Attend XDA's Second Annual Developer Conference, XDA:DevCon 2014!
5,768,220 Members 45,465 Now Online
XDA Developers Android and Mobile Development Forum

Locked MK2 and Bootloader question

Tip us?
 
flyboy43
Old
#1  
Junior Member - OP
Thanks Meter 0
Posts: 5
Join Date: Sep 2013
Cool Locked MK2 and Bootloader question

Trying to understand where the security/lock sit:

1) If the digcert was in the device then bootloader, kernel, or both, can be tied to a device, and then protected from change. Is that the case?
2) If the digcert was in either the bootloader or the kernel , they can be tied to one another, but then , if both were changed at the same time, security couldn't be enforced.


3) Any digcert has to be validated vs. a matching digcert. Those can exist at Samsung, at ATT, or both. In fact, from descriptions in other threads, they seem to be present at certain Best Buy stores, at least temporarily.
4) If '3' is correct (ANDIF '1' is not correct), then all that is need to circumvent the lock is again, a dual change to bootloader and kernel, or am I missing something?

5) If '3' is correct, it seems that part of the public-private key may sit at ATT and at VZW. While those two parts couldI] be different, the infrastructure to manage this would be more cumbersome then I give them credit to manage. Therefore, it would be a logical (yet WAG) assumption that VZW and ATT either
(a) rely on the Samsung master certificate and/or
(b) have the same certificate as each other. Is there a way to test this 'b' theory?
 
flyboy43
Old
#2  
Junior Member - OP
Thanks Meter 0
Posts: 5
Join Date: Sep 2013
Default Bump

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy43 View Post
Trying to understand where the security/lock sit:

1) If the digcert was in the device then bootloader, kernel, or both, can be tied to a device, and then protected from change. Is that the case?
2) If the digcert was in either the bootloader or the kernel , they can be tied to one another, but then , if both were changed at the same time, security couldn't be enforced.


3) Any digcert has to be validated vs. a matching digcert. Those can exist at Samsung, at ATT, or both. In fact, from descriptions in other threads, they seem to be present at certain Best Buy stores, at least temporarily.
4) If '3' is correct (ANDIF '1' is not correct), then all that is need to circumvent the lock is again, a dual change to bootloader and kernel, or am I missing something?

5) If '3' is correct, it seems that part of the public-private key may sit at ATT and at VZW. While those two parts couldI] be different, the infrastructure to manage this would be more cumbersome then I give them credit to manage. Therefore, it would be a logical (yet WAG) assumption that VZW and ATT either
(a) rely on the Samsung master certificate and/or
(b) have the same certificate as each other. Is there a way to test this 'b' theory?
Bump
 
DeadlySin9
Old
#3  
DeadlySin9's Avatar
Senior Member
Thanks Meter 620
Posts: 1,238
Join Date: Sep 2012

 
DONATE TO ME
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyboy43 View Post
Trying to understand where the security/lock sit:

1) If the digcert was in the device then bootloader, kernel, or both, can be tied to a device, and then protected from change. Is that the case?
2) If the digcert was in either the bootloader or the kernel , they can be tied to one another, but then , if both were changed at the same time, security couldn't be enforced.


3) Any digcert has to be validated vs. a matching digcert. Those can exist at Samsung, at ATT, or both. In fact, from descriptions in other threads, they seem to be present at certain Best Buy stores, at least temporarily.
4) If '3' is correct (ANDIF '1' is not correct), then all that is need to circumvent the lock is again, a dual change to bootloader and kernel, or am I missing something?

5) If '3' is correct, it seems that part of the public-private key may sit at ATT and at VZW. While those two parts couldI] be different, the infrastructure to manage this would be more cumbersome then I give them credit to manage. Therefore, it would be a logical (yet WAG) assumption that VZW and ATT either
(a) rely on the Samsung master certificate and/or
(b) have the same certificate as each other. Is there a way to test this 'b' theory?
I recommend you take this to one of the bootloader discussion threads, the one in the Verizon S4 General section titled "If we are serious about unlocking this bootloader" or something like that seems to be more active. However, I can tell you that number 4 is incorrect on your list. ODIN packages flash bootloaders and kernels, but there is a counter on the phone that prevents older bootloaders and kernels from being flashed.
Current Device: ATT Samsung Galaxy S4 (i337)

Past Devices:
Droid Bionic (GSM Hacked)
HTC Inspire 4G (Desire HD)
Nexus One
Motorola Backflip
HTC Dev Phone 1 (Dream/G1)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes