[ROM][11.0_r35]JAGUAR ONEPLUS 6T FAJITA OFFICIAL V7.1 UPDATED April 9

[TheCrispyChaos]

Just clean flashed lastest update and as another user already posted I cant enroll my fingerprint :/

Edit: Just clean flashed twice but no cigar, onto another rom I guess

 

[urgali]

Just clean flashed lastest update and as another user already posted I cant enroll my fingerprint :/

Edit: Just clean flashed twice but no cigar, onto another rom I guess

Still, none of you is providing logs to dev as he already requested billion of times.

I will try to flash the ROM this weekend and try out fp to get some logs, was planning to wait a bit since I don't have much time but I see people on xda has become lazier than me

 

[urgali]

Thanks for the logcat. Unfortunately, it does not show any error with in-display fingerprint. Nor, do I find any differences in my fajita device tree, as compared to Lineage, Crdroid, Candyrom and a few others. So, I am thinking this is a kernel issue. As such, I am rebasing my kernel, which will be included in the next release, when April security patches become available.

Hi there!

Here is a logcat while trying to add FP on latest build; no icon is present and nothing happens if i try to "click" where the FP icon should be.

Additional info:
-Clean flashed JAGUAR rom over OOS 10.3.8 as base
-Stock JAGUAR kernel
-No GAPPS
-Magisk installed
-No other personalization, after first boot up went straight to FP and reported here

 

[optimumpro]

April 9, New Release V-7.1

1. Fingerprint enrollment FIXED (confirmed)
2. WIFI time-out option
3. Updated kernel

Download in post #3

 

[mitchst2]

April 9, New Release V-7.1

1. Fingerprint enrollment FIXED (confirmed)
2. WIFI time-out option
3. Updated kernel

Download in post #3

Great ROM glad you got the FP sensor sorted. My only gripe is the app locker. For a security centricR

April 9, New Release V-7.1

1. Fingerprint enrollment FIXED (confirmed)
2. WIFI time-out option
3. Updated kernel

Download in post #3

Great ROM glad you got the FP sensor sorted. My only gripe is the app locker. For a security centric ROM it isn't very good as it only works from the launcher. Havoc OS has a system level locker that works everywhere. Its only a suggestion but in my opinion its a better implementation given what you have tried to achieve here .

 

[optimumpro]

Great ROM glad you got the FP sensor sorted. My only gripe is the app locker. For a security centricR

Great ROM glad you got the FP sensor sorted. My only gripe is the app locker. For a security centric ROM it isn't very good as it only works from the launcher. Havoc OS has a system level locker that works everywhere. Its only a suggestion but in my opinion its a better implementation given what you have tried to achieve here .

Builtin Launcher3 provides app locking and app hiding.

From what I remember about the other 'applocker', it doesn't require pin/fingerprint when accessing the settings themselves. I could be wrong, but if that's true, that's no security at all, as it only gives you the false sense... .

 

[mitchst2]

Builtin Launcher3 provides app locking and app hiding.

From what I remember about the other 'applocker', it doesn't require pin/fingerprint when accessing the settings themselves. I could be wrong, but if that's true, that's no security at all, as it only gives you the false sense... .

Settings has to be set to require pin/FP same as this I think. However if access to settings is left unlocked apps still require pin/FP from settings. However with launcher level security only I can launch apps from settings even if locked. System level would be better IMO.

 

[optimumpro]

Settings has to be set to require pin/FP same as this I think. However if access to settings is left unlocked apps still require pin/FP from settings. However with launcher level security only I can launch apps from settings even if locked. System level would be better IMO.

But in Launcher, you can also hide an app, and by default, you can't access app hiding/locking settings without a pin/password.

Also, I am not sure you can lock Settings within the app locker, and without it, it's useless.

 

[mitchst2]

But in Launcher, you can also hide an app, and by default, you can't access app hiding/locking settings without a pin/password.

Also, I am not sure you can lock Settings within the app locker, and without it, it's useless.

But you can still access settings from quick settings even if you've hidden and locked it from the launcher. Now that isn't secure.

Havoc OS has it integrated into Settings at the system level and you can lock settings. It is not a standalone app. No matter where you launch an app from it is locked.

This is your ROM if you're happy the way it is fair enough.

 

[optimumpro]

But you can still access settings from quick settings even if you've hidden and locked it from the launcher. Now that isn't secure.

Havoc OS has it integrated into Settings at the system level and you can lock settings. It is not a standalone app. No matter where you launch an app from it is locked.

