-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
Module Installs, but Device Bootloops #6
Comments
Have you tried clearing dalvik-cache or using the default From your framework.jar, I see that the ROM you're on has implemented PixelPropsUtils to spoof both bootloader and fingerprint so you may actually not need this module at all. Besides your report, I have also heard from some users with PixelPropsUtils in their ROMs, that FrameworkPatch is not working properly even after everything are patched correctly. There may be some conflicts between PixelPropsUtils and FrameworkPatch that we do not know of and may have no solution about it. |
I have not, but I will, and this time, I will also make a copy of the log.
I am not sure if this is relevant, but unless I use PIF, the device fails even basic integrity. With PIF, I am able to pass basic and device. I was hoping to give FrameworkPatcher a try because, based on my understanding of what I have read, it is possible to pass hardware-backed if you find a working keybox. |
Okay, I have tried again with a fresh install of the The next thing I will try is to install the last official Android release that Google put out for this phone and see if it works.
|
So, the module installs properly when I use the stock image! 🥳 I still fail all integrity checks, but I assume that's probably because Google has blacklisted the keybox you used in the default I still haven't wrapped my head around FrameworkPatch well enough to know for sure if a working keybox is all I need or if I also need to use PIF with a device fingerprint, but I will keep researching. I know this isn't the place to ask for help, but if you have anything you are willing and/or able to share, I would appreciate it. 🙂 |
Try adding the DroidGuard process (Google Play Services -> com.google.android.gms.unstable) to DenyList and see if that makes a difference for Play Integrity. |
@CaptainThrowback Adding it to the DenyList makes it possible for me to pass BASIC, but DEVICE and STRONG still fail. It is still unclear to me if this behavior is expected when using the default keybox. |
The idea is that you would pass both Basic and Device, regardless of the keybox used, since that's determined by the props used in Android.java that spoof to DroidGuard. |
You can try out LineageOS if you're looking for a custom ROM that could potentially work properly. At least from what I've seen, there seem to be less issues coming from LineageOS based ROMs.
The default So when using the default To check if your bootloader is spoofed properly, you should use this KeyAttestation app: https://t.me/playintegrityfix/19 |
I understand now, I think. Thank you! When I get a chance, I will try it with LineageOS and report back on if it works or not. The phone that I have been testing this on is a phone that I use for doing development work, but I would really like to use this on my daily-use phone once I am confident that I'm not going to encounter problems with it. |
So, I have finally had a chance to try out this module with the default For reference, here's what the Key Attestation app shows when I am not using the module. And here is the unmodified |
That's strange. I've manually patched your unmodified Simply by installing the FPG module successfully, then reboot your device. Then replace Here's the patched framework.zip |
Unfortunately, it still happens even with your manually patched jar. In case it is relevant, I tried doing the test using the new v1.1.1 release that you put out several hours ago. |
Absolutely yes, you cannot mix these 2 "patches" together and expect it not to break. |
I believe that the TEE is broken on the phone that I was using for testing but it is not clear to me why this issue only becomes apparent when I try to use this module. |
I have tried to install this module on a Pixel 3 XL running the
crosshatch-unity-20240512-1420-release
build of the PixelBuilds ROM. The module installation completes successfully, however, the device boot loops when I attempt to restart. I used a customclasses.dex
file for it.Contained in attached zip file is the copy of the
framework.jar
that I extracted from the phone.framework.zip
If there is any additional information that I can provide to aid in solving this issue, please let me know!
Unfortunately, I did not obtain an install log, but if it would be helpful for you to have one, I do not mind reproducing the issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: