Database Users

Request for _CURRENT_ docs on creating a simple update.zip

I have searched, read, and tested my butt off on this so, I'm not posting without doing my own homework. I promise.
I'm looking for CURRENT documentation on how to create a standard update.zip file that simply copies a file into /system/foo/bar and chmods it.
All the links I've looked at seem to have old deprecated syntax on the update-script file, or the examples given simply do not work.
I do NOT want to download someone else's script-pak, windows app, or any other such thing that makes it for me.
As for signing, I'm completely comfortable signing using the SDK, although I'll probably take the easy route with ZipSigner/Signapktic running on the phone/tab now that I've discovered those.
Can someone please post a very simple howto?

Thanks for posting this -- I'm with you, I'm not a script-kiddie using someone else's tools, I want to learn it for myself, but like you, I've searched, and what I've found -- while probably correct and accurate -- isn't working the way they say it should. I've even followed the directions on android.com itself and they fail, so I'm starting to suspect my recovery or my ROM is at fault, not the signing itself.
I have a bunch of files I want to place in /system/foo/bar and chmod, as you say, and the error I'm getting is "No signature (172 files) Verification Failed". I do indeed have signatures in the file, as when I open them I see CERT.RSA and others that weren't there before signing, so IDK what the deal is with the error I'm getting (obviously something's missing -- maybe a public key verification from a trusted authority like Thawte or VeriSign).
I see you, too, are getting as much help as I am seeing others get. They start threads, get all sorts of praise from script kiddies who have no clue and just see a point-click solution, and then someone asks for real help and everyone shuts up for months until the thread eventually dies.
But kudos to you, sir, for being in the same boat as I!

cj chitwood said:
Thanks for posting this -- I'm with you, I'm not a script-kiddie using someone else's tools, I want to learn it for myself, but like you, I've searched, and what I've found -- while probably correct and accurate -- isn't working the way they say it should. I've even followed the directions on android.com itself and they fail, so I'm starting to suspect my recovery or my ROM is at fault, not the signing itself.
I have a bunch of files I want to place in /system/foo/bar and chmod, as you say, and the error I'm getting is "No signature (172 files) Verification Failed". I do indeed have signatures in the file, as when I open them I see CERT.RSA and others that weren't there before signing, so IDK what the deal is with the error I'm getting (obviously something's missing -- maybe a public key verification from a trusted authority like Thawte or VeriSign).
I see you, too, are getting as much help as I am seeing others get. They start threads, get all sorts of praise from script kiddies who have no clue and just see a point-click solution, and then someone asks for real help and everyone shuts up for months until the thread eventually dies.
But kudos to you, sir, for being in the same boat as I!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
See my other reply to you in a similar topic.

I may be wrong but dont you have to sign system apps with the same key that the rom was signed with.
You can compile and sign from source and then add system apps or data
From something awesome

killersnowman said:
I may be wrong but dont you have to sign system apps with the same key that the rom was signed with.
You can compile and sign from source and then add system apps or data
From something awesome
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
System apps must be signed using the same key that is used to sign the platform. This has nothing to do with the ZIP signature that may or may not be present on a recovery update. The actual platform public key is stored within the ROM and gets extracted just like any other file in the system image.
If you compile from source, you use the platform key provided in the source; typically: build/target/product/security/platform.x509.pem. If you are an OEM like say HTC, you'll use your own key to compile the platform and sign the system apps.

Gene Poole said:
System apps must be signed using the same key that is used to sign the platform. This has nothing to do with the ZIP signature that may or may not be present on a recovery update. The actual platform public key is stored within the ROM and gets extracted just like any other file in the system image.
If you compile from source, you use the platform key provided in the source; typically: build/target/product/security/platform.x509.pem. If you are an OEM like say HTC, you'll use your own key to compile the platform and sign the system apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So in order to put ringtones in the appropriate system folder, I have to sign the update.zip with the same key that e.g. Roalex uses to sign the ROM? Of course that won't work, as I don't have his key, and then there are kernels and themes that other people make that work, and surely they don't have Roalex's key.
So I think I'm misunderstanding this still.
But if I compile from source, I sign with the key that's in the source, so if I know Roalex compiles from source, if he signs with the source key, I can sign an update.zip with that key and it will work?
Also, Recovery says there is NO signature in the file, but does that not necessarily mean really what it says?