This is your ROM if you're happy the way it is fair enough.

Can you confirm that in the other app locker, when Settings is locked, you can't access it from Quicksettings?

The commit is rather large, and if you can still access Settings from Quicksettings, it wouldn't make sense to implement it.

 

[mitchst2]

Can you confirm that in the other app locker, when Settings is locked, you can't access it from Quicksettings?

The commit is rather large, and if you can still access Settings from Quicksettings, it wouldn't make sense to implement it.

Running your ROM at the minute so can't check but I'm sure the lock is global.

 

[maximus2708]

Does face unlock work?

 

[mitchst2]

Does face unlock work?

Yes

 

[mitchst2]

Can you confirm that in the other app locker, when Settings is locked, you can't access it from Quicksettings?

The commit is rather large, and if you can still access Settings from Quicksettings, it wouldn't make sense to implement it.

ShapeShiftOS just added

- system wide applocker and launcher apphider

Only mentioning it in case it's helps implement. Also as mentioned above app hider needs to be retained in the launcher.

 

[optimumpro]

ShapeShiftOS just added

- system wide applocker and launcher apphider

Only mentioning it in case it's helps implement. Also as mentioned above app hider needs to be retained in the launcher.

App locker is a Paranoid Android commit. System-wide applocker doesn't mean Settings can't be accessed via Quicksettings short cut, which by the way could simply be removed (needs implementation).

I need someone to confirm that with Settings locked, Settings can't be accessed via QS short cut. Because if it can, there is no point in applocker (vs. Launcher 3 implementation).

 

[mitchst2]

App locker is a Paranoid Android commit. System-wide applocker doesn't mean Settings can't be accessed via Quicksettings short cut, which by the way could simply be removed (needs implementation).

I need someone to confirm that with Settings locked, Settings can't be accessed via QS short cut. Because if it can, there is no point in applocker (vs. Launcher 3 implementation).

Asked here:

[ROM][11.0.0_r34][OFFICIAL] ShapeShiftOS [fajita]

/* * Your warranty is now void. * * I am not responsible for bricked devices, dead SD cards, * thermonuclear war, or you getting fired because the alarm app failed. Please * do some research if you have any concerns about features included in...

forum.xda-developers.com

If nobody replies I'll reinstall Havoc.

 

[optimumpro]

Asked here:

[ROM][11.0.0_r34][OFFICIAL] ShapeShiftOS [fajita]

/* * Your warranty is now void. * * I am not responsible for bricked devices, dead SD cards, * thermonuclear war, or you getting fired because the alarm app failed. Please * do some research if you have any concerns about features included in...

forum.xda-developers.com

If nobody replies I'll reinstall Havoc.

I have just built Jaguar with Paranoid app locker implemented:

This doesn't even have an option to lock Settings.apk. It is not listed there. So, it looks like app locker is useless, as compared with Launcher 3 implementation.

The only reason someone might want this is if they are using a different launcher, but again, applocker provides less protection than the Launcher 3 implementation.

 

[mitchst2]

I have just built Jaguar with Paranoid app locker implemented:

This doesn't even have an option to lock Settings.apk. It is not listed there. So, it looks like app locker is useless, as compared with Launcher 3 implementation.

The only reason someone might want this is if they are using a different launcher, but again, applocker provides less protection than the Launcher 3 implementation.

Don't know about paranoid but I'll try havoc later.

 

[optimumpro]

Don't know about paranoid but I'll try havoc later.

It's the same commit authored by Paranoid guys. You can see it in Havoc and many other roms. I had it in Android 10 and I didn't like it..., didn't remember why at the time, but now I know.

But it's already in Jaguar, so, I'll leave it for those who use other launchers.

 

[mitchst2]

It's the same commit authored by Paranoid guys. You can see it in Havoc and many other roms. I had it in Android 10 and I didn't like it..., didn't remember why at the time, but now I know.

But it's already in Jaguar, so, I'll leave it for those who use other launchers.

Dang you were right - settings can't be locked.

Jaguar issues with Settings app lock
Quick settings & Recents still gives access

52.21 MB file on MEGA

mega.nz

Havoc (Paranoid)
No settings lock but it is possible to create a bit of a workaround by hiding all access to settings other than through a locked launcher. You must remember to clear settings from recents though.

127.54 MB file on MEGA

mega.nz

Neither is ideal but for me System level is better as all apps that can be locked are protected everywhere not just the launcher.

Why can't settings be app locked anyway?