devices. I doubt that Google will do the full stack check each time, i.e. they will have to cache the result of the last check somewhere ... just because there might be connection issues / the device might be offline / ...

I'll try to understand the posts of [MENTION=4470081]topjohnwu[/MENTION] at Twitter. Probably I'll find some further information.
[Magisk] Gen5:
Can i use magisk to root a phone with a locked bootloader? If so, how can i do that?
[Magisk] zgfg:
You cannot. Please start by reading Magisk Wiki and Installation guidelines
[Magisk] Shtiff1:
Rooted and BL UL, and passing SN. Running stock rom though.
[Magisk] Wolfcity:
Android version? I have no problems with stock 8.1 too.
[Magisk] zgfg:
How are your Widevine security levels, L1 or L3?

You can check with e.g:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.androidfung.drminfo

Asking because of a post from March:

https://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=82005471&postcount=38817

and a post from another thread:
[Magisk] Shtiff1:
10
[Magisk] kudichode:
What a slap in the face... as someone whose been Android since day 1, I no longer see a reason to ever purchase a new (or old) one... if the ability to tweak our phones/use them as we want, as rightful owners of devices we've paid for should be, is being taken away from us (or heavily restricted, facing an ultimatum basically), why not just jump ship and go to Apple where things "just work" anyway?

What can Android owners really say we have that trumps iOS/iPhone as of 2020? Majority of us have lost our headphone jacks having anything recent, majority of us do not have user replaceable batteries, I don't believe its a far stretch to say many many if not majority of us have also lost SD card capability. And if it's at the point where you're a "bad guy" simply because your bootloader is unlocked and you're not even rooted, that is just... wow, incomprehensible.

So instead of having proper security practices via developers of apps which require handling of sensitive data(clearly not McDonalds--are you serious?), this is what it's come to? When people said Android security "sucked", this isn't what was meant nor implied. Even in 2020, are the software updating facilities of Android phones even being utilized by carriers? (Other than Pixel phones, minority?) 6 months of support for a device, 12? max? The situation on that front is the same as it ever was, billions (yes, with a B) of insecure Android devices are floating around out there that will never ever see any fixes.

I don't really see the purpose of this other than to fool people that don't understand technology, that they've "secured" a product, completely twisting the meaning and context of the word. Sorry if I'm missing it, but with this going through and being a real thing, why should any of the people on this board even consider an Android for the next phone, when there's no longer anything to gain? I'm no Apple fanboy but the last time I looked, the iOS devices don't even come with anywhere NEAR as much bloat as stock Android devices do, never really thought I'd be making this post.

You (Google) may think you're all big, bad, and almighty with unlimited funds/resources, just remember karma is a b*tch. Android was once incredibly developer friendly, why are we the bad guys now? Everything that was contributed by "hackers" or "enthusiasts" has essentially been stolen, for lack of a better word, incorporated into stock roms, eliminating the need for root for maybe many folks, but that doesn't justify this type of behavior.

Do what you will, I'll be damned before I ever put money into a brand new Android ever again. On what planet can unlocking a bootloader be seen as a malicious act, bad enough to deny content to customers? This "scene" has become pretty toxic, thanks a lot Google:good:
[Magisk] casouzaj:
The latest Magisk Canary builds are buggy in my Sony Xperia Z5C phone, running a stock 7.1.1 ROM. TWRP shows all the installation stteps and all seems preety standard to me. Magisk Manager shows 'Installed: N/A', though, and root access is lost. Magisk Manager logs page is empty. By the way, it resides in the internal storage.

I'm back to the stable v20.4 release, where (almost) everthing works. A local banking app, after an update, now complains that it is not allowed to run in a modified device, although it is, obviously, activated in Magisk Hide list. That's why I tried the Canary builds. Logcat shows nothing of notice. Any thoughts?
[Magisk] kudichode:
Welcome to the new and improved fascist worldview of how security should work, courtesy of Google. Your choices are to be bootloader locked and be unrooted, or buy an iPhone. Sorry buddy, it's how they've decided they're going to treat us from here on out. You're a bad guy, and will be discriminated against, simply for having Magisk or using your phone as you want

Edit: Alternatively, wait for someone to make sense of this convoluted mess and establish some sort of "temporary solution", just don't count on it. These are "end days" (and have been since key attestation was introduced a few months back)
[Magisk] Wolfcity:
Widvine L1 since day 1 with unlocked BL.

Latest Magisk Canary.
[Magisk] pndwal:
Well, Android control is certainly out of the hands of enthusiasts, and, as the means to the ends of big corporate players facing stiff competition I think we all need to face reality. It's not entirely a new reality either, but it's seems to have been gathering pace.

I think It will come down to carrying two phones for many root users, unless, and this thought is, I admit, Ill considered, we can Dual Boot to two separate environments using modern device partitions, one "unmodified environment whose behavior is predictable" to satisfy security centric apps/Devs, passing SafetyNet, and one rooted.

