Magisk General Support / Discussion

[HippoMan]

[ ... etc. ... ] I am sure google are doing the changes as they think/know its in my best interest [ ... etc. ... ]

I'm pretty sure that Google's choices are not driven by any considerations, whatsoever, concerning the ease of rooting devices and upgrading the OS's on these rooted devices, espcically with regard to getting these rooted devices to pass SafetyNet.

In any case, I understand and accept that it's my choice as to whether I install upgrades or stay with older and perhaps easier-to-utilize rooting and OS upgrading procedures.

I guess I'm soon going to have to bite the bullet and learn a more complex procedure for upgrading my OS, without that OTA feature.

My device is a OnePlus 7 Pro (GM-1917), currently running OOS 10.3.8, and I am using TWRP 3.5.0_9-0. Could anyone point me to instructions about how to upgrade my exact device to the next OOS 10.x.x version under the latest Magisk, but without that OTA feature?

And if I ever decide to go to Android 11 and use Magisk, are the instructions for doing so on my specific device outlined anywhere?

Thank you very much in advance.

 

[zgfg]

I'm pretty sure that Google's choices are not driven by any considerations, whatsoever, concerning the ease of rooting devices and upgrading the OS's on these rooted devices, espcically with regard to getting these rooted devices to pass SafetyNet.

In any case, I understand and accept that it's my choice as to whether I install upgrades or stay with older and perhaps easier-to-utilize rooting and OS upgrading procedures.

I guess I'm soon going to have to bite the bullet and learn a more complex procedure for upgrading my OS, without that OTA feature.

My device is a OnePlus 7 Pro (GM-1917), currently running OOS 10.3.8, and I am using TWRP 3.5.0_9-0. Could anyone point me to instructions about how to upgrade my device to the next OOS 10.x.x version under the latest Magisk, but without that OTA feature?

And if I ever decide to go to Android 11 and use Magisk, are the instructions for doing so on my exact, specific device outlined anywhere?

Thank you very much in advance.

Look at your device forum, and forums for other models from the same vendor

 

[HippoMan]

Look at your device forum, and forums for other models from the same vendor

My device doesn't have such a forum, and I am indeed searching for this info, which I have not yet found for my own device. I'm specifically talking about a procedure that utilizes post-21.4 versions of Magisk. I was just hoping that someone here might have gone though this for the device I mentioned and could point me to the steps that they took.

The fact that such info is not easy to find (at least not for my device) is yet another reason for my avoiding any Magisk upgrade beyond 21.4.

 

[asanford]

My device doesn't have such a forum, and I am indeed searching for this info, which I have not yet found for my own device. I'm specifically talking about a procedure that utilizes post-21.4 versions of Magisk. I was just hoping that someone here might have gone though this for the device I mentioned and could point me to the steps that they took.

The fact that such info is not easy to find (at least not for my device) is yet another reason for my avoiding any Magisk upgrade beyond 21.4.

OP7Pro doesn't have a forum...

? ROMs ⌇ Kernels ⌇ Recoverys ⌇ Firmwares ⌇ Tools ⌇ Guides ⌇ Videos ?

OnePlus 7 Pro Index for Custom ROMs & Kernels, Recoverys, Firmwares, Tools, Guides and other stuff (like videos). Codename: guacamole ✘ Index ┋Custom ROMs & Kernels ┋Recoverys ┋Firmwares (OTAs) ┋Tools ┋Guides ┋Videos ┋Other ... or just keep...

forum.xda-developers.com

 

[harddisk_wp]

Goodoh.

I don't have a Samsung device, but noted this requirement for those who do, and I guess it's peculiar to Samsung. At least my (Xiaomi) device w/ unlocked bootloader doesn't grey-out OEM unlocking toggle.

Not sure attestation fails due to Knox trip (guess you mean evalType = Hardware / ctsProfile fails?) - After all you should be able to relock bootloader to pass ctsProfile even w/ Knox fuse blown, and ctsProfile trip due to Hardware key attestation w/ unlocked bootloader is common to most recent devices now, even if evalType shows Basic. Solution is to use Universal SafetyNet Fix Magisk module and Magisk root. (Working presently incl. customised fix for Samsung which, of course, also have tripped Knox, but won't work after Google swings the Big Hammer finally.)

You won't be able (on recent Samsung devices) to reset Knox so will have lost ability to set up/use secure Knox partition and possibly other 'Enterprise' mode features forever.