I don't know who Roalex is. I don't know anything about your device per se. I don't know anything about Amon-Ra recovery. I was hoping some others would jump into this thread to help out with these unknowns. I've always used clockworkmod recovery so that's all I can speak for, but I did D/L an Amon-Ra recovery to analyze it.
As far as custom ROMs go, most are based on some OEM ROM and still contain system files signed by the OEM and the OEM certs are still included with the ROM so no modifications are necessary.
If you have a simple update.zip with just some files to be written to the system partition, then signing the update.zip file is unnecessary. A signed update.zip is only useful when it is distributed by an OEM with an official OEM update since the stock recovery will refuse anything not signed by the OEM. One of the reasons for using a custom recovery on rooted devices is that it gets around this security check to allow you to install custom stuff written by someone other than the OEM.
If you are having trouble installing an update.zip that contains an otherwise valid working "amend" or "edify" script, then I don't know what the issue might be. Clockworkmod recovery (at least all the versions I've run) has an option to toggle signature checks in the "apply update from SD card" sub-menu, but I don't know of any good reason that it is there since it only has one key and it is the same "test" key distributed in official source distributions, and the toggle is off by default.

I've been poking around github and grabbed the current source for amon-ra recovery (https://github.com/packetlss/amonra_bootable_recovery) and interestingly, amon-ra has a signature verifyer that is missing from clockworkmod recovery. It actually parses the zip file for the META information and ensures that the included signing key for the zip is consistent with the manifest and each file's signature.
So, it would seem that your update.zip should be signed the same way an APK is signed, using jarsigner.
Do you have a valid signing certificate and are you signing your update.zip correctly?

After learning to compile cm from source I found it easiest just to edit the .zip and then resigning the zip. I have added a few programs into /system and never had an issue. Perhaps this is because it's cm?

Gene Poole said:
I've been poking around github and grabbed the current source for amon-ra recovery (https://github.com/packetlss/amonra_bootable_recovery) and interestingly, amon-ra has a signature verifyer that is missing from clockworkmod recovery. It actually parses the zip file for the META information and ensures that the included signing key for the zip is consistent with the manifest and each file's signature.
So, it would seem that your update.zip should be signed the same way an APK is signed, using jarsigner.
Do you have a valid signing certificate and are you signing your update.zip correctly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i was just going to conjecture that perhaps the amon-ra recovery is verifying sigs. you however have found proof. thank you
the only way someone would have the valid sig is for it to either be public, or for them to have signed the platform themselves and have there own private key. i ran into this same problem when investigating the android.intent.action.REBOOT intent which can only be broadcast by system apps signed with the same sig as the platform.

Gene Poole said:
I don't know who Roalex is [...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, he's the guy who put together the COS-DS ROM for G1/HTC Dream based on CyanogenMod and AOSP sources.
Gene Poole said:
As far as custom ROMs go, most are based on some OEM ROM and still contain system files signed by the OEM and the OEM certs are still included with the ROM so no modifications are necessary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait... can signing the zip be as easy as including the CERT.MSA and related other two files as found in the other update.zip files I have that work? Seems that would be too easy... I assumed there would be something in the zip file headers that would be modified to reflect a key as well so that they would also have to match. Maybe this is getting too in-depth...
Gene Poole said:
If you have a simple update.zip with just some files to be written to the system partition, then signing the update.zip file is unnecessary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So just put together a common zip file with the update-script and the right folder structure in it, and I'm good? I tried that too and it also failed. Does the NAME of the file have to be update.zip in that case, though? I didn't actually try that. My unsigned one was named "CJ-Audio-Update_unsigned.zip" or something like that.
Gene Poole said:
A signed update.zip is only useful when it is distributed by an OEM with an official OEM update since the stock recovery will refuse anything not signed by the OEM. One of the reasons for using a custom recovery on rooted devices is that it gets around this security check to allow you to install custom stuff written by someone other than the OEM.
If you are having trouble installing an update.zip that contains an otherwise valid working "amend" or "edify" script, then I don't know what the issue might be. Clockworkmod recovery (at least all the versions I've run) has an option to toggle signature checks in the "apply update from SD card" sub-menu, but I don't know of any good reason that it is there since it only has one key and it is the same "test" key distributed in official source distributions, and the toggle is off by default.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay then. From here it's a lot clearer than a week ago. Thanks for taking the time to explain it so thoroughly... I think so many people understand so little and they're so quick to say "here, just use this other guy's tool LOL!!!111!1 he r0x0r$!!!1!1". I mean, that's great, that there are tools, but I want to understand it, not just be a script kiddie with someone else's tools, blindly trusting that they're doing it right and all that. Not saying the tools are bad or wrong, but by knowing myself, I know whether it's done right, you know? Same reason I learned automotive mechanicals, computers, and electrical wiring. Oh, and plumbing is slowly being added and in a few years roofing
Then it's on to framing as I build a 20-by-20-foot "workshop" in the back yard but I digress...
Thanks again!

