UPDATE: As mentioned in previous post, I got past the first "badged version" error and was able to register my phone on the company profile!Dang.. that's unfortunate. I think the launcher service restarts too fast. Hard to say.
As far as logs and reporting - MobileIron is aware of this problem, however they made that claim last year and thus far posted no updates. That's what I meant by MobileIron hell. :/
Good news.. I managed to edit the MobileIron APK and remove that obnoxious check. I highlighted the code I deleted:
![]()
However, I had to sign the application with debug keys, so you will not be able to update MobileIron via Play Store. This is probably the best I can do for you.
Also, make sure you install MobileIron once, then uninstall it again from the Play Store before you install this. MobileIron does something wonky when that badged version error comes up, and it hides (disables) the client.
Also, keep in mind: I don't know how MobileIron will react to you using an edited client. I tested this with my Samsung / Dual Messenger, and I got past the splash screen. I did not attempt to register.
https://mega.nz/#!0yQxAK7A!6Ms_SWAzcuis6Gy36LrncAeXhnL9Iwgb5cGkQwWV-0w
However, it wants to proceed with the "Secure Apps Manager", and now its stops with an error there: "the secure apps data has been removed per company security policy. The reason is: security on your Android device is compromised in violation of the corporate security policy. To enable access to corporate resources, please contact your Administrator" .
I tried several times but I do not get past this screen. I even tried to install the official version over the edited one, but that was messing up everything. Also I am on the official ENCOMMON v1.06 rom, no developer options on, fingerprint off, no rooting, no bootloader unlocking, etc etc.
So, it looks like the Secure Apps Manager is also checking things on the dual instances or container storage systems?
Do you have any clue to get any further? You already managed to bypass the first error, could you check if something similar is possible on the second (above mentioned) error? Thanks again friend!!!