Please correct me if there is any evidence attestation is affected by Knox status. Would be helpful to know of any new connection. PW

I've tried the latest Canary, still does not work. What I've done and discovered so far:

• The proper way to enter ODIN mode on a SM-T575 is not "adb reboot download" - this ODIN invocation won't print much debug information. Power the tablet off, then hold VolUp+VolDn, then plug in the USB cable.
• The way to Recovery is hold the red Bixby button and VolUp, then press power to boot (and with unlocked bootloader, you may need to press Power again - but keep holding Red/VolUp!
• The way to Safe Mode: press and hold VolDn.
• KG State is "Prenormal" (probably "Knox Guard"), FRP LOCK is OFF, OEM LOCK is OFF (U), Secure Download is Enabled (whatever that means)
• Replacing the vbmeta.img and vbmeta_samsung.img with an empty one (created with avbtool info_image --image empty.img) doesn't help, still the same error about "only official released binaries allowed to be flashed
• A really nasty problem: removing super.img and userdata.img to reduce the file copy and flash times from the stock AP image and to prevent ODIN from wiping out all user data (and thus, also from the Magisk patched image) leads to a corrupt system. Here's what I did: a flash of the full stock AP image, followed by booting into Android, doing the first-time initialization, rebooting to ODIN mode, and then flashing stock AP image sans userdata.img / super.img yields a prompt_and_wipe_data reason=set_policy_failed:/data/misc error in last_history. So, then I wiped the data in recovery, completed the install assistant - suddenly, it crashes and goes to recovery again, this time with a postrecovery_failed / rason=dataresizing_failed / RecoverySystemdataresizing_failed in /cache/recovery/last_history.
• Removing only userdata.img seems to work, but of course it takes *ages* to copy files between my Windows machine where Odin runs and my Mac

I'm at a complete loss on what to do now. Has someone maybe already documented why Samsung uses two separate vbmeta images and what's the difference? Or how one can enroll one's own signing keys into the bootloader?

Is there anything I can do to help?

 

[HippoMan]

OP7Pro doesn't have a forum...

? ROMs ⌇ Kernels ⌇ Recoverys ⌇ Firmwares ⌇ Tools ⌇ Guides ⌇ Videos ?

OnePlus 7 Pro Index for Custom ROMs & Kernels, Recoverys, Firmwares, Tools, Guides and other stuff (like videos). Codename: guacamole ✘ Index ┋Custom ROMs & Kernels ┋Recoverys ┋Firmwares (OTAs) ┋Tools ┋Guides ┋Videos ┋Other ... or just keep...

forum.xda-developers.com

I also said this: "I'm specifically talking about a procedure that utilizes post-21.4 versions of Magisk." I have yet to find such info in the forums mentioned.

 

[asanford]

I also said this: "I'm specifically talking about a procedure that utilizes post-21.4 versions of Magisk." I have yet to find such info in the forums mentioned.

I've been on magisk canary since upgrading to A11 and haven't changed any procedure from A10 other than TWRP not supporting A11 yet.

 

[HippoMan]

I've been on magisk canary since upgrading to A11 and haven't changed any procedure from A10 other than TWRP not supporting A11 yet.

But you aren't using the OTA A/B feature, correct? ... given that this feature is no longer supported in Magisk.

So, I guess I should just do the "long form" upgrade methodology (i.e., without that OTA A/B utility), correct?

PS: and I *do* want to use TWRP, which I guess is still possible as long as I stay on A10.

 

[asanford]

But you aren't using the OTA A/B feature, correct? ... given that this feature is no longer supported in Magisk.

I did when I installed OB2. Haven't had to try it since today's canary update. But the option to flash to inactive slot is still there for me. Is virtual A/B different from the A/B that's been around for years? Don't have a new update to flash otherwise I'd experiment

 

[HippoMan]

I did when I installed OB2. Haven't had to try it since today's canary update. But the option to flash to inactive slot is still there for me. Is virtual A/B different from the A/B that's been around for years? Don't have a new update to flash otherwise I'd experiment

I'm not sure about the answers to these questions.

In the past, I was always willing to play around and experiment with my device. But these days, I need my phone for work, and I don't have the luxury of being able to try things and then possibly have to take the time to unbrick and restore my device.

I'll get around to that eventually, but unless/until I can find definitive information about this, I think I'll just stick with 21.4 and use the OTA A/B utility.

 

[73sydney]

Same here with hidden app.
Uninstalling the hidden app and reinstall it works. But trying to hide it again, leads to the same behaviour.

I got hit too...thats a real showstopper lol

I'm sure it'll get fixed soonish

 

[MECH_TECH]

I have a S9 SM-G960F/FD on android 9 rooted and Magisk 20.4 installed and Manager 8.0.7 (4834) its asking to update to 21.4 (21400) Is it safe to let it update using the Manager?

 

[J.Michael]

PS: and I *do* want to use TWRP, which I guess is still possible as long as I stay on A10.

From posts here, you can use TWRP on A11 by "fastboot boot TWRP.img", you just can't replace your recovery with TWRP.