Well this is interesting...
I took the MSA and other two files from the COS-DS update, and put them in a new zip containing my other files (not signed) and it didn't complain about no signature... instead, it failed saying some lib file is missing. Stagefright or some such. Progress is still progress though...
EDIT:
Okay, so it looks like there's something in those signats that says, "hey, look for all these other files too", so I'ma try a different tack...
EDIT2:
I guess I'm just gonna have to use Testkeys. They appear to have worked. :/ But if everyone else is doing it that way, I guess there's no harm.

Unpack stock System.img?

Hello Moto
I've just downloaded Verizon Jelly Bean 4.1.1 by "Firmware Team".
Just to play with it a little, extract apks and test them on Galaxy SII Skyrocket.
The thing is i'm having a hard time opening system.img.
Now i've tried LinuxReader, Unyaffs and ext2explore/read but none of these can open it, they all say that it's an unrecognized image.
Do you guys know how to properly open a stock moto System.img?

lingowistico said:
Hello Moto
I've just downloaded Verizon Jelly Bean 4.1.1 by "Firmware Team".
Just to play with it a little, extract apks and test them on Galaxy SII Skyrocket.
The thing is i'm having a hard time opening system.img.
Now i've tried LinuxReader, Unyaffs and ext2explore/read but none of these can open it, they all say that it's an unrecognized image.
Do you guys know how to properly open a stock moto System.img?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google for a tool called simg2img (I used the python script that appears in get first few results, there should be other versions as well). That will unpack the image into a plain ext4 image that you can mount with any Linux pc (I recommend using a virtual machine if you have windows or mac).
Happy hacking!
Sent from my XT907

aslomagic, did you try this with the firmware lingowistico is talking about? I also tried before to unpack system.img from this package, and system.img.ext4 from ICS package, and another ICS soft for XT897, and all of them give "Bad magic" error in simg2img. All of those softs are published by the same "Firmware Team" - maybe that's the case? I also tried dsixda kitchen (which also uses simg2img, but anyway...) and it also didn't work. Might be also some custom Motorola's approach to system.img....
Could you possibly help? Thanks.

micx_pl said:
aslomagic, did you try this with the firmware lingowistico is talking about? I also tried before to unpack system.img from this package, and system.img.ext4 from ICS package, and another ICS soft for XT897, and all of them give "Bad magic" error in simg2img. All of those softs are published by the same "Firmware Team" - maybe that's the case? I also tried dsixda kitchen (which also uses simg2img, but anyway...) and it also didn't work. Might be also some custom Motorola's approach to system.img....
Could you possibly help? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I know for a fact that those images are packed ext4, but I haven't tried specifically with that one.
Now that you mention, I think I remember signed images (like those ones) have some additional header, maybe that needs to be removed with an hex editor, or with dd of you like
If I get a chance, I'll try and report back...
Sent from my XT907

aslomagic said:
Well, I know for a fact that those images are packed ext4, but I haven't tried specifically with that one.
Now that you mention, I think I remember signed images (like those ones) have some additional header, maybe that needs to be removed with an hex editor, or with dd of you like
If I get a chance, I'll try and report back...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I tried, and yes, it complains it cannot find the magic (again, I'm using the python script). I modified the script to look for the magic value in the first 50Mb of the file, and if it finds it, it starts unpacking from there. Python scripts are very easy to play with
It seems to work for me, but I don't have a linux vm handy to see if it mounts correctly (I'm currently on a mac). micx_pl, can you give it a try and let me know?
I had to zip the file even though it's very small because the forum won't let me upload a .py file... who knows, just unzip it.

Holy cow! It works! You're the master I was looking for such solution everywhere, and was stunned to see barely few topics with similar problem, and no solution at all. Thanks!

micx_pl said:
Holy cow! It works! You're the master I was looking for such solution everywhere, and was stunned to see barely few topics with similar problem, and no solution at all. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome, glad I could help!
Sent from my XT907

aslomagic said:
Ok, I tried, and yes, it complains it cannot find the magic (again, I'm using the python script). I modified the script to look for the magic value in the first 50Mb of the file, and if it finds it, it starts unpacking from there. Python scripts are very easy to play with
It seems to work for me, but I don't have a linux vm handy to see if it mounts correctly (I'm currently on a mac). micx_pl, can you give it a try and let me know?
I had to zip the file even though it's very small because the forum won't let me upload a .py file... who knows, just unzip it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HOLY $#!+ THANKS!!! I've been trying to decompress the moto images for awhile and have never been able to do it until now

Would it be possible to modify make_ext4fs to re-sparse the image and copy the original signature?

