|
Now, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the whole point of Nexus devices to be easily rootable or has something changed in the last couple years that I haven't been paying attention due to the ease of use of Wugfresh's Root Toolkit for the Nexus 4. The amount of advertising on my new N5x is absolutely boggling and I just want loving adblock already.
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 12:41 |
|
|
MC Hawking posted:Now, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the whole point of Nexus devices to be easily rootable or has something changed in the last couple years that I haven't been paying attention due to the ease of use of Wugfresh's Root Toolkit for the Nexus 4. Nexus are supposed to be developer phones allowing you to easily unlock the bootloader. This makes it easy to root since you can unlock the bootloader. A rooted device was never the goal of the nexus, just a nice side benefit. Now that security in marshmallow is changing its harder to find a decent solution to rooting without introducing other risks. They should be required by law to allow a safe method to gain root. Can you imagine buying a desktop or laptop that you were not allowed full control over? Adblock is the main reason they don't want you to root your device. Are there any other adblockers, that work, in the play store?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
It's still piss easy to root the Nexus 5X. Same procedure as all previous Nexus phones. Unlock OEM, flash boot image, flash recovery, sideload/install root program of choice. The only thing to watch out for is for the 6P, on which unlocking the bootloader apparently triggers an irreversible hardware switch that will reveal whether the bootloader was ever unlocked. No telling whether that'll actually impact anything in the long run (Google doesn't void warranties for unlocking bootloaders, after all) but it's a thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:They should be required by law to allow a safe method to gain root. Can you imagine buying a desktop or laptop that you were not allowed full control over? You mean like my Chromebook? Typical users don't need root and for security reasons shouldn't have it. They certainly don't need it on their phones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Jan posted:It's still piss easy to root the Nexus 5X. Same procedure as all previous Nexus phones. Unlock OEM, flash boot image, flash recovery, sideload/install root program of choice. I unlocked my 6P right when I got it. It doesn't blow the QFuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:They should be required by law to allow a safe method to gain root. Can you imagine buying a desktop or laptop that you were not allowed full control over? Adblock is the main reason they don't want you to root your device. Are there any other adblockers, that work, in the play store? Yeah. I'm not renting the right to use a phone, I'm buying a handheld computer. It should be an option in Android now that there are separate user profiles. If you bought a computer without the ability to add an admin account, you'd flip poo poo, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
.
MC Hawking fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Jul 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
But you need to unlock your bootloader in order to get the custom recovery which will allow rooting...
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
The way Im dealing with no root on a Verizon s6: Foxfi for tethering (unlimited plan). Paid around 10 bux to buy ad-free versions of apps I use. Lightning browser for adblock. And the crowning jewel the Debloater tool: http://forum.xda-developers.com/android/software/debloater-remove-carrier-bloat-t2998294 which allows freezing pretty much any app on a phone with no root. Debloated around 150 apps including all the S-stuffs. After all that, the S6 rocks! Battery life is around 2-3 days?! Fast as hell, no stupid apps clogging my workflow. Do I wish I had root? Sure but this is not bad at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
.
MC Hawking fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Jul 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
LastInLine posted:You mean like my Chromebook? Yeah, that machine you can install Linux on, exactly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
LastInLine posted:You mean like my Chromebook? Go back to the lastinline appreciation thread, no one here appreciates you. Oh some people don't know what root is so no one should have root, certainly not on their phones which are used for making phone calls, sexting and posting selfies on facebook.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
MC Hawking posted:Oh okay well as you can see this is why I've been using a toolkit for this for a while. Your earlier post said it's piss easy but that may only be the case if you (spoken in a general sense of you, not you in particular) know that you're doing. Well, to be perfectly fair, it is sometimes possible to root without unlocking the bootloader (and thus wiping data), but that usually involves exploits and workarounds that frequently stop working with Android updates. I haven't heard of such a technique in the wild for Marshmallow. I dunno if the toolkit uses those or only resorts to the "recommended" method. I'm a programmer so faffing around with command line tools isn't much of a big deal for me, but I do agree it'd be nice to have simpler, less destructive methods available sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:Go back to the lastinline appreciation thread, no one here appreciates you. Given this is the thread for the, um, differently placed on the spectrum, I'm not concerned about appreciation but thanks for the advice! The thing you're saying is exactly the same thing I said (emphasis added for the mentally infirm): "TYPICAL USERS don't need root and for security reasons shouldn't have it." If you know what it is and want to assume the risk, go right ahead. The OEMs and Google should do nothing to help you, however, and should actively work to prevent it which they do. They do this and should do this to prevent malicious applications from using the same methods to subvert the security model. Honestly this should be obvious. There is no reason a typical user needs root on their computer or cell phone and I've yet to hear anyone refute that (because it is true).