(They may have said you can install TWRP if you don't use Magisk.)

 

[HippoMan]

From posts here, you can use TWRP on A11 by "fastboot boot TWRP.img", you just can't replace your recovery with TWRP.

(They may have said you can install TWRP if you don't use Magisk.)

I was imprecise. I just meant to write that I can't use TWRP as my recovery under A11.

Thank you.

 

[ipdev]

Odd question.

Did I miss how adb is handled in Magisk?

The current canary (8476eb9f : 21409), I have adb root?

---

I did a clean install on a device testing something else.

I had to acknowledge and allow the computer to connect via adb just like it should.
When I started adb shell, I was root. No prompt from Magisk to grant root?
adb does not show under Superuser settings in Magisk.

adb shell is deftly root since it shows as root and I can navigate and list all restricted directories without issue.

[ip@lost 20210213]$ adb shell whoami
root
[ip@lost 20210213]$

Clean flash was on Nexus 7 (2013) flo[WiFi] and deb[LTE] using TWRP.

- Complete wipe and format in fastboot
- Complete format and wipe in TWRP (reboot to recovery in there also)
- Flash Lineage 18.1
- Flash OpenGApps
- Flash renamed Magisk canary
- Reboot to system

Cheers.

Edit:

Same with new current canary (b76c80e2 : 21410).

If this is intended behavior I am fine with it.
If it is not intended, then there is a problem and I will open a GitHub issue.

[ip@lost 20210214]$ adb shell whoami
root
[ip@lost 20210214]$

 

[newkydawg]

Just updated to Magisk (21410) after having the "hiding Magisk" issue with (21409). Hiding magisk is working fine now on my Pixel 3 XL.

 

[pndwal]

Latest Canary Changelog incl. Release Notes:

Magisk (b76c80e2) (21410)

• [App] Fix crashes after hiding the Magisk app
• [MagiskSU] Fix incorrect APEX paths that caused libsqlite.so fail to load

How to Use the APK for Recoveries
In general, it is recommended to install and uninstall Magisk through the Magisk app. However, if you insist to use custom recoveries, rename the Magisk APK's .apk file extension to .zip. TWRP should then be able to directly flash the zip file. If you have trouble renaming the file extension on PC, rename the file with TWRP's built-in file manager. To uninstall in recovery, rename the zip file to uninstall.zip before flashing it.

Diff from v21.4

• [General] Magisk and Magisk Manager is now merged!
• [App] Rename the app "Magisk Manager" to "Magisk"
• [App] Support hiding the Magisk app with advanced technique (stub APK loading) on Android 5.0+ (it used to be 9.0+)
• [App] Disallow re-packaging the Magisk app on devices lower than Android 5.0
• [MagiskHide] Fix a bug when stopping MagiskHide does not take effect
• [MagiskBoot] Fix bug when unpacking lz4_lg compressed boot images
• [MagiskInit] Support Galaxy S21 series
• [MagiskSU] Fix incorrect APEX paths that caused libsqlite.so fail to load

PW

 

[DiamondJohn]

I'm pretty sure that Google's choices are not driven by any considerations, whatsoever, concerning the ease of rooting devices and upgrading the OS's on these rooted devices, espcically with regard to getting these rooted devices to pass SafetyNet.

My statement stands, as Google would see rooting as NOT being in my best interest. And in Googles eyes, somehow faking / working around safetynet or having a weakness to allow workaround it, would definitely be considered contradictory to my best interest. Remember, they are producing for the mass public, not for the small percentage of knowledgeable people.

 

[pndwal]

A little insight into the 'crashes after hiding the Magisk app' fix:

John Wu, 33m

Pushed a new canary build that fixed crashes when the Magisk app is hidden. I assumed that class references in layout XMLs will be expanded by AAPT to the full path just like AndroidManifest.xml. Apparently I'm wrong...

Re. 'Support Galaxy S21 series' fix:

John Wu, 19h

Update: Exynos variant confirmed working with the additional patch

PW

 

[HippoMan]

My statement stands, as Google would see rooting as NOT being in my best interest. And in Googles eyes, somehow faking / working around safetynet or having a weakness to allow workaround it, would definitely be considered contradictory to my best interest. Remember, they are producing for the mass public, not for the small percentage of knowledgeable people.

I don't disagree with your statement that this is what Google sees as being in the best interest of the mass public, even though it isn't in the best interest of people like me who want to root. I'm not accusing Google of having bad intentions; it's just that they are not working to promote functionality that happens to be desired by me and by others who want rooted devices.

And therefore, as time goes on, my life gets more complicated as I try to live in the Google world with a rooted device. And my desire to avoid this complication as much as possible is why I am holding back on upgrading to A11 and to the post-21.4 Magisk.