Q9Nap said:
Would it be possible to modify make_ext4fs to re-sparse the image and copy the original signature?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome to try ... my guess is that it could be made to work if the image was an official, originally signed image that was unpacked by the script above or equivalent, but if you want to modify it, re-pack it and re-attach the signature, most likely the signature won't match the content. But I may be wrong, so if somebody is willing to try, best of luck to you
If your goal is just to create a packed image, but not necessarily signed (needs bootloader unlock), then I'd say it's definitely possible, search around here.

aslomagic said:
You're welcome to try ... my guess is that it could be made to work if the image was an official, originally signed image that was unpacked by the script above or equivalent, but if you want to modify it, re-pack it and re-attach the signature, most likely the signature won't match the content. But I may be wrong, so if somebody is willing to try, best of luck to you
If your goal is just to create a packed image, but not necessarily signed (needs bootloader unlock), then I'd say it's definitely possible, search around here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm sure you're right about the signature not working on a modified image; it was just wishful thinking. the idea of course would be to inject superuser.apk and su, which wouldn't be necessary on a bootloader unlocked device.
for bootloader unlocked devices though, the ability to repack a modified image does give you another way to build custom roms. here's the code to unpack and repack images with simg2img.py and make_ext4fs:
Code:
mkdir system
./simg2img.py system.img.ext4 system.raw
sudo mount -t ext4 -o loop system.raw system/
#make changes, then:
wc -c system.raw #lists size in bytes of system.raw
sudo make_ext4fs -s -l 1234567890 -a system system.img system/ #where 1234567890 is output from wc -c
sudo umount system
rm -rf system
i've used this proecess with samsung system images, should work for moto images now too (bootloader unlocked, of course)

Yep, it's a good cheat sheet reference
Besides, on razr m and hd at least, you can also use this with safestrap without unlocking the bootloader.

aslomagic said:
Besides, on razr m and hd at least, you can also use this with safestrap without unlocking the bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure what you mean by this; do you mean you could mount a modified system.img with safestrap? I guess it's possible since safestrap uses a system.img on the emmc, interesting idea

Q9Nap said:
Not sure what you mean by this; do you mean you could mount a modified system.img with safestrap? I guess it's possible since safestrap uses a system.img on the emmc, interesting idea
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that's what I mean, more or less. You don't need safestrap to just mount it (use the terminal and "mount"), but you can use it to boot from it and try it.
I did this to try the Telstra image that pjcons dumped, which is pre-rooted and not signed (there it's no official signed image to date), and with a few tricks it worked without me having to unlock the bootloader.
Sent from my XT907

aslomagic said:
Google for a tool called simg2img (I used the python script that appears in get first few results, there should be other versions as well). That will unpack the image into a plain ext4 image that you can mount with any Linux pc (I recommend using a virtual machine if you have windows or mac).
Happy hacking!
Sent from my XT907
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hello, i cant find anything on the basics of how this works, could you point me somewhere that explains it step by step or do one here. sorry of the noob question

TheWhiteChallenger said:
hello, i cant find anything on the basics of how this works, could you point me somewhere that explains it step by step or do one here. sorry of the noob question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1588461

CNexus said:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1588461
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the link I need to go learn Linux now. Lol I dontbgt the virtual machine thing at all. Its basically a Linux emulator right?
Sent from my XT1080 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

TheWhiteChallenger said:
Thanks for the link I need to go learn Linux now. Lol I dontbgt the virtual machine thing at all. Its basically a Linux emulator right?
Sent from my XT1080 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No need to
http://sourceforge.net/projects/androidicsjbext/

CNexus said:
No need to
http://sourceforge.net/projects/androidicsjbext/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh damn it. ok first i do appreciate the help. but that sucked. that was the frist program i tryed and it gives me "unknown file format" have i just been screwing up from the begining?

[Q] What about the Alcatel OT Fire C (4019X)?

Hello!
I've been trying to see if there's any root exploits, ROMs, whatever for this phone. Is it Hamachi (4012) compatible? Or is it another species? It does seem there's not much about it.

The only thing I've found is this mail thread.
comments DOT gmane DOT org / gmane DOT comp DOT mozilla DOT devel DOT b2g / 12487
The Fire C is a Jelly Bean based one. Start from there.
If I can successfully flash mine will post results. Wish me luck.
resetreboot said:
Hello!
I've been trying to see if there's any root exploits, ROMs, whatever for this phone. Is it Hamachi (4012) compatible? Or is it another species? It does seem there's not much about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

mancvso said:
The only thing I've found is this mail thread.
comments DOT gmane DOT org / gmane DOT comp DOT mozilla DOT devel DOT b2g / 12487
The Fire C is a Jelly Bean based one. Start from there.
If I can successfully flash mine will post results. Wish me luck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. Bricked phone.
Anyone knows how to use this files?
forum DOT gsmhosting DOT com / vbb / f272 / flash-file-request-alcatel-4019x-1883599

Where did you find these files? Can you point me to them?
Maybe I can make something out of it. The MTK Droid Tools is totally unable of dumping anything from this phone and it's supposedly designed for these kind of phones (the chipset is a MediaTek).
If only I could snatch the boot image...! But the /dev/ block devices do not make any sense to me, otherwise I'd have at least something to go back when I screw the boot loader.