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
LastInLine posted:Given this is the thread for the, um, differently placed on the spectrum, I'm not concerned about appreciation but thanks for the advice! Nobody's disputing that. What they disagree about is how hard Google should make it to root. Does it really need to be harder than enabling developer mode and then enabling an option that has a huge scary confirmation dialog?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Nobody's disputing that. What they disagree about is how hard Google should make it to root. Does it really need to be harder than enabling developer mode and then enabling an option that has a huge scary confirmation dialog? NO TYPICAL USERS DO NOT NEED ROOT OR ANY CONTROL OVER THEIR DEVICE (INSERT AD HERE)
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Nobody's disputing that. What they disagree about is how hard Google should make it to root. Does it really need to be harder than enabling developer mode and then enabling an option that has a huge scary confirmation dialog? This is the problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Tunga posted:Describe in detail how you would implement this such that it cannot be abused by malware? Uh, in the exact same way that elevated permission prompts have been working since Windows Vista, OS X, Linux and any civilized desktop OS? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Jan posted:Uh, in the exact same way that elevated permission prompts have been working since Windows Vista, OS X, Linux and any civilized desktop OS? Oh you don't know how malware works, once you view a webpage thats infected it will enable root on your device and start sending your banking info to hackers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
Jan posted:Uh, in the exact same way that elevated permission prompts have been working since Windows Vista, OS X, Linux and any civilized desktop OS? Yeah 'cos that worked out so well there
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
dissss posted:Yeah 'cos that worked out so well there At some point you have to assume the user at the device has some measure of competence and good faith. Or you have to design an insane asylum for an entire national population.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:At some point you have to assume the user at the device has some measure of competence and good faith. This is certainly true. Would you consider what Google currently does which is providing clean factory images and an unlocked bootloader putting faith in the user? I would. The fact is that there is a legitimate need for a trusted environment in many scenarios and the compromise Google has struck is more than generous in balancing that need for the overwhelming majority and accommodating the few hobbyists who insist on breaking their devices.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
LastInLine posted:This is certainly true. Would you consider what Google currently does which is providing clean factory images and an unlocked bootloader putting faith in the user? I would. You're turning into RZA Encryption.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:You're turning into RZA Encryption. I don't think I am. This started when I responded to an obviously erroneous statement: r0ck0 posted:Nexus are supposed to be developer phones allowing you to easily unlock the bootloader. This makes it easy to root since you can unlock the bootloader. A rooted device was never the goal of the nexus, just a nice side benefit. Now that security in marshmallow is changing its harder to find a decent solution to rooting without introducing other risks. LastInLine posted:You mean like my Chromebook? What I'm saying is fundamentally true. I still root my Nexus and would always advocate unlocking the bootloader on one. I'm not even against it in principle. What I'm saying is that there is a real and distinct security tradeoff in rooting one's devices and in manufacturers allowing for it directly in the OS. Not only is it not a right but just as a commonsense measure should be difficult to do, especially on a device like a smartphone that is poorly understood by most users and certainly a ripe target for exploitation. There seems to be a contingent of users wielding poorly thought-out arguments for why it should be easy to subvert the security model of the entire ecosystem and I think there's room for a voice saying that no, the way it is just fine and the direction things are moving in is not only good but necessary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:Nexus are supposed to be developer phones allowing you to easily unlock the bootloader. This makes it easy to root since you can unlock the bootloader. A rooted device was never the goal of the nexus, just a nice side benefit. Now that security in marshmallow is changing its harder to find a decent solution to rooting without introducing other risks. LastInLine posted:You mean like my Chromebook? Except for, you know, on a Chromebook you literally can flip a switch and have full developer access and even install your own OS.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
SIR FAT JONY IVES posted:Except for, you know, on a Chromebook you literally can flip a switch and have full developer access and even install your own OS. Exactly like on a Nexus device
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
We all know the real problem here, WTF. Unlocking the bootloader doesn't make root appear. You have to flash some whackjob boot.img and then load someother whackjob root EXPLOIT and hope you don't open the gates of hell. If google made a dev option to enable root access with UAC then this wouldn't even be a thread. r0ck0 fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Nov 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