It may be a tall ask to have two bootloaders, or mechanisms to lock and unlock one bootloader depending on environment to be booted... I simply haven't enough knowledge / time to say myself, so I'm just "throwing it out there".

Another pipe dream? Fat chance? You tell me... Any takers? PW
[Magisk] warrencoakley:
Yep I'm passing. Google Pixel 2 XL
[Magisk] Pandemic:
Also tried with this ?

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.flinkapps.safteynet

Please post a screenshot also with that app.
[Magisk] warrencoakley:
Here you go
[Magisk] Pandemic:
Why you have succes and what you did and also using edxposed ?
[Magisk] pndwal:
PW :laugh:
[Magisk] Shtiff1:
L3
[Magisk] Peter the Great:
I'm passing with L1 widevine security level using Magisk Manager 7.5.1 (267) (7), on Evolution X Android 10 custom ROM on Xiaomi Mi 9T Pro (Redmi K20 Pro).
[Magisk] AndDiSa:
Try to re-install the app. Most likely the last status of the checking is stored somewhere in the application data.

---------- Post added at 07:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:13 AM ----------

Passing with a Pixel-3a, rooted with Magisk 20.4, too. I checked and checking type is BASIC only ...
[Magisk] ounerkouks:
hi all

Im basic hardware backed (:

my phone samsung s9 android Q

Is there anything I can do to correct it?

If I install a stock rom and I go back to a custom I will still be basic hardware backed?

thank you so much
[Magisk] yhogievo:
so apparently, for now, there's no way you could spoof safetynet if it's hardware-backed? But is it possible though? I mean, if safetynet is contacting google to verify your device, why can't we make like... same response like google does, but from our own server?
[Magisk] InsaneNutter:
I can on my OnePlus 5T.

Any device not using hardware attestation should be fine at the moment, that's not to say that won't get enabled on this device as the OnePlus 5T should in theory support it. The phone shipped with Android 7, which is when that became a requirement from what I gather.
[Magisk] zgfg:
Did you test on your phone with Canary Manager (if not using Hide Magisk Manager you can easily upgrade Manager ONLY) or a standalone SafetyNet checker (as discussed about during last days) to double-check if really passing and to see if using only Basic CTS

---------- Post added at 11:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:51 AM ----------

Is there any other SafetyNet checker at the moment, to show if CTS attest was forced via Hardware backed or not, isn't it?

Ofc, it can be tested by using SafetyNet Attest apk, but it requires using Logcat (hence generally requiring root) to read if using Basic or Hardware

Well, in Magisk Manager (Canary 288, where it shows Basic or Hardware), to get to the SafetyNet test you must go through Superuser menu, but Superuser menu cannot be opened if Magisk was not installed (reasonable)

Hence if Magisk is not installed, you cannot try SafetyNet test to read e.g. whether it uses Basic or Hardware.

But SafetyNet doesn't really require Magisk/root for testing, hence IMO it would be useful to reorganize Magisk Manager menus to make SafetyNet checking accessible no matter if Magisk was installed or not
[Magisk] warrencoakley:
Nope haven't Xposed installed at all. Maybe it just hasn't hit me yet I'd say.
[Magisk] Didgeridoohan:
If your goal is to see if basic or hardware is being used, you need root...

Nevermind... Had some bad luck while thinking. See my next post below.
[Magisk] zgfg:
Are you sure that SafetyNet checker application cannot read from the response from Google Framework, what CTS attest was attempted?

For example, SafetyNet check application, screenshot attached, usefully prints all kinds of info from the SafetyNet response - and the app does not require root.

However, it's an older app, probably before Google introduced this new parameter to the game
[Magisk] bunklung:
Would it be possible for Magisk/community to include like an Android VM container that could be used as a Magisk Hide environment? Could we then emulate like an older Pixel 1 that does not have a TPM module? What if we emulate our own TPM module in software to bypass the HW module?
[Magisk] Didgeridoohan:
No I'm not, and you're probably correct. I haven't looked at any of the code or the APIs for this, but it's very likely that it's something the app can read directly from the API.

If this is something you want changed, you do now that the place for feature requests is on GitHub, right?
[Magisk] zgfg:
Ofc, I put to GitHub, actually under an existing Issue asking for the SafetyNet shortcut from Magisk Manager icon:

https://github.com/topjohnwu/Magisk/issues/2634
[Magisk] Displax:
For now you can use ADB for devices without ROOT.

adb logcat -s SafetyNetResponse
[Magisk] leviiis:
I have also now safety-net error in cts Profil (hardware). My question, is this problem comes only on new firmwares with new security updates or a general problem from Google play service updates etc. ?

My problem, all was fine until I would hide Magisk manager (in settings), and now this. There is no fix I think?