The URL is in the post above, just replace " DOT " with "." and delete spaces.
Anyway, the direct link is
mediafireDOTcom/?t6x77dxpb9bucbf
Which one is boot, system, userdata? Do you have the original file sizes?
I've tried with various Hamachi (4012X) boot.img but none of them works.
PD: I cannot post links.

I managed to fix my phone!!
In the folder above (Mediafire)
boot.img is B1TC000112R0.mbn
recovery.img is R1TC000112R0.mbn
system.img Y1TC000112R0.mbn
Be sure to explicitly start in fastboot mode (Power+Volume down)
As a side note, if load recovery.img in boot.img the phone will start in that mode. I've had to do that to make it boot (and them flash boot.img)
Good luck. Pass it on.

Wonderful! This is really useful info.
Now we can try to couple it with the FFOS SDK and try to get root and maybe upgrade to 2.0...
D'loading so I can start hacking...

resetreboot said:
Wonderful! This is really useful info.
Now we can try to couple it with the FFOS SDK and try to get root and maybe upgrade to 2.0...
D'loading so I can start hacking...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please do so! An upgrade to 2.x is crucial even for copy/pasting text.

mancvso said:
I managed to fix my phone!!
In the folder above (Mediafire)
boot.img is B1TC000112R0.mbn
recovery.img is R1TC000112R0.mbn
system.img Y1TC000112R0.mbn
Be sure to explicitly start in fastboot mode (Power+Volume down)
As a side note, if load recovery.img in boot.img the phone will start in that mode. I've had to do that to make it boot (and them flash boot.img)
Good luck. Pass it on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great news, remember you can type *#3228# to know what are all these filenames in your device.
I have a 4019M (sold unlocked in this country) and I am interested on this, however I don't have experience flashing yet, as this is my first smartphone. If you need to do some tests from here for this particular device to get root and upgrades, feel free to ask!
This device is qualcomm based and gonk is jelly bean based, if I recall correctly.

Some news, they finally uploaded this month 4019X / 4019A GPL compliance sources into sourceforge · net / projects / alcatel / files /

Some progress to get a proper factory image
When using One Touch Update, I tried to figure what happens with the factory image download from the vendor. It downloads a bunch of 64 KiB files stored in a downloaded/ subdir of the programfiles application folder. They are downloaded via TCP, not using HTTP. Once the download is complete, out1.data and out2.data are generated, I guess all these files get somewhat assembled into these. They are placed in the programfiles application folder too, 203 MiB each. They look like a couple of Android sparse image files, according to header magic numbers. These files should be copypasted somewhere before ending the flash operation and closing the application, otherwise they will be deleted. Maybe these files contain interesting stuff :good:. There is also a log file showing addresses where is flashing and sizes of the images of the factory flashing operation.
Maybe some USB sniffing is worth, but not tested.

4019X Brick
Hi guys.
I have a 4019X bricked becasuse i tried to install a wrong system.img.
Can you upload again the factory flash images? The mediafire link is broken.
I made a backup of the original system with adb pull /system /system as mozilla´s recommend in the Firefox OS build prerequisites.
But i dont know how to compile to restore my phone. I tried this:
ANDROIDFS_DIR=<path to system backup> ./config.sh tarako
ANDROIDFS_DIR=<path to system backup> ./build.sh
but always fail.
If you dont know, can you tell me how to use the source code of alcatel to unbrik my phone:
sourceforge.net ... OT_FF_4019X_20150408.tar.xz
Thanks

Backup of the stock One Touch Fire C files
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nzn6g4qhh585ho4/4019X-2[X=A,B,C,D]TBHU1.rar?dl=0
Please keep us informed on any progress, now that Firefox has freed itself.

can u tell me if this rom has portuguese language? i need 4019x android or firefox with portuguese language? or anyway to add language?
best regards

mancvso said:
I managed to fix my phone!!
In the folder above (Mediafire)
boot.img is B1TC000112R0.mbn
recovery.img is R1TC000112R0.mbn
system.img Y1TC000112R0.mbn
Be sure to explicitly start in fastboot mode (Power+Volume down)
As a side note, if load recovery.img in boot.img the phone will start in that mode. I've had to do that to make it boot (and them flash boot.img)
Good luck. Pass it on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi! I can not fix my Alcatel OT- 4019A yet. ¿could you please help me with that?
I don't know exactly what do with that archives.
Thanks!