dissss posted:Yeah 'cos that worked out so well there For most people it has.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:For most people it has. That isn't true though, in fact it's a big part of why a huge number of people who used to use Windows PCs just use their iPhone/Pad now
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:If google made a dev option to enable root access with UAC then this wouldn't even be a thread. I don't see how - the majority of the discussion in this thread has always been about non-Nexus devices anyway
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
dissss posted:That isn't true though, in fact it's a big part of why a huge number of people who used to use Windows PCs just use their iPhone/Pad now I dunno about that one, I use my phone a lot because it's always in my pocket and super convenient, not because it has some different security model than my desktop computer
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:I dunno about that one, I use my phone a lot because it's always in my pocket and super convenient, not because it has some different security model than my desktop computer The fact that you're even posting in this thread means you are not a typical tech user
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
dissss posted:That isn't true though, in fact it's a big part of why a huge number of people who used to use Windows PCs just use their iPhone/Pad now This hasn't actually happened. PC usage remains extremely high, with people simply keeping computers longer between upgrades (thus leading to PC sales declining and now being on track to plateau). They simply use a phone or tablet as well. Also most modern malware that a user who isn't being spearphished encounters doesn't need any sort of escalated privileges: your cryptolockers and annoying adware need nothing more than single user access as a phone's non-rooted system would allow to cause their trouble.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
dissss posted:The fact that you're even posting in this thread means you are not a typical tech user I feel like we've gotten pretty far from any kind of point about anything, but if you're saying people use their phones and iPads because they don't have root/administrator access, or something like that, then that's a weird stance to take imo. Of all the differences between a smartphone and a desktop computer, you think that is the determining factor in why someone uses their phone more than a desktop?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
dissss posted:Exactly like on a Nexus device No, what the gently caress. Enabling root on a Nexus phone, as mentioned, involves: 1. Unlocking your bootloader, wiping the device 2. Flashing a custom bootloader 3. Installing a custom recovery 4. Manually install a superuser binary All of which has nothing to do with developer access which is already tucked considerably out of the way of the average user. That is not "literally flipping a switch".
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:I feel like we've gotten pretty far from any kind of point about anything, but if you're saying people use their phones and iPads because they don't have root/administrator access, or something like that, then that's a weird stance to take imo. Of all the differences between a smartphone and a desktop computer, you think that is the determining factor in why someone uses their phone more than a desktop? That they're generally more consistent and more stable than a crammed-full-o-malware PC is a big part of it, and the more locked down nature of those devices is a big part of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
dissss posted:That they're generally more consistent and more stable than a crammed-full-o-malware PC is a big part of it, and the more locked down nature of those devices is a big part of that. I agree, except "locked down nature" is more like there's a single source for apps (Play store) and by default you can't install software from elsewhere. If every Android phone came with root access but you couldn't turn on "install from third party," that would probably be better than the reverse (no root but could install third party by default) and not too different from how it is now. E: Just to be clear, I think we're generally on the same page 
sourdough fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Nov 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
dissss posted:That they're generally more consistent and more stable than a crammed-full-o-malware PC is a big part of it, and the more locked down nature of those devices is a big part of that. Why do you keep going on about something only a small minority of computers actually have to worry about? For all that people like to joke, most people manage to not get anything worse then the ask.com search bar, which ain't exactly a CPU hog or stability issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:Why do you keep going on about something only a small minority of computers actually have to worry about? For all that people like to joke, most people manage to not get anything worse then the ask.com search bar, which ain't exactly a CPU hog or stability issue. I don't know about that - all I can give is anecdotes but it does appear to me that a lot more people have a lot more severe problems than you think
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 12:41 |
|
|
dissss posted:all I can give is anecdotes Yeah, so
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2015 05:41
|
|