Gsmfanatic said:
can u tell me if this rom has portuguese language? i need 4019x android or firefox with portuguese language? or anyway to add language?
best regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The firmware doesn't have the Portuguese language, flashed it myself ...

Analysis of Huawei's GMS installer

As many of you know, Huawei released a GMS installer so that we can (FINALLY!) have google on our Chinese model phones.
I was wondering how it worked, so I looked into it, and I'd like to share what I've found.
The APK is signed with Huawei's key. I guess the way it's installed, it runs as a system app.
Inside the APK file, you will find assets/update_data_public.zip -- this is the payload. The payload zip file is not mentioned in the manifest file, but it is a flashable update file signed by huawei. The payload simply flashes the GoogleServicesFramework, GoogleLoginService, and GmsCore folders to /system/app
Where it gets interesting is, we can use this to flash whatever we want onto the phone (as long as it's something signed by Huawei, of course). Simply replace update_data_public.zip with whatever file you want to flash (rename it to update_data_public.zip of course) and if it's signed by Huawei, it will install.
Theoretically, you could put, for example, a European firmware zip file, and it would flash. I haven't tried this yet, though.
So then, this begs the question, "How does it do this?" Here's how.
It moves the payload file (update_data_public.zip) to the folder /data/update and runs the following command:
Code:
/cache/recovery/command --update_package=/data/update/update_data_public.zip
And that's basically it.
I don't have my USB cable with me at work to try anything over ADB, but if anyone wants to try any of this, go for it! I don't think this will lead to root or anything, but it will probably lead to an easier way of installing packages, which means we don't have to do everything via eRecovery.

That is a very interesting find. Cannot wait to see someone tests your theory.
duraaraa said:
As many of you know, Huawei released a GMS installer so that we can (FINALLY!) have google on our Chinese model phones.
I was wondering how it worked, so I looked into it, and I'd like to share what I've found.
The APK is signed with Huawei's key. I guess the way it's installed, it runs as a system app.
Inside the APK file, you will find assets/update_data_public.zip -- this is the payload. The payload zip file is not mentioned in the manifest file, but it is a flashable update file signed by huawei. The payload simply flashes the GoogleServicesFramework, GoogleLoginService, and GmsCore folders to /system/app
Where it gets interesting is, we can use this to flash whatever we want onto the phone (as long as it's something signed by Huawei, of course). Simply replace update_data_public.zip with whatever file you want to flash (rename it to update_data_public.zip of course) and if it's signed by Huawei, it will install.
Theoretically, you could put, for example, a European firmware zip file, and it would flash. I haven't tried this yet, though.
So then, this begs the question, "How does it do this?" Here's how.
It moves the payload file (update_data_public.zip) to the folder /data/update and runs the following command:
Code:
/cache/recovery/command --update_package=/data/update/update_data_public.zip
And that's basically it.
I don't have my USB cable with me at work to try anything over ADB, but if anyone wants to try any of this, go for it! I don't think this will lead to root or anything, but it will probably lead to an easier way of installing packages, which means we don't have to do everything via eRecovery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Excellent idea. Modifying the apk will remove Huawei's signature, no?

onslaught86 said:
Excellent idea. Modifying the apk will remove Huawei's signature, no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I tried modifying the APK and it was a failure, of course. So I don't think any new flashing method will become of this. At the very least, though, we know more about how it works.

onslaught86 said:
Excellent idea. Modifying the apk will remove Huawei's signature, no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes . We can compile/decompile but when install we'll have error in installation packet just because there is a bad sign. No possibility to recover a keystore from apk. So waste of time

So sorry it's out of topic, couldn't find it. I have huawei enjoy 7 or the kfc limited phone. Downloaded the gms installer but never work. Tried several gms installer and google installer
Here is the error on gms installer
Software install failed
Get help from emui.com/...
Reboot system now
I really like this phone. One of a kind, even though I promoted KFC indirectly ?

Janus Vulnerability Allows Attackers to Modify Apps without Affecting their Signature

In various thread scattered around the Fire and Kindle forums here on XDA, I talked about the possibility of decompiling an Amazon system APK, modifying the contents such as settings for the framework or changing permissions in an attempt to escalate privileges to some degree, maybe even root. I ran into several issues when attempting such a thing:
1) Using a PC, I found it almost impossible to successfully recompile a modified APK. Many of the tools like APKtool are just too complicated and missing even the slightest step will cause it to fail.
2) Surprisingly, I've had the opposite outcome using two apps. Using APK Export, I was able to export an APK from the system and use APK Editor Pro to modify permissions. I have been able to, on a consistent basis, use APK Editor Pro to decompile the Android Live Wallpaper system APKs to add or remove any permission from the APKs manifest. Installing the APKs did not result in getting them into /system/priv-app on my HD 8, but all modifications held over and over. But every time the signature is ruined, and installing as a system app fails again.
Janus can help escalating permissions even further when using the above method and maybe others, to modify system APKs. The question is: Can we use Janus to modify an APK in some form, to install an update to an Amazon system app, which would on install, execute code that would install SU binaries? What about any other known exploit patched or not? Could we fake the system into thinking a one-click-root app is a system app and install it? Link to XDA article.
Janus takes advantage of the fact that extra bytes go unnoticed in APK files and DEX files. The GuardSquare report explains that an APK file is a ZIP archive which can contain arbitrary bytes at the start, before and between its ZIP entries. The JAR signature scheme only takes into account the ZIP entries, ignoring any extra bytes when computing or verifying the application’s signature.
It goes on to explain that a DEX file, on the other hand, can contain arbitrary bytes at the end – after the regular sections of strings, classes, method definitions, etc. Therefore, a file can be a valid APK file and a valid DEX file at the same time.
GuardSquare also mentions that a key element of the vulnerability is a “harmless” feature of the Dalvik/ART virtual machine. The report states that in theory, the Android runtime loads the APK file, extracts its DEX file and then runs its code. However, in practice, the virtual machine (VM) can load and execute both APK files and DEX files. The issue is that when the VM gets an APK file, it still looks at the magic bytes in the header to decide which type of file it is: DEX or APK. On finding a DEX header, it loads the file as a DEX file. If it doesn’t find a header, it loads the file as an APK file containing a zip entry with a DEX file. Thus, it can misinterpret dual DEX/APK files.
GuardSquare says that an attacker can leverage this duality feature of the VM to add a malicious DEX file to a normal APK file without affecting its signature. The Android runtime will accept the APK file as a valid update to a legitimate earlier app version, but the Dalvik VM will load the code from the DEX file, which has been injected with malicious code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

This is a good point. I brought up something similar a few months ago in another thread.
With all the exploits discovered this year where's someone trying these exploits on this hw sw combo we have with FireOS.
Where's the fuzzer for all the system calls while trying the known exploits?
Where is the systematic approach to testing these from the pedants on the forum?
Sure you can reply with the usual comebacks, but try a different approach instead of more of the same.
With
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Robius said:
Where is the systematic approach to testing these from the pedants on the forum?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree! Those selfish tech elitists who put real life above the desires of strangers. They should dedicate themselves (without compensation) and their community resources to methodically crack this very important nut. Ya know, because exploiting a $50 entertainment gizmo should rise to the top of THEIR priority list. Sorry sweetie, daddy won't becoming to any of your soccer games this year; he has important work to do.

My point exactly.
You spent enough energy to respond to this in a sarcastic manner. Thank you
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Robius said:
My point exactly.
You spent enough energy to respond to this in a sarcastic manner. Thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Time well spent; appreciate the opportunity to respond in kind.

I have seen a bunch of hashes running through the terminal last time. Amazon may compare the hashes of the apks against a whitelist.

All right, I am ready to take this exploit on my 5th Gen. What I have to do??

Adyatan said:
All right, I am ready to take this exploit on my 5th Gen. What I have to do??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't sat down and looked into this too much so I'm not sure how to execute the exploit yet.
The idea I had been working on months ago was to somehow insert SU binaries into an Amazon system APK, and get it to install the modified APK as an update to an existing system app. The issue back then was the signature getting destroyed. If we can modify an Amazon system APK to contain a script to execute installation of SU binaries, the exploit might allow the APK to install as an update to an existing Amazon app and in theory install the SU binaries. Based on what little I've read, we would have to either 1) modify the existing DEX file of an Amazon system APK to contain code/script to install SU binaries or 2) create a new DEX file with the code and replace it with the original. My opinion is a better chance at the first method.
Now how to do all that using the Janus exploit? I do not yet know.

"An attacker exploiting the flaw could replace a trusted application that already has high privileges, such as a system app, with one of their updates to abuse the permissions that have already been granted. This could enable the attack to access sensitive information stored in the devices or enable the attacker to seize control over the device completely."
https://www.scmagazine.com/janus-vu...-android-50-devices-and-newer/article/713449/
So how would one go about updating a DEX file to contain 1) SU binaries that install upon 'updating' the app on installation? Or 2) clone a system app and edit or change the DEX file? 3) add an exploit script to a DEX file that would gain root (then you would install SU binaries and app)?
It seems the editing of the DEX file itself doesn't damage the signature and that's the nature of the exploit?

Hey is it possible to modify the permissions ota updater and remove the internet permissions so it can't update
I just found this https://github.com/odensc/janus don't have a computer anymore or would try it

Asadullah said:
Hey is it possible to modify the permissions ota updater and remove the internet permissions so it can't update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cannot recall if I've ever tried with that APK. I have tried with others, unsuccessfully. Either the APK will fail to recompile into a proper installation file, or it would 'install', but with none of the modifications holding.

Android Flaw Lets Hackers Inject Malware Into Apps Without Altering Signatures
While installing an Android app or its update, your device checks APK header information to determine if the archive contains code in the compressed DEX files. If header says APK archive contains DEX files, the process virtual machine decompiles the code accordingly and executes it; otherwise, it runs the code as a regular APK file.
It turns out that an APK archive can contain DEX files as well as regular application code simultaneously, without affecting its validity and signatures.
Researchers find that this ability to add extra bytes of code due to lack of file integrity checking could allow attackers to prepend malicious code compiled in DEX format into an APK archive containing legitimate code with valid signatures, eventually tricking app installation process to execute both code on the targeted device without being detected.
In other words, the hack doesn't require attackers to modify the code of legitimate applications (that makes signatures invalid)—instead, the vulnerability allows malware authors to merely add some extra malicious lines of code to the original app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So we would need to write a script or other code that would be placed into a Amazon System APK. Now would we be able to add SU binaries to an APK? What about a root script like DirtyCow. Although DC is patched, would that be different if the exploit was installed into the /system-priv-app and then executed? I really don't want to sound dumb here so please help me pout guys. Any feedback, negative or not is appreciated.

Maybe this tool can help https://forum.xda-developers.com/android/software/tool-dex-manager-v1-0-designed-to-play-t2988532

Robius said:
Maybe this tool can help https://forum.xda-developers.com/android/software/tool-dex-manager-v1-0-designed-to-play-t2988532
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't find a working download link. Apparently it has been discontinued and i was directed to this: Uret Android Reverser Toolkit v1.6. I downloaded it.
I did find the other one but it says it's for a Galaxy Note. Not sure if that's really the case though.

DragonFire1024 said:
Android Flaw Lets Hackers Inject Malware Into Apps Without Altering Signatures
So we would need to write a script or other code that would be placed into a Amazon System APK. Now would we be able to add SU binaries to an APK? What about a root script like DirtyCow. Although DC is patched, would that be different if the exploit was installed into the /system-priv-app and then executed? I really don't want to sound dumb here so please help me pout guys. Any feedback, negative or not is appreciated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's beyond my knowledge but if you were to maybe add a script to the dex giving it the permisions I gotta look more into this
---------- Post added at 04:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:54 PM ----------
DragonFire1024 said:
I can't find a working download link.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here's smali baksmali for editing dex files https://github.com/JesusFreke/smali I havent used it in a while but used to work good

Asadullah said:
It's beyond my knowledge but if you were to maybe add a script to the dex giving it the permisions I gotta look more into this
---------- Post added at 04:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:54 PM ----------
here's smali baksmali for editing dex files https://github.com/JesusFreke/smali I havent used it in a while but used to work good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Editing DEX is pretty much out of my league too. I wouldn't know where to start. I don't even know how to install or use the tool you posted.

DragonFire1024 said:
Editing DEX is pretty much out of my league too. I wouldn't know where to start. I don't even know how to install or use the tool you posted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://github.com/JesusFreke/smali/wiki/DeodexInstructions
It's really pretty simple used to use it take out the ads from angry birds and what not when it first came out. But it's easier said than done. If you do try first thing I would suggest is that you decompile then recompile to see if it works right the dependencies sometimes will get you or we can try and beg another developer to make us a modified apk..... Please pretty please with sugar on topwe'll like all your posts???

Check this thread for root possibility:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/hd8-hd10/general/complete-guide-root-hd7-8-106th-gen-t3545411

Robius said:
Check this thread for root possibility:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/hd8-hd10/general/complete-guide-root-hd7-8-106th-gen-t3545411
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FYI - nothing new in that thread. Same familiar tools/techniques targeting a different gen/suite of Amazon devices. Similar outcomes too. Vulnerability patched in FireOS 5.3.2.x as so far proven impenetrable by generic rooting tools of common origin (KingRoot, KingORoot, etc).

Davey126 said:
FYI - nothing new in that thread. Same familiar tools/techniques targeting a different gen/suite of Amazon devices. Similar outcomes too. Vulnerability patched in FireOS 5.3.2.x as so far proven impenetrable by generic rooting tools of common origin (KingRoot, KingORoot, etc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure if the following report is true: (HD10 7th Gen on 5.6.0.0)
https://forum.xda-developers.com/hd8-hd10/general/rooted-fire-hd-10-7th-generation-t